How do you feel about "Life of Pi"?

[LifeIsBrief]

So, first, I think that it's important to mention, that I only saw the film, did not read the book, and I know this is a dated topic, but I was surprised it hadn't been discussed on the board.  I recommend the film, if you have an HD TV, just because it's beautiful... but as an atheist, it's a really frustrating film intellectually.

 

A small spoiler, the theme, in essence, is that believing in god makes you happy, and that's a perfectly rational reason to do it.  It's important to note that the main character believes in 4 different religions at the same time.

 

It's a bit frustrating for me, because, in essence, as an atheist, I just want to say "Yay, we won the intellectual argument, just admit that, and we can all get along"... but I'm not sure exactly how to feel about those emotions.  From the other side, I think they're just looking at us like "Of course it just makes us happy, to believe nonsense, it's fun... Why aren't you joining one of us yet?  Are you anti social?"

 

Is there anything wrong with believing in religious nonsense, simply because it makes you happy, provided that you're willing to be intellectually honest with yourself, and family about that?  "Yeah, I picked this one, I like the dances".  If you start explaining at two, to your child, that you chose the one that throws spices on Holi, because it looks beautiful... As long as you're honest with the child, is that perfectly fine?

 

I tend to side with, "Yeah, sure... Party!". I'm curious if that's the consensus among many people who identify atheist...

 

 

[Ruben Zandstra]

 

A small spoiler, the theme, in essence, is that believing in god makes you happy, and that's a perfectly rational reason to do it.  It's important to note that the main character believes in 4 different religions at the same time.

 

 

That's one of my favourite books actually! I've probably lent it to someone I shouldn't have ... I can't find my copy right now. It's been quite a while since I read it.

And I absolutely loved it.

I'm not sure I agree with the essence of it as you put it here, and of course it's hard to objectify anyway since it's a work of literature. But I would point out that all along, Martell's character knows perfectly well that he is telling a tale, not recounting facts. He knows what has actually happened to him on the voyage: he watched his mother get assaulted, killed, I can't remember the details, but if I remember well he matter of factly presents the facts to the japanese insurance guys at the end. 

I don't get the impression that Martell is an apologist for religious bigotry at all, the main character is being so religious that it's a hilarious insult to each religion, what the priests and rabbi's keep on telling him more or less ( if I remember well) . They're all making complete fools of themselves, in a delicious way. And the tragedy of Pi's life and voyage is very effectively communicated to the reader when at the end of the book he punctures his own odyssey-like tale and recounts the facts. Which would you prefer? To me it is about the origins of imagination, and as such It had a profound impact on me.  

[ThatAtheistPlace]

I totally agree with you both!  Ruben, I put the book down feeling like he'd effectively shown that he had to tell a lie to cope with his reality, but that his cognizance of that poked holes in his earlier religious assertions.

 

And yet, the movie....  ah, the movie....  I totally walked away feeling like they uplifted religion and mythology as a perfectly acceptable salve.

 

SPOOOOILER ALERT

 

Did anyone else feel some sort of way about the Tiger not looking back or acknowledging Pi?  Once you find out it was a story, I wondered why he would have added that piece in there, but then once you realize that the tiger was him.  The side of him that saw his mom get killed and in turn killed someone.

 

I love this story because I still ponder it.  It'd be a good one for a Stef book review, if he hasn't done one.

[LifeIsBrief]

I need to read the book... I had a feeling the Disney version was a bit more ambiguous.  I didn't find it apologetic of religious bigotry, so much as the one great defense of religion without bigotry.  The one last haymaker that religion throws every once in awhile "Oh, yeah... I don't know, but it's fun to believe, and I like the ceremonies".

 

"Which do you prefer?"... I prefer imagination... doesn't everyone?

 

I've even been thinking, along the lines of Atheism 2.0 or + or whatever...  Wouldn't it be fun to try to revive some old religions?  Celebrate their holidays, just for history sake, and because they're beautiful?  Could that be an interesting Trojan horse even? 

 

The root of these questions though, is my emotional desire, to occasionally pretend to believe in nonsense... Is that inherently wrong?  Is it irrational to be self awarely irrational, for fun, because it feels good occasionally?

 

Edit... Maybe the tiger never really left him, and the jungle is the depths of his mind?  It couldn't give him closure.  Also, I really enjoyed the story, as well as the visuals of the film.  It sold me on the book, it just frustrated me a bit, as a pretty serious atheist.  I've always been a "I'm sure no one else knows either", kind of guy.

[Ruben Zandstra]

"Which do you prefer?"... I prefer imagination... doesn't everyone?

 

I've even been thinking, along the lines of Atheism 2.0 or + or whatever...  Wouldn't it be fun to try to revive some old religions?  Celebrate their holidays, just for history sake, and because they're beautiful?  Could that be an interesting Trojan horse even? 

 

The root of these questions though, is my emotional desire, to occasionally pretend to believe in nonsense... Is that inherently wrong?  Is it irrational to be self awarely irrational, for fun, because it feels good occasionally?

 

Edit... Maybe the tiger never really left him, and the jungle is the depths of his mind?  It couldn't give him closure.  Also, I really enjoyed the story, as well as the visuals of the film.  It sold me on the book, it just frustrated me a bit, as a pretty serious atheist.  I've always been a "I'm sure no one else knows either", kind of guy.

 

What I was trying to get to is how the real torment and grief of Pi's experience is delivered to the reader in a very profound manner, by using imagination, parables, fairy tale recollections so obviously made up that it's obviously exquisitely humorous, evasive, beautiful and prudent in a way. But on the other hand it's utterly ghastly and mind-destroying when we imagine from our end what must have been really going on. There's a major difference between the imaginative force of let's say Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings kind of stuff. (Nothing wrong with any of that btw). The difference being that these books are more or less wonderful but meaningless trains of imagined spectacles, with a central theme usually coming down  to an everlasting "good vs bad", no strings attached kind of thing. There is no good vs bad in "Life of Pi". There's just a whole bunch of strings attached to insane events, that turn out to be parables for events too horrible to be properly put into words. And as such he actually puts his experience into words. 

 

So no, I personally don't prefer imagination per sé. Not if it's just mind-candy, or meant to subjugate / cover up and misinform.

The bible doesn't end with a matter of fact admittance that, "well it's all a bunch of lies of course, and here's why:.."

[LifeIsBrief]

So no, I personally don't prefer imagination per sé. Not if it's just mind-candy, or meant to subjugate / cover up and misinform.

The bible doesn't end with a matter of fact admittance that, "well it's all a bunch of lies of course, and here's why:.."

 

You could write a version like that though... People write and rewrite the bible all the time

 

It wouldn't necessarily be the book I'd choose... I only like a few parts, JC seemed like a nice guy sometimes.  I think what the movie and writing this thread, really made me think about was, "What if, and why don't atheists have the best holidays?".  Why when Dawkins types propose such things do they always tend towards Newton Day?  Why has no one proposed we start worshiping unicorns, and leprechauns?

 

Has anyone ever done that?  Dragons are awesome, let's make that an atheist holiday... and write songs, and dance around like idiots once a year... Is there something inherently wrong with intentional frivolity?

[wdiaz03]

...  Wouldn't it be fun to try to revive some old religions?  Celebrate their holidays, just for history sake, and because they're beautiful?  Could that be an interesting Trojan horse even? 

...

 

Why revive one and be restricted by their rituals when you can invent one

 

http://www.venganza.org/

 

I consider myself a born again pastafarian. ArrrGG

[Ruben Zandstra]

... Is there something inherently wrong with intentional frivolity?

 

No. Just don't burn the people that don't show up  

[LovePrevails]

I loved the book, haven't seen the film yet