Well, why not?

Today in class we were talking about the novel “Life of Pi” by Yann Martel. Basically, it’s about a boy who’s stranded in the middle of the Pacific ocean in a small boat with only a Bengal tiger to keep him company. And if you’ve read that novel, you’ll know that by the end the author offers us a different version to the story. A version that doesn’t include a young boy alone with a tiger in the middle of the ocean – a more boring, but quite unsettling version, where the boy and his mother and a couple of other survivors are forced to undergo horrific experiences in order to survive.

And the lecturer asked the class which one we believed. And everyone said they believed the human version. They gave reasons. The story with the tiger was a coping mechanism, devised by a young boy who couldn’t handle those horrific experiences otherwise. That Pi, when he is being interviewed later, seems unsettled, fidgety, nervous, uncomfortable talking about it.

I’m a little too conflicted though. I want to believe the story with the tiger, but I can see their rationality. There are annoying little clues which seem to indicate toward the rational interpretation. But then there is Pi himself. He questions the interviewers’ rationalism, points out the holes in their reasoning, the similarity between their faith in their science and his experience.

And it made me so mad. It makes me mad. I’m so unreasonably mad, and all because of a little incongruity in the novel. An opening which the author has invited the readers to interpret in whatever way they want to. Why should we be so eager to accept the rational explanation? Why not the irrational one? So what if it doesn’t make sense? Why does everything, nearly everything, have to be painted with this dull tinge of ordinary, banal, colourlessness of reasonal explanation? Why not the fantastic?

And then I went online and saw this picture. Which just made me even more mad.


Well, why freaking not huh? Why do we have to accept the less than satisfying? The less than wonderful? The less than freaking PERFECT? Yeah, ok, as far as I know now, nothing is forever.

But what is wrong with perfect? What is so wrong with wanting to believe in a little more? Wanting a little more magic from life? Why should we have to settle for less? Maybe it’s because we’ve convinced ourselves that perfect is impossible, that magic is unreachable, unreasonable, that we’ve stopped making it. And I don’t mean magic in the sense of wands and Harry Potter. Or perfection in the sense that everything should run smoothly devoid of human error. No, of course not.

I mean, magic as in … that extra spark in life. That spark that seems more and more elusive the older I get; and the spark that everyone seems to want to tamp down the older I get, too. Because the world was pretty damn magical when I was ten and that is not a lie. I want that. I look around and people just seem to shine a little less every year. And they are doing it by choice. That’s why I’m throwing this little tantrum. Why should we choose it? Why are we SETTLING? ‘Settle’ is one of the saddest sounding words. Who needs that?


4 thoughts on “Well, why not?

  1. Hi Lady Disdain, thanks for stopping by my blog. You are so right, there's nothing wrong with wanting a 'little more magic from life' like you say. The worst thing is to settle then live with regrets. Life is too short for that.
    I havent read Life of Pi mostly because all the hype turned me off to it.


  2. And thanks for stopping by mine =)
    Yeah, regrets is the thing I fear most and yet life seems to be peppered with it.

    I know what you mean – hype has the unfortunate tendency to turn people off books; I've been a victim of this numerous times. The best reason to read a book is on your own inclinations.


  3. Okay, hopefully this comment gets through. I read your post about halfway through reading Life of Pi, but after finishing it, I totally know what you mean. The ending frustrated me too, because yes, logically, the “real” ending is the one that happened – but there should be more to life than just that, and we should always to conjure magic and hope. I was also frustrated at how Martel made it seem like religion was the only way to see that magic and hope… I'm not religious myself, but I do think there is much more to life than facts and numbers. Anyway, I really empathized with your post, keep it up!


  4. Yup, 2nd time's the charm. Maybe it's the clash of wordpress and blogger…
    Exactly. It frustrates me that the 'logical' side is the more acceptable one. Or that there should even be a a more logical side. Yeah, the novel is quite contrived actually in many aspects, especially with religion. I'm religious but I don't think that's the only way to a 'more' magical world. And I don't think I liked the way he dealt with religion in the novel – as I say it felt a bit contrived so I get what you mean. Thanks for stopping by =)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s