It is through irrational experiences that the rationale of life is understood. How do the two texts explore this?
Life is not a linear story, nor is it one singular occasion, but rather a series of events in succession. It is a journey, and each day brings about new struggles and new triumphs, however strange the events that occur are. Yann Martel’s
Life of Pi and Robert Zemeckis’
Forrest Gump both contain irrational experiences that characters must progress through in order to not only discover the rationale of life, but also to discover who they are. Whereas one text details the journey of a boy lost at sea on a lifeboat, with his only companion a Royal Bengal Tiger, the other details the life of a simple man as he charts his course through the 20th century.
The titles of both texts,
Life of Pi and
Forrest Gump, give insight to the characters and the book itself in the early stages of the text. In
Life of Pi, Piscine Molitor Patel is derided at school as a result of his name and its closeness to the word “pissing”. Deciding to act on the first day of school, Piscine marches to the chalkboard and writes “My name is Piscine Molitor Patel, known to all as Pi Patel”. He would go on to draw the greek letter for pi, and finish by denoting the numerical value of the letter. The book derives its title from this, and refers to Piscine as Pi. Similarly, Forrest Gump explains the origin of his name early in the text. He narrates to the audience that he was named after a racist and Klu Klux Klan founder, with his mother’s reason being that “…the Forrest part was to remind me that sometimes we all do things that, well, just don't make no sense”. The reader immediately is given the impression that the characters are unpredictable and different. The numerical properties of Pi are irrational, having no end or no fixed value, a mystery in mathematics. This shows the reader that Piscine is not a normal boy, and does not conform to what normal society dictates a boy should be, or have interest in. Forrest Gump is similar in that his name denotes that not all actions may have a clear meaning, and many of the actions made by Forrest in the movie are illogical and not normal by what is dictated by society, creating the strange experiences that shape his life.
The titles of both
Life of Pi and
Forrest Gump also highlight the narrative styles of the two texts, both of which are narrated by their respective eponymous characters. Whereas
Life of Pi is narrated by Piscine Patel looking back at his life and telling his story through the author, Forrest Gump is narrated by Forrest as he waits for a bus, telling his story to the people who wait with him. The narrative style of the two texts allows the reader to delve into the psyche of the narrators as they progress through various points in their story and journey, and as they greet each event in their life. It is not only through the view of Pi and Forrest that we can understand their choices in life. Forrest’s narrative style reveals exactly the kind of person he is and what his values are, most telling when describing his financial situation, saying that he was “invested in some kind of fruit company”, in what turns out to be Apple Computers. After amassing a fortune, upon hearing his friend Dan tell him he need not worry about money anymore, he simply replies “That's good. One less thing." This simple statement shows that money, while it may be everything to a regular person, is almost nothing to Forrest. This in itself shows the reader that Forrest’s life is not in pursuit of money, but rather happiness. Pi Patel narrates back his life to the reader, offering hindsight whenever possible, one scene in particular illustrates his perspective on the perception of life and the irrational experiences that surround it. When having to recount his amazing story to interviewers, he is met by a wall of doubt and disbelief. He then narrates a new complication in the form of another story, without any animals, the tiger called Richard Parker being replaced by a villainous cook. He describes each gory detail and at the end simply asks “Which is the better story? The story with animals, or the story without animals?” The Japanese interviewers respond that the story with animals is the better story and Pi leaves the statement at that. Although Pi is simply trying to convince the Japanese that his story is correct, the final statement holds a deeper meaning. Pi’s question of which story was better is closely correlated with life, and how the illogical and random events are perceived, whether embraced and enjoyed, or looked at with doubt and disbelief. Pi succinctly summarises his feelings on this discussing agnostics, who stay “beholden to dry yeastless factuality” much like the interviewers, and on their deathbeds “miss the better story”. It is here that the true meaning of the text emerges, being the enjoyment of life and the acceptance of the irrational.
Imagery is prevalent throughout both texts, and both Martel and Zemeckis use it to great effect in explaining how their characters deal with the irrational events in life, be it due to chance of blind luck. Martel is subtler in his use, having Pi’s explanation for inexplicable events and tragedies being that “The reason death sticks so closely to life isn't biological necessity- it's envy. Life is so beautiful that death has fallen in love with it, a jealous, possessive love that grabs at what it can.” The image of a scornful lover is what Pi interprets as the irrational, the experiences he suffers though being death’s way to sully the forever beautiful life that surrounds him. Zemeckis, utilising a close up shot that slowly tracks a feather being blown in a breeze to symbolise the chance events that affect Forrest and shape his life, before finally landing at Forrest’s feet. The unpredictability of where a feather is blown is thought of briefly by Forrest, when he thinks “I don't know if we each have a destiny, or if we're all just floating around accidental-like on a breeze….” The image of floating on the breeze instantly gives the image of the feather to the audience, and the symbolism of how the irrational events that occur in Forrest’s life may be both destiny and accident. Both Pi and Forrest struggle to comprehend why the irrational events happen in their life, and in doing so, attempt to discover the true foundation of life.
In
Life of Pi Martel uses Richard Parker in his text, a Royal Bengal tiger, in order to allegorize the problems faced throughout life, problems which are represented in
Forrest Gump by the different people Forrest meets. The tiger, a primary predator always threatening the safety of Pi, is representative of the most difficult challenges in life, and yet Pi manages to survive through sheer determination in the most irrational of situations. So dire are his circumstances that he must learn to adapt to the irrational and illogical, becoming more like Richard Parker and hence, making the irrational the rational. He notes of his need to do so later, with the pinching of his heart “It came as an unmistakable indication to me of how low I had sunk the day I noticed that I ate like an animal, that this noisy, frantic, unchewing wolfing-down of mine was exactly the way Richard Parker ate”. It is ironic, that in such unhospitable conditions, Pi must endure and in turn become the very thing he fears the most, an animal.
In contrast, Forrest is surrounded by people who by all standards are rational and normal; however, their actions and behaviour display irrationality. The setting is familiar, America through the 20th Century, a far cry from the Pacific Ocean. Yet, Forrest has more irrational experiences and more amazing stories than Pi, whose setting, while fantastic, makes him strive to achieve one goal only, survival. The characters that surround Forrest are outlandish and colourful, from his childhood sweetheart Jenny to his friend Lieutenant Dan; all make mistakes and have rash actions. This is evident when Zemeckis shows numerous shots of Jenny experimenting with drugs, or Dan wallowing in a battle with alcoholism. However; it is these characters’ actions and mistakes, which may seem strange and irrational, that give them their humanness. The experiences that Forrest has interacting with different people of different cultures and upbringings in his life make them both familiar to us, but also more irrational than perhaps a Bengal Tiger.
The discovery of God is a recurring motif in both
Forrest Gump and
Life of Pi, as the characters in the texts attempt to discover their purpose and destiny, along with who they are.In
Life of Pi, Piscine considers himself a Hindu, Muslim and Christian all at the same time. Religion is not something that he must find, but rather something that he feels has been present in his world and around him forever. There is much irrationality however, in Pi’s belief in all religions. He devoutly follows all paths to God, no matter how contradictory they may be to each other. Yet when questioned upon this by angry church leaders, his simple reasoning that “I just want to love God” provides the rationale amongst a situation as absurd as being a follower of every religion. God does not come as easily to the characters in
Forrest Gump, the least of which to Lieutenant Dan Tyler. Having lost both legs on the battlefield, Lt. Dan blames God for stripping him of his destiny of dying on the battlefield, and upon meeting Forrest later, sarcastically makes remarks such as “God is listening. What a crock of shit”, or when things go poorly “Where the hell's this God of yours?” Lt. Dan struggles to find a reason why God would do such a thing to him, his very own existence not making sense to Lt. Dan. It is only upon surviving a hurricane on the shrimping boat that he discovers God and his purpose.
Forrest comments “He never actually said so, but I think he made his peace with God”. Zemeckis’ shot of Lt. Dan swimming backwards towards the sunset gives the audience the impression of a man that is completely at peace with the universe and himself. By accepting God, Lieutenant Dan hence accepts the events that befell him, and looked to the future and thus, it is the irrational events that shaped his life that led to his discovery of God and the meaning of his life. It is Forrest’s acknowledgement of Dan’s discovery of God that provides the audience with the justification for the irrational being that is Lieutenant Dan Tyler.
In essence, Forrest Gump and Piscine Molitor Patel both go on journeys. They embark on journeys of discovery and inadvertently, discover themselves. Both Forrest and Pi discover who they are and their place in the universe, whether blowing in the breeze like a feather to the whims of God or being in the presence of God in the most horrific of ordeals. While both characters experience irrational event and circumstances, their perspective on life seeks to make sense out of the impossible, whether it be training a tiger to allow you on a lifeboat, or coping with the hand you have been dealt by God. It could be said that, although these irrational experiences may not always be expected or even wanted, they are a part of life and allow it to draw ire from even death itself for its intrinsic and eternal beauty. As much as it is oxymoronic, it is often that the irrational provides the backdrop for the rational of life to be understood.