Life Of Pi Rhetorical Analysis

1382 Words6 Pages
Yann Martel never tells us that one story is better than the other in Life of Pi until the end; however, he implied it through the entire novel. The first story is the better story; it requires a leap of faith. The animal story is magical, it’s colorful, and unusual. It teaches us the lesson of theism and belief in the supernatural. Its not childish or dumb to believe in God; it is sublime. Once you start to truly believe you will realize that this whole world is a miracle, a miracle made by God. Martel uses many techniques including metaphors, juxtaposition, and allegory. Martel tries to teach us the lesson of theism. He does this by calling things we wouldn't imagine being God as God. Using metaphors, he compares many things to God. For example, on page 185, Pi was forced to eat meat for the first time in his life. He repeatedly bashes a fish over the head. When he looks into the dead fish’s eye, he sobs and apologizes for taking his life. Then, almost as a reflex, he thanks the Hindu…show more content…
The second story is less amicable and gives you less pleasure as you read it, making the first story the better story even though it is delusional. Greater, though has a whole other meaning in my opinion, greater means it takes guts to say it, it takes bravery and a strong heart. Meaning to choose a greater story it would the one about cannibalism the second story. True the second story is is plain straightforward and possibly not the most pleasant to read; however, thats what makes it the greater story. To make your story the better story you just need to add literary techniques and make it entertaining for the audience. To write a greater story might not have to put a lot of thought, you just have to express your feelings right and let the audience feel pity and automaticly the audience just get emotionally connected to

More about Life Of Pi Rhetorical Analysis

Open Document