Life of Pi uses different stylistic techniques to challenge the readers’ expectations of narrative. Life of
Pi was written by Yann Martel and is a piece of postmodern literature. Yann Martel led the readers
to view the story in different perspectives and think about the meanings. He used different
techniques very well in his endeavour to do this.
One of the techniques he uses is Magic Realism. Magic realism is when a narrative introduces
unrealistic events into a usually realistic story. Life of Pi has many examples of magic realism, one of
which is when Orange Juice first appears after the Tsimtsum sunk. “She came floating on an island of
bananas in a halo of light, as lovely as the Virgin Mary” (pg 111). It would be quite unlikely that an
orang-utan would be able to stay afloat atop bananas while a ship is sinking. This is one of the
earliest instances of magic realism and it slowly positions the reader to view more unbelievable
things as realistic with a good metaphor. As the book continues so do the unbelievable occurrences,
it all comes to the most unbelievable thing in the book. The discovery of a tooth in a fruit and the
conclusions drawn from it. “The island was carnivorous. This explained the disappearance of the fish
in the pond.” (pg 281). By using the power sentence he is straight to the point he doesn’t leave room
for misunderstanding. While Pi sees this as a completely reasonable thing, the audience has realised
that it is completely unreasonable for an island to be carnivorous. He made sure to make the
audience realises the story is not real and has never been real by integrating magic realism into the
story skilfully.
Yann Martel used the element of choice meaning very well. He leaves the story up to interpretation
by the reader and their beliefs. This is the most clearly shown at the end. After Pi explains both the
animal story and the human story he asks the Maritime Officers a question, “Which is the better
story, the story with animals or the story without animals?” (pg 317). The officers answer the one
with the animals. This is the main choice of the novel. Which version of the story do you want to
believe? He gives you the choice and that question is not just for the officers but at the readers. Even
if Yann Martel gives the reader a choice he has positioned the reader to believe the animal story.
The main plot of the story is the animal story, there is not an equal amount of storytelling or details.
He clearly wants the reader to believe the animal story as the last line of the entire book is “Very few
castaways can claim to survive so long at sea as Mr. Patel, and none in the company of an adult
Bengal tiger.” (pg 319). This is Yann Martel’s way of showing the reader that he wants them to
accept the story of Richard Parker. However in the end, it is as Minter says, it depends on the
readers value system and their capacity to believe imaginary things.
One of the main elements of the story that makes it so interesting is the use of an unreliable
narrator. While the author is a somewhat reliable narrator he stops his narration when the Tsimtsum
sunk and then there is only Pi as the narrator. Pi is not a reliable narrator for a couple reasons. One
being that any person who has no human company or proper nutrition and is alone for 227 days
would not be mentally sound. When the French man first appears at Pi’s boat, Pi makes the
reasonable assumption that he has gone mad. He says, “Misery loves company, and madness calls it
forth.” (pg 242). Pi has been alone and traumatized for so long that it is only reasonable that he
starts hallucinating. The audience has no idea how much of the story is real life or simply an illusion
created by a lonely and miserable boy in the middle of the sea who has experienced tragedy after
tragedy. Another way Pi is unreliable is the fact he cares more about telling an entertaining story
rather than telling the truth. At the end of the novel he tells the officers the story and they do not
believe him. They ask him to tell them the real story and he says this is response, “You want the dry,
yeast-less factuality.” (pg 302). He sees this as a story to entertain people. It’s his way of coping with
the intense trauma he went through at such a young age. He sees the truth as dry and yeast-less, not
full of entertainment and intrigue like the animal story. He believes that the better story is the better
truth. The more important one to tell.
Minter says “it is the absence of certainty that gives rise to multiple interpretations about existence
and survival. Much depends upon our value system and our capacity to imagine and believe. Whilst
some prefer a more realistic and practical version, others may opt for something more fanciful.”
Yann Martel successfully gave the story multiple meanings that are interpreted, whether it be the
dry, yeast-less factuality, the fanciful animal story or a different interpretation. He challenges the
reader by giving them more and more unbelievable events until it is more than clear that the story
could not have happened the way it has been told. He is exceptionally talented at using magic
realism, choice meanings and an unreliable narrator to tell a compelling and thought-provoking
story. In the end it is all up to the readers’ personal belief system and imagination to decide which of
the two stories they want to believe.