Symbolism of the Characters in Yann Martel’s Life of Pi

Symbolism of the Characters in Yann Martel’s Life of Pi


Muhammad Fahrizal English Literature

Faculty of Languages and Arts

State University of Surabaya

[email protected]

Dr. Ali Mustofa, M.Pd. English Department

Faculty of Languages and Arts

State University of Surabaya

[email protected]

Abstrak

Karakter adalah peran terpenting yang terdapat didalam cerita. Karakter dapat membangun cerita dari awal

hingga akhir seperti yang penulis inginkan. Karakter atau peran yang diceritakan didalam cerita naratif atau

drama oleh penulis. Karakter memiliki kualitas moral dan kecenderungan ekspresif secara gamblang,

praktis, dan detil. Di novel Life of Pi, karya Yann Martel, simbolisme tersebar hampir di setiap cerita yang

ada didalam tokoh-tokohnya. Lalu, simbol-simbol yang tersebar tersebut menyimbolisasikan sesuatu yang

ada di dalam cerita. Fakta-fakta diatas membuka jalan kepada satu-satunya rumusan masalah yang menjadi

objek utama dalam penelitian, yaitu bagaimana hubungan antara karakter-karakter didalam novel Life of

Pi? Metode yang akan dipakai untuk menganalisis isi dari novel menggunakan konsep karakter dan

simbolisme. Simbolisme dipakai untuk mengurai misteri tanda yang berada di masing-masing tokoh, dan

penggunaan simbolisme ini harus mendalam dan menyeluruh. Dan simbolisme disini menunjukkan bahwa

tokoh Zebra adalah simbolisasi dari si Pelaut, Orangutan adalah Ibu Pi, Hyena adalah si Koki, dan Richard

Parker adalah Pi Patel.

Kata Kunci: karakter dan simbolisme

Abstract

Character is the most important role of the story. It supports the happening until it can build the story that

the writer wants. Characters are the persons who are portrayed in a narrative work or drama, by the readers,

it is implicated to have moral quality and certain tendency as what has been expressed utterly or practically.

In the Life of Pi, the great novel by Yann Martel, symbolism is scattered all around the story of the main

characters. Then, those scattered symbolism do symbolize something that is still contained in the story.

This fact, lead the way to the one and only research question that becomes the main subject of this thesis,

how is the relationship of the characters in Yann Martel’s Life of Pi? The method to reveal the truth of

analysis is using the concept of characters and symbolism, but the one that takes important thing is

symbolism. The last mentioned is to solve the mystery behind the characters that’s needed to be analyzed

deeply. And that signs show the symbols of Zebra is the Sailor, Orangutan is Pi’s Mother, Hyena is the

Cook, and Richard Parker is Pi Patel in this analysis. This characters are the symbolization of one another,

so that gives the boundary between the animal characters to the human characters.

Keywords: characters and symbolism

INTRODUCTION

In interpreting literary works, it needs an ability to

catch meanings that is practically hidden in those

works. Meanings are usually conveyed indirectly, even

the writers don’t realize the works which they have

made have deeper meanings than they expect. To avoid

ambiguities, interpreting symbols in literary works

become an important thing.

It is a must, when talking symbols in literary works,

the role of the characters become unavoidable part of

it, because a literary works, especially novel, will not

be produced without characters as the crucial thing to

determine the plot of the story. Character is the most

important role that supports the happening until it is

able to build a story (Najid, 2003: 23). Character, as

what Abrams says as quoted by Nugiyantoro, is

persons who are portrayed in a narrative work or

drama, by the readers, it is implicated to have moral

quality and certain tendency as what has been

expressed utterly or practically. (Nurgiyantoro, 2007:

165).

Literary work, especially novel, is full length works

that hiding many various meanings. There are many

signs hidden inside of it, the hidden signs can be traced


through Characters, Settings, and many other elements

inside the novel. Links between one characters to

another and settings conclude the relations that

implement meanings. Characters, Settings, and all

other elements in a literary work can be categorized as

signs. Furthermore, it is important to be understood

that the resources of language are exploited much more

deliberately and systematically. In the work of a

subjective poet, the readers have manifested a

"personality" far more coherent and all-pervasive than

persons who are seen in everyday situations. Certain

types of poetry will use paradox, ambiguity, the

contextual change of meaning, even the irrational

association of grammatical categories such as gender or

tense, quite deliberately (Wellek & Warren, 1949: 13—

14).

When talking about signs, there is system where

signs exist because other signs make it different to one

another until the meaning of that signs are

discoverable. For instance, cat is cat because cat is not

horse, or mustache, or flea, etc. Another example is

BMW cars are more expensive than Toyota cars. BMW

is expensive because Toyota is cheap, just imagine

when Toyota’s price as expensive as BMW’s, so BMW

can’t be associated as the expensive cars. So, without

ignoring these substantives that have been signed,

difference can establish those meanings. Those things

also happened in literary works, especially in a novel

which described the crucial fights between characters

that establish a storyline which has signs to learn.

This thing happened in a novel Life of Pi’s Yann

Martel. Pi is described as a guy who has a lot of

upheavals in his thought about religions. From those

upheavals, he finally chose three religions that exist

near him. In this novel, the author presented two

stories, the stories that describe Pi, the main character,

when he was on the lifeboat after the Tsimtsum sank.

The two stories tell the same plot and the same place,

the only difference is the characters when Pi was on the

lifeboat. The first story is when Pi survived along with

the animals from the zoo that was being transferred

from India to Canada. The animals that with Pi when

he was on the boat are a Zebra, a Hyena, an Orangutan,

and a 225kgs Bengal Tiger. This story tells us about

the brutality that happened on the lifeboat, it is caused

by the feeling of a must to survive. The second story

that Pi describe is the story with the same plot,

surviving on the boat after the ship sank, but the

difference is the characters. If the first story tells about

animals, this other story tells about the human beings.

The story is very similar to the first story, but the

characters are a Sailor, a Cook, Pi’s mother, and Pi

himself. This story also tells about the brutality that

happened on the lifeboat, it is also caused by the

feeling to survive. So, these stories actually presented

with the same way, and they are actually the same

stories that are symbolized. So, this novel actually has

one story instead of two. The symbolizing that

happened here is because when talking about brutality,

it is more logic if it is served with the animals inside

that story.

Two stories, which have the same exact plots but

different characters, is interesting to be discussed,

remembering that animals that Pi told would not

logically survived like Pi. The speculation of that

impossibility is because animals’ chambers are in

down below the ship, erasing the chances of animals to

climb up to the ship’s surface and jumping down to the

lifeboat. With this appearing conflicts, these two stories

are enough to be discussed and get ”skinned off”, with

the razor-sharp of Symbolism.

This analogical play make the signs’ role be the

things that is crucial, because from this moment we can

reveal the animal’s symbols. It gets more interesting

because of Pi will be analogized as the Bengal Tiger

who is merciless and meat-eater, even though, Pi is a

religious person, and a vegetarian. Those points are

exact opposite from each other. But from the

oppositions, this thesis will open the space of many

chances through symbolism study. It can be said that

this thesis is not a hard work, because this thesis itself

that does the hard work, analogizing things that is exact

opposite, or positioning.

Plenty of arguments and interpretations about this

Yann Martel’s Life of Pi that discuss the fields about

diversities, how Pi survived with the tiger in a lifeboat,

religious story of Pi, and many other field that has been

presented clearly. So, it triggers this thesis to be built,

instead of the new discussion, the analysis of this novel

will discuss about the hidden symbols beneath the

novel. The hidden representation can be seen as then

main focus to slice and to ply the representation of the

characters, between the human characters and the

animal characters, through symbolism.

Furthermore, it is important to see that in Yann

Martel’s Life of Pi, there is two stories which are

similar and related each other through symbols.

Therefore, what the things that have been exposed,

becomes the major reason of why this topic becomes

the interesting thing to be chosen as the basic thought

of this research.

As known, Yann Martel’s Life of Pi has won The

Man Booker Prize for the fiction category in 2002.

This novel has been published into many several

languages, so it can valid this novel to be the source of

analysis that is interesting to build. Coming with the


potential title The Hidden Representation of The

Characters through Symbolism in Yann Martell’s Life

of Pi, this thesis will work well.

Yann Martel has done many literary works during

his writing career. After jumping job from a

dishwasher, he wrote his first work in 1993 with the

title The Facts Behind The Helsinki Roccamatios and

Other Stories. His first novel already received warm

responses from the literature critics. The story tells

about the hidden or secret events out of those short

stories in his first work. But that work didn’t sell well.

Martel’s first novel is Self, in this novel he tried to get

the alternative story with presenting the gender troubles

and changes. Symbolism made him in his grand novel,

Life of Pi, earned the Man Booker Prize in 2002. After

finishing his grand novel, he wrote some other novels

and critics that received the responds not as good as

Life of Pi. But still, Yann Martel’s is the one who

served the best symbolization in his literary work.

Life of Pi is the novel of Yann Martel that shook the

world in 2001. This novel gives the extraordinary

storyline, a boy that is trapped on a lifeboat with

animals. This storyline is not logically possible because

surviving on the lifeboat is very hard. But, that

difficulties is felt harder because the presence of the

Bengal Tiger, the jungle-top-food-chain predator. Yann

Martel only gives the logical way by adding animal

characters in his work to the readers because this

novel’s plot is full of brutality. That is the only way he

could deliver his brute messages by symbolizing the

human beings into animals.

RESEARCH METHOD

In every literary analysis, it must need a method. In

every literaty analysis there are technique and

approaches. On this analysis, the method that will be

used are textual intepretation or, in this case, Yann

Martel ‘s Life of Pi. Intrepretation will be done by

reading the texts simultaniously, then the quotations

that related to the analysis will be given as the source

and guidance to organize the analysis. The technique

that will be used also with intepretations, because this

technique is the most suitable way to dig the texts.

With the close approach support, intepretation can be a

technique and also a method with no argument against

it. The way to do the method for this thesis is close

objectively approach, because the result of analysis

will be based from the texts.

THE CONCEPT OF CHARACTERS

To make a sense in a literary works, the elements

should be connected linearly. Whilst, the elements that

moves the plots overly are accused to the characters, if

the meant literary works are novels. In a novel,

characters tendency to be the crucial parts because it

moves the plots definitely. The attribution of this

element in a novel finally makes the novel can be

understood.

Character, as what Abrams says as quoted by

Nugiyantoro, is persons who are portrayed in a

narrative work or drama, by the readers, it is implicated

to have moral quality and certain tendency as what has

been expressed utterly or practically. (Nurgiyantoro,

2007: 165). Additionally, character is the most

important role that supports the happening until it is

able to build a story (Najid, 2003: 23). However,

characterization is a brief potrayal about somebody that

is displayed by a story (Nurgiyantoro, 2007: 165).

Characterization is the essential of the story that cannot

be deleted. With characterization, a story can be felt

more reliable and more lively. By the characterization,

a reader can obviously catch the image of the

characters that has been displayed by the author (Najid,

2003: 23).

Characters place the most strategic position in the

story to be the message and morality carrier or

something else that on purpose wanted to be delivered

to the readers (Nurgiyantoro, 2007: 16). If judging

from the characterization or the importance level of a

story, there is a character that is very important to be

displayed on and on until that character dominates the

majority of the story. And the other way around, there

is character that is only shown once or several times in

a story, and it may be also in a short storyline. From

the two sentences above, the first type mentioned is the

central character or main character, the character that

majorly controls the plot of the story. The second

mentioned is the peripheral character or additional

character, the character that only helps the existence of

the main character. The main character is the one that

is being mostly in the storyline as the essential that is

controlling the event of the story, or the one who is

being controlled by the event. Because of the main

character has many relations with the additional ones,

the main character is very important for the whole plot

of a story. On the other hand, the display of the

additional characters in the whole story is much more

less than the main ones, and their existence is not the

thing that is very important, their existence becomes

important if the give the influence to the main

characters, directly or indirectly (Nurgiyantoro, 2007:

176).

As Foster said (quoted in Nurgiyantoro, 2007: 181),

based by the characterization, characters can be defined

into Simple or Flat characters and the Complex or

Round characters. Simple or Flat characters is a type of


character who has only one certain personality. This

type of characters, because of their personalities, they

cannot give the shock effects or the interesting points

to the readers. The personality of the Simple or Flat

characters are very flat, monotone, and only reflect into

one characteristic only. But, because of that certainty,

these type of characters will be given more and more

pressure to their personality in the story (Nurgiyantoro,

2007: 181). Complex or Round characters is the type of

characters who has the characteristic of many various

sides of life, personalities, and identities. It can be

crowned with the several type of personalities that can

be formulated, but it can also be showing or having

many various behaviors, and sometimes has

contradictions inside it and it is very hard to predict.

And by that example, characterization, commonly, is

very hard to describe. Comparing with the Flat

characters, the Complex characters is way more like

the life of the real human beings, beside of having

various personalities and acts, this type of characters

often give the readers many surprises (Abrams in

Nurgiyantoro, 2007: 183).

In literary works, especially the fiction novels,

characters are strongly described as the essential of it

that has the relations to the conflicts. There is one who

carries the principal idea, carries the tendencies of

contradictions, and there is also one who acts as the

character who brings the peace to the conflicts. The

character that carries the principal idea is called as

protagonist. If the one who carries the principal idea is

called the protagonist, so the one who is against that

principal idea or carries the tendencies of

contradictions is called the antagonist. Lastly, the one

who acts as the peace bringer is called tritagonist

(Najid, 2003: 24).

There are three ways that is often used by the

authors to describe the characters in their works.

1. Direct way (analytical way), it happens if the

authors directly describe or draw the situation of

the characters.

2. Indirect way (dramatical way), it happens if the

authors describe or tell the situation of the

characters hazily. There are several typical ways

from the authors to create their works with this kind

of way, there are:

a. With exposing the situation of the place, way to

dress, way to talk, and others.

b. With exposing the way of the characters to

reach or approach the events and even the

conflicts.

c. With exposing the confessions and sobers in the

characters.

d. With exposing the responses of that characters

to the other characters.

e. With exposing the conversation between the

characters with the other characters.

3. Mixed way, the mixing of the direct and indirect

way. (Najid, 2003: 24).

To achieve a fully dimensional character, fictional

or real, a writer must watch people closely, much more

closely than the average person would. He or she looks

especially for anything unusual or distinct about the

person or persons involved, but does not ignore what is

ordinary and typical. The writer then reports, in as

interesting a way as possible, these poses, posturings,

habitual gestures, mannerisms, appearances, glances.

Not that the writer limits observations to these, but

these frequently appear in creative nonfiction writing

(Theodore: 2000).

SYMBOLISM

To continue the review of literature in this research,

it is needed to repeat again that between the concept of

characters and symbolism is quite related each other

where language is the referee of it. To classify and to

avoid the commutation in interpreting the signs in

Yann Martel’s Life of Pi’s in this research, where the

animals are the representation of humans, thus, it is

clear to say it as the play of symbol.

In literature, symbolism’s function is to be the

object or reference to provide meaning to the writing

that is, possibly far, beyond the essential thing that is

being described. It can be so obvious, so that is why

the authors have to use symbolism very cautiously or

heavy-handedly. An author may use the obvious object

repetitively to communicate a deeper meaning or may

use the distinctions of the same obvious object to make

a complete mood or feeling.

The study of symbolism is seen by some as a

curiosity, rather far removed from the central matters

of life. Anyone who spends time studying Biblical

symbolism may well be getting into a “dangerous”

area. Persons who engage in an “overly symbolic”

interpretation of Scripture are to be regarded with

suspicion. What matters is the study of reality;

symbolism is secondary. From the Biblical point of

view, however, the reverse is the case. Symbolism is

more important than anything else for the life of man.

Since this is a manifesto, let me repeat that statement in

italics: Symbolism is more important than anything else

for the life of man (Archive from James B. Jordan,

retrieved from biblicalhorizons.com).

Symbol and signs, whether verbal, musical,

dramatic or plastic, are means of communication. The

references of symbols are to ideas and those of signs to


things. One and the same term may be symbol or sign

according to its context: the cross, for example, is a

symbol when it represents the structure of the universe,

but a sign when it stands for crossroads. Symbols and

signs may be either natural (true, by innate propriety)

or conventional (arbitrary and accidental) traditional or

private. (Archive from Ananda K. Coomaraswamy,

retrieved from seriousseekers.com).

Symbolism is used in literature to provide imagery

and detail to an object. Symbolism can make a story far

more interesting, and able to provide intriguing details

to the reader. The way to understand the symbolism

that is used in literary works is to grasp the meaning of

symbol. Just like Bald Eagle is often thought as the

symbol of the United States, symbols used in literature

are objects that have the function to represent other

things or ideas. For example, in Hawthorne’s “The

Scarlet Letter,” the “A” that Hester Prynne was forced

to wear represented not only that she was an adulteress,

but also the first letter of the name of her illegitimate

child’s father, the Reverend Arthur Dimmesdale.

Recognizing the signs. There are several ways to

recognize symbolism in literature. One is the frequency

an object or character is mentioned in a piece of

literature. If it is mentioned often, it is probably

important. Another way to find a symbol is to look at

how much detail is used in describing an object. These

two methods give clues that the writer wants the

readers to infer something about particular object.

Familiarizing with the author’s work and style. A

symbol in a piece of literature often represent an

important issue of the time in which the author lived,

or has personal significance to the writer. Edgar Allan

Poe, for example, is well-known for the tragedy he

suffered during his lifetime. His stories and poetry

often included dark imagery and death which were

undoubtedly symbolic of the events in his life.

Trusting the feelings. If an image or object

described by the author makes the readers react in a

certain way, it is probably on to something, never

discredit the feelings just because the readers are

novice. It is very likely that the author planted the

image in the work in a particular way to alert the reader

that a symbol is important. (Archive from Mudazir

Rizvi, retrieved from ehow.com).

Symbol, says Comte Goblet d'Alviella, in his book

on The Migration of Symbols, “might be defined as a

representation which does not aim at being a

reproduction (Symons, 1908: 2).” If it is related to the

signs, while the relation is the power that ties it,

therefore it can be articulated that symbol must need

the relation between connection of understanding and

the thing itself that has similarities or relation.

Additionally, to simplify the thought that believes in

symbol is symbolism.

Symbolism, as a movement beginning in the

eighties, can be described as a reaction against

naturalism which took on its classic form in about 1870

but had its roots in the sixties and, when seen in a

larger perspective, was itself the final stage of realism

already carried far by the preceding generation, in

broader terms, symbolism can be thought of as part of a

philosophical idealism in revolt against a positivist,

scientific attitude that affected (or infected) not only

painting but literature as well. (Goldwater, 1980: 1).

Therefore, it can be understood that the born of

symbolism is signed as the born of human culture in

the reaction of naturalism where transcendental things

or beyond things mix up in human’s thought, but now

symbols are used to deliver something indirectly and to

give the impression aesthetically.

In the literary works, symbols sometimes are

borrowed as the aesthetic aspect. As the art of

language, literary works should be consisting of

messages and meaning where the play of language,

words, signs, are working on. Again, what in popular

usage are called ‘symbols’ would be regarded by

semioticians as ‘signs’ of some kind but many of them

would not technically be classified as purely

‘symbolic’. (Chandler, 2007: 38). It is important to see

that between signs and symbols sometimes seem

identical, although signs itself are the compound of

signified and signified that means relation of the sender

and the object while symbol needs the relation between

the understanding and the objects to make clear what

thing or what mean within it.

For Pierce, a symbol is ‘a sign which refers to the

object that it denotes by virtue of a law, usually an

association of general ideas, which operates to cause

the symbol to be interpreted as referring to that object’

(Chandler, 2007: 39). It is the clearance of the

commutations between symbol and sign, and the two is

purposed to search what things are hidden behind the

objects. In Peirce's semiotics, the term symbol denotes

a sign (signifier) whose relationship to its object

(signified) is entirely arbitrary or based on convention.

An example would be the word 'cap' where there is no

causal physical link or resemblance between the sign

(the word car) and its object. In his system of

classification, Peirce distinguishes signs used as

symbols from those used as icons or as indices (index).

(Martin & Ringham, 2000: 128).

DESCRIPTION OF THE CHARACTERS’S

RELATIONSHIP


To begin this chapter, there is a thing to analyze the

characters in the novel. By analyzing the relationship

between those characters, these two stories can be

accurately compared to one another through

symbolism. There are two almost similar stories

described in this novel. But these two stories were

portrayed distinctly different. The first story that is

described is the story of the life of the animals and Pi

Patel on the lifeboat. This first story is a very unique

one because logically, a question would come up,

“How could it be like that?” That is the main point of

the novel. The other story is about the same plot, but

the only difference is the characters. The characters are

human. No animals in the second story. Once to be told

again is the relationship is the judging razor to untie

this confusion. Here is the analysis of the characters of

the both stories in the novel.

The zoo has to be moved, Pi’s father decides to sell

the animals to Canada. Thus, the solution is packing

those animals by ship cargo, and the one that drives it

is Japanese cargo. It has trip through Pacific Ocean, the

widest place whose water covered it all, only some

very small islands scattered untidy on it. The cargo

goes off, the trip starts on.

In the ship, Pi meets a sailor who is Chinese

Emperor, he is a vegetarian. Pi also meets the cruel

one, the bad one, he is the Cook. It has been for days

from Manila, and they are on Mariana waters. It is the

deepest area in this earth. The ship, Tsimtsum, meets a

night, and they will face the worst thing it has ever

seen.

When the night falls, when the sea roars, the ship

seems to wreck. It shakes the contents of it while the

animals belong to it. It is thunder that shines, it is the

wind that blows, and it is the rain that erodes the calm

weather. The abrasion of the soft sky goes blur to seek

the moan of the anger, but whose anger? Here, Pi starts

feeling that God has really indeed shown His existence.

However, what has been happening is the shipwreck,

and it insists the ship crew to utilize the boat for saving

the passengers.

It is when Pi jumps out into the boat, and he loses

everything, his family. Pi still strives in facing the

roaring storm, on the unleashed boat that jumps out on

the surface of the shaking sea, Pi keeps shouting,

looking for help, and wishing of not staying more away

from the ship, but it is not a kind of worth. He has tried

to have a try, but it is in vain.

The worst thing comes, the panic animals jump out

on the boat. Started with the Zebra whose one of the

legs is broken, in this condition, the Zebra seems so

painful and pity. Continuously, the Hyena follows, Pi

seems to have hatred to this animal, and he tries to

shove the Hyena out, but it does not work. It can be

imagined, an Indian boy, sixteen, thin and small, tries

to fight against one of the beasts, the cruel one, the

killer one, one of the best carnivore, hyena, and it can

be guessed that it will not have any worth, in vain must

be stuck in his lucky.

The zebra’s broken leg was missing. The hyena had

bitten it off and dragged it to the stern, behind the

zebra. A flap of skin hung limply over the raw stump.

Blood was still dripping. The victim bore its suffering

patiently, without showy remonstrations. (Martel,

2012: 150—151).

The relationship between these two animals is

absolutely like in the jungle. That the wounded zebra

became the advantage of the Hyena to kill and eat it

without any heavy efforts. At last, the zebra died by the

fierce of the Hyena.

Followed by the Orangutan or the Orange Juice,

this animal didn’t jump down to the lifeboat like the

other two animals. This animal stranded in an “island

of bananas” in the middle of the ocean. And luckily the

stream drives that “island” into the lifeboat to make the

Orangutan not to feel all alone like the stranger in the

middle of the new environment.

She thumped the beast on the head. It was

something shocking. It made my heart melt with love

and admiration and fear. (Martel, 2012: 162).

The Orangutan slapped the Hyena in the face to

show her anger to the brutality of the Hyena. Even

though the huge effort of defense was shown by the

Orangutan, the Hyena still got the weakness of

Orangutan and ended her by killing than eating her.

And lastly, the Richard Parker, the Bengal Tiger

found on the lifeboat. This cruel animal was there but

Pi didn’t even notice that this 225kgs animal was

already there all along. This beast was hidden under the

lifeboat’s cover. But this presence of the animal gave

Pi’s unexpected motivation to live on that lifeboat.

Richard Parker and Pi have the enormous

relationship between each other. Pi survived the Pacific

Ocean because he avoids make Richard Parker kill

him. Richard Parker is the motivation for Pi. So, the

relationship is giving each other advantages. Pi feed

Richard Parker all the time to make him not hungry.

And the presence of Richard Parker motivated Pi to

keep living and surviving the cruelty of the Pacific

Ocean.

After describing the relationship of the characters in

the first story, which is the story that contained the

animal characters. Now the relationship of the

characters of the other story needed to be revealed.


First relationship happened between the sailor, who

broke his leg after jumping from the ship to the

lifeboat, and the Pi Patel who followed him later.

The sailor was young. Actually, he was older than

me, probably in his early twenties, but he broke his leg

jumping from the ship and his suffering made him a

child. He was beautiful. He had no facial hair at all and

a clear, shining complexion. His features—the broad

face, the flattened nose, the narrow, pleated eyes—

looked so elegant. I thought he looked like a Chinese

emperor. (Martel, 2012: 382—383).

This relationship of Pi as the main character and

Sailor is Pi adores him as the near perfect human being.

There is no conversation between these two characters.

It is because he Taiwanese and does not speak any

English at all. The relationship of this character also

happened to Pi’s mother and also the cruelest one, the

Cook.

The Cook killed the Sailor and Pi’s mother. The

Cook has the personality like the Hyena who is cruel

and brutal. The victims of this brutality are the

characters that are consist on the lifeboat.

The cook promptly butchered him. The leg had

made for poor bait. The dead flesh was too decayed to

hold on to the fishing hook; it simply dissolved in the

water. Nothing went to waste with this monster. He cut

up everything, including the sailor’s skin and every

inch of his intestines. He even prepared his genitals.

When he had finished with his torso, he moved on to

his arms and shoulders and to his legs. (Martel, 2012:

386).

The Cook is explained that he is the cruelest

character after all. But this character keeps the struggle

of Pi Patel to fight against him to take the revenge of

his mother and the character he adores, Sailor.

SYMBOLIZING THE SAILOR AS THE ZEBRA

To launch the analysis of the symbolizing of the

human characters as the animals, it is better to make a

first from the Sailor as the Zebra. As reasonable reason,

it is needed to be seen that the Zebra is the first dead

animal on the boat. Continuously, it will give a

clearance for the next animals whose death follows as

the story of the human characters.

The boat goes further, goes fade, and disappear

from the tipsy, half shot, and drunken ship. The

morning says hello although it seems too late for Pi and

the animals on the boat. The Zebra seems to suffer

what happens on its leg. It seems to scream and cry, but

it will not.

It had badly broken a rear leg. The angle of it was

completely unnatural. Bone protruded through skin and

there was bleeding. Only its slim front legs had a

semblance of normal position. They were bent and

neatly tucked against its twisted torso. From time to

time the zebra shook its head and barked and snorted.

(Martel, 2012: 136).

It can be seen that the Zebra has an injury on its leg.

Its leg is broken, and it feels suffered. The moan can be

listened and felt by Pi, and Pi seems to have sympathy

of it. Based on what is appeared on its appearance, the

painful and poor characteristic can be right to put to

explain about this animal.

Furthermore, Zebra is a kind of herbivore animals.

When it is an herbivore, the animal must be included

into vegetarian indirectly because they will not hunt

and eat the meat of their prey. They do not have any

weapon such tusk or fang because it is used to tear and

rip in rigs all meat they catch. Differently, herbivore

animals use their weapon to defend themselves from

the predators because they are the prey of them. Such

as a deer, they have horns, or elephant that has long

snout, they do not utilizes it to eat other animal but

they utilize it for surviving for their life. Their meat,

their blood, and their life are the life of the predator.

Thus, it can be concluded that the Zebra is herbivore

that will be the prey of the predator or the killer, and

the Zebra can be classified into the vegetarian because

it just eats plants, leaves, and grasses.

Furthermore, National Geographic notes that

Zebras are social animals that spend time in herds.

They graze together, primarily on grass, and even

groom one another. Zebras must be constantly wary of

lions and hyenas. A herd has many eyes alert to danger.

If an animal is attacked, its family will come to its

defense, circling the wounded zebra and attempting to

drive off predators. Somehow, it notes that Zebra is

what Hyena loves to eat, and it becomes interesting

fact that the Hyena is on the boat to eat the broken leg

Zebra, and the Cook is on the boat to eat the broken leg

Sailor.

It is what Pi sees on the Zebra that lies on the boat.

Furthermore, Pi gazes on the elegancy that Zebra has.

The elegancy that shows something different from the

other, it is the unique animal. It is weak but it is

beautiful, that simpler word to represent this animal.

It was a lovely animal. Its wet markings glowed

brightly white and intensely black. I was so eaten

up by anxiety that I couldn’t dwell on it; still, in

passing, as a faint afterthought, the queer, clean,

artistic boldness of its design and the fineness of its

head struck me. (Martel, 2012: 136).

Based on the quotation above, it can be seen that Pi

salutes on the beauty the Zebra has. It is not a kind of

hyperbole to characterize this animal. Zebra is kind of

horse, but the most different part is on the decoration of


its fur skin. If the usual horse has total color with no

any pattern and no more than one color, but Zebra has

a special character that is almost impossible for other

animals to have it. The black and white stripe colors its

beauty.

What Pi mean by “It was a lovely animal” may

infer something that this animal is tamed enough, when

it is tamed, it will not hurt anyone. When it is put in

front of the view and vista of nature, this animal seems

to be mixed and matched, naturally constructs an

impress of peaceful. The peaceful part of this is the

lovely thing Pi can catch, and he knows it because he

has a zoo where this animal lives in with the “imitation

nature” that is constructed by human.

While the sentence of “Its wet markings glowed

brightly white and intensely black” creates an impress

that, this Zebra really amazes Pi and slaps astonishment

on Pi’s admiration. Fantasizing that this Zebra, with the

color on its skin, finally makes Pi worries of getting

anxiety “that I couldn’t dwell on it; still, in passing, as

a faint afterthought, the queer, clean, artistic boldness

of its design and the fineness of its head struck me.”

That is simple, pure, and naturally spoken by the

unconsciousness that is governed by the wonderfulness

that befriends with his admiration of the God’s

creature, the lovely one.

However, this beauty finally has to end its existence

because some bits will like to tear it just to fill

cholesterol level in blood’s pressure. The pain and the

suffering do not stop the Hyena’s desire to eat the

Zebra up. Finally, this creature ends in the madness of

Hyena’s hunger.

Based on the story of this animal, it can be

concluded that the Zebra is getting hurt, its leg is

broken. It can be seen on the mimic it shows to Pi.

However, when Pi tries to tell another story, which the

characters are human, the similarity arrives indirectly,

and the story that Zebra feels and experience is similar

to the story about the Sailor that Pi tells.

The sailor was young. Actually, he was older than

me, probably in his early twenties, but he broke his leg

jumping from the ship and his suffering made him a

child.

He was beautiful. He had no facial hair at all and a

clear, shining complexion. His features—the broad

face, the flattened nose, the narrow, pleated eyes—

looked so elegant. I thought he looked like a

Chinese emperor. (Martel, 2012: 382—383).

Within the quotation, there is told that the Sailor is

young, his leg is broken caused by jumping from the

ship to the boat. He is also told as a beautiful one,

shining complexion, and elegant. Based on the

portrayal, it can be taken a simple concrete picture that

the Sailor has similarity with the Zebra. The tow is

beautiful, and what the more important to be revealed

is the broken leg. The two, the Zebra and the Sailor,

jump out of the ship, and the two finally break their

leg. Is that coincidental story? Then, the signifier

begins to be understood that the lovely characteristic

refers to the signified, it is the herbivore, or in human,

it is vegetarian. The play of symbol concentrate to the

attributes the two have, and the sign is within it.

Once again, the thing that becomes the enlightening

of this dark assumption that the Sailor is the Zebra is

the broken leg. In the story, when the ship wrecks, Pi

jumps out of the ship to the boat. Then, the boat

unleashes from the ship because the rope does not have

any further power to hold. The boat floats on the

surface of the quake of the ply of the sea, so does Pi on

it. After that the Zebra jumps out as what Pi has done.

When the morning comes, Pi knows that the Zebra’s

leg is broken. It is similar to the story when the Sailor

jumps out of the ship to the boat, his leg then is broken.

The core of these two story is the broken leg of the

two. It can be supposed as the coincidental action, but

when it is dragged again to the plot, it will uncover the

story that the two jump out of the ship, and it makes

their leg breaks. If it does not clear enough, it can

borrow the Hyena and the Cook as proof.

The Zebra is eaten up by the Hyena, while the

Sailor is killed by the Cook then the meat is eaten up. It

is too cruel and almost impossible, but the two are

similar each other, and what differentiates them is only

the character, the Zebra is animal, awhile the Sailor is

human. The two has instinct, and when it is pushed in

to the edge of the humanity and sanity, human will be

like animal, there is no thought, no moral, and no more

attitude. If it is insisted to fulfill the rationality, the

analysis can borrow the concept of Freud when he says

that human has three basic thing, it is id, ego, and

superego. Then, it will sharpen to the id, as the basic

instinct of human and it always seek for the pleasure

principle. What becomes the pleasure is something that

is no more moral, rule, or politeness, because it is

instinct. It is like what the Cook has done the Sailor,

when hunger has gnawed the patience of having food,

therefore moral is only fiction at that moment. Thus, it

is acceptable when it is known that the Cook eats the

Sailor because there is no more wish floating on the

Pacific Ocean. What the Cook has done is like animal,

therefore the symbolizing that the Sailor is the Zebra is

absolutely right because the two is the prey of another

two, the Cook and the Hyena. Followed by those facts

it can be grabbed a sign of the symbolizing of the two,

that the two are the prey, being a prey is a signifier, and


what is signified is the symbolizing of the two

characters.

To believe it is hard and difficult to accept by the

logical thinking, but it is the way to think about God.

To believe in God, the important thing is to believe that

God exists and His existence does not have to be made

true.

SYMBOLIZING PI’S MOTHER AS THE

ORANGUTAN

After knowing that the Sailor whose leg is broken is

the Zebra, then it can be continued to the Orangutan.

Before going striking the analysis, it becomes more

important to see the facts of Orangutan that

continuously offends to the similarity to Pi’s mother

through symbolizing. Based on what National

Geography notes that the Malay word orangutan means

“person of the forest.” These long-haired, orangish

primates, found only in Sumatra and Borneo, are

highly intelligent and are close relatives of humans.

Orangutans have an enormous arm span. A male may

stretch his arms some 7 feet (2 meters) from fingertip

to fingertip—a reach considerably longer than his

standing height of about 5 feet (1.5 meters). When

orangutans do stand, their hands nearly touch the

ground. Orangutans' arms are well suited to their

lifestyle because they spend much of their time (some

90 percent) in the trees of their tropical rain forest

home. They even sleep aloft in nests of leafy branches.

They use large leaves as umbrellas and shelters to

protect themselves from the common rains. These

cerebral primates forage for food during daylight

hours. Most of their diet consists of fruit and leaves

gathered from rain forest trees. They also eat bark,

insects and, on rare occasions, meat. Orangutans are

more solitary than other apes. Males are loners. As they

move through the forest they make plenty of rumbling,

howling calls to ensure that they stay out of each

other's way. The “long call” can be heard 1.2 miles (2

kilometers) away. Mothers and their young, however,

share a strong bond. Infants will stay with their

mothers for some six or seven years until they develop

the skills to survive on their own. Female orangutans

give birth only once every eight years—the longest

time period of any animal. The animals are long-lived

and have survived as long as 60 years in captivity.

Thus, it can be taken the simpler of the long note

that Orangutan is familiar, it is rare of eating meat that

means Orangutan will eat meat in some condition

terms, and female Orangutan is very sensitive of

keeping and saving their baby. Then, this will drive to

what Pi’s mother to save Pi from the cruel one, the

Cook.

In Yann Martel’s Life of Pi, Orangutan, or Pi calls

it Orange Juice because it always drips its saliva, it lips

are always wet, never dry of being wiped out by the

wind. The Orangutan is female, on her face it can be

seen that the Orangutan is getting seasick when she is

on the boat.

Before going to the analysis, it is important to tell

briefly that the Orangutan comes lastly, she comes on

the floating island of bananas, as this quotation exposes

it below here,

She came floating on an island of bananas in a halo

of light, as lovely as the Virgin Mary. The rising

sun was behind her. Her flaming hair looked

stunning… The bananas on which she floated were

held together by the nylon net with which they had

been lowered into the ship. (Martel, 2012: 139—

140).

In addition, it is important to see also this below

quotation as the regarded one, “Mother held on to some

bananas and made it to the lifeboat.” (Martel, 2012:

382).

On the quotation there is said that Orange Juice

comes floating on an island of bananas and she looks

stunning. It is easy to predict that what makes her gets

stunning is caused by the fact that her habitat is on the

tree or wood, but now she is on the boat that is

surrounded by water. It must make her gets stunned.

Just taking it aside for a while and going back to the

symbolizing Pi’s mother as the Orangutan. The floating

of an island of bananas is the signifier of the signified

of the similarity of the two that affords to their

symbolizing.

The first sight when talking about these two

characters, Pi’s mother and the Orangutan, is the sex of

the two. The two are female and it is the earlier sign

that can be caught. For more signs that finally refer to

the similarity of the two, it requires the reading detail

of the plots. It is known that the two are coming to the

boat on the floating island of bananas. Then, how can

banana float on water? That is a kind of question of

rationalization, but it does not need to be thought

hardly because the focus is on the plot.

The story tells that the Orangutan comes to the boat

on the floating island of bananas, so does Pi’s mother.

Then, it can be stimulated the assumption that the two

is same because there is no reason to proof that it is

coincidental action. As recalling on the previous sub

chapter when it is called the coincidental action in the

similarity between the Hyena and the Sailor. What

becomes the point is, it is irrational to say that there is

always coincidental action in the every animal and the

human, because coincidental can be taken as the


answer when it does not happed frequently but this

case everything is structured, signed, and symbolized.

It needs to pull back again, to the conflict when the

Zebra is eaten up by the Hyena. It is told that the

Orangutan is angry with what the Hyena is doing. It

can be mirrored on this statement, “She thumped the

beast on the head. It was something shocking. It made

my heart melt with love and admiration and fear.”

(Martel, 2012: 162).

According to the statement above, it can be seen

that Orange juice strikes the Hyena that begins of

becoming aggressive after eating the Zebra, and Pi is

astonished by what the Orangutan does because he

thinks that Orangutan will never be an animal who is

so heroic. As the comparison, this below quotation can

be regarded as the proof,

Mother slapped him in the face, a full hard slap that

punctuated the air with a sharp crack. It was something

shocking coming from my mother. And it was heroic.

It was an act of outrage and pity and grief and bravery.

(Martel, 2012: 387).

As what the quotation writes on, it delivers

something that is almost completely and perfectly

similar to what the Orangutan is doing in facing the

Hyena. Pi’s mother, there, slaps the Cook because of

the Cook comes to her. It is a heroic, and it is what Pi

thinks to her mother.

Then, it can be grabbed a simple analogy, that the

Cook is the Hyena who has become more aggressive

than before, while Pi’s mother is the Orangutan who

hated the Cook of having killed the Sailor. The two, the

Orangutan and Pi’s mother, are facing the same thing

and the two try to fight them. If the Orangutan faces

the Hyena, Pi’s mother faces the Cook. Thus, it

becomes more clear to see the glance of the truth about

the symbolizing of the two, between the Orangutan and

Pi’s mother. The thing that is important to classify the

signifier of this, is the heroic action, and the heroic

action brings to a signified of their similarity, and the

similarity, again, arrows to the symbolizing that

Orangutan is actually Pi’s Mother.

SYMBOLIZING THE COOK AS THE HYENA

This is the antagonist one on this boat, the Cook is

a cruel one, and he eats the Sailor’s meat. That sounds

so crazy, but it is the Cook. Before the Cook is

explored too much, it is better to see the animal that is

symbolized on him.

Hyena is deathly killer animal. It is actually from

African, but what makes it famous is the cruelty and

greedy character. National Geographic even notes that

the Maasai people of Kenya and Tanzania actually

leave their dead to be consumed by hyenas. However,

these intelligent and bold animals (Hyenas) will raid

food stores and crops and are blamed for many

livestock and even some human deaths. In some areas

they have been heavily hunted as destructive pests.

While, African Wildlife Foundation analogizes this

animal as scavenger and supposed to be a skillful

hunters.

Going back to the story, the Zebra has broken leg.

The injury caused by jumping out of the ship to the

boat. Unfortunately, for the God’s sake, it meets Hyena

that is like the explanation before as the predator that

deathly eats Zebra. The way the Hyena eats the leg of

the Zebra apparently seems to cruel, but when the story

is about animal and this what life lies on the world, it

becomes the usual thing.

The zebra’s broken leg was missing. The hyena had

bitten it off and dragged it to the stern, behind the

zebra. A flap of skin hung limply over the raw

stump. Blood was still dripping. The victim bore its

suffering patiently, without showy remonstrations.

(Martel, 2012: 150—151).

On the quotation, it is portrayed clearly, how the

Hyena eats the leg of the Zebra greedy. It is really such

a greedy killer animal. With no pity, it eats, with no

patience it gnaws its keen and dirty teeth on the effort

of tearing apart the meat of the broken leg of the Zebra.

It shows how cruel this animal.

This is also what the Cook has done in gnawing and

tearing the Sailor’s flesh. The Sailor is also eaten by

the Cook cruelly, with no pity and patience. This

quotation can be supposed as the proof,

The cook promptly butchered him. The leg had

made for poor bait. The dead flesh was too decayed

to hold on to the fishing hook; it simply dissolved

in the water. Nothing went to waste with this

monster. He cut up everything, including the

sailor’s skin and every inch of his intestines. He

even prepared his genitals. When he had finished

with his torso, he moved on to his arms and

shoulders and to his legs. (Martel, 2012: 386).

Inside of the quotation, it can be viewed clearly, the

moment when the Cook butchers the Sailor with

swallowing the dead flesh with no rest. Probably, the

Cook thinks that no good chance of eating fresh flesh

goes to waste, it can be caught by what he has done by

cutting all parts, including the Sailor’s skin, arms, and

legs. What that again is, the Cook cuts the leg of the

Sailor and utilizes it as the bait for fishing, and the rest

flesh is what he eats.

These two killers, the Hyena and the Cook, are

cruel. The two eat their prey violently to imagine, thus,

what is more again that has to say that these two

characters have no relation except only a play of plots?


The Hyena is only a symbol of the cruelty, the

characteristic, and the personality of the Cook. These

two characters are actually a character, the Hyena

becomes the symbol of the Cook, and it can be the

opposite that the Cook is the symbol of the Hyena. The

truth is, there is cruelty, there is a poor boy named Pi as

the eyewitness, and the poor boy who loses his family.

The signifier of these two character is the cruelty, and

the signified is the killer of the Zebra and Pi’s Mother,

that means they are only a victim of the game of

symbolizing.

What makes Pi loses his all part of his family is

when he knows that the Cook also kills his mother.

Again, the similarity, the Hyena kills the angry

Orangutan. This is represented to this small sentence,

“He killed her. The cook killed my mother.” (Martel,

2012: 389).

Thus, it becomes clear to symbolizes the Hyena as

the Cook who is such a cruel one on the boat. There are

some characteristics to support this symbolizing,

between the Hyena and the Cook, the characteristics

that are hard to say as the coincidental facts.

SYMBOLIZING PI PATEL AS THE RICHARD

PARKER

It has reached the core of this analysis, this part will

say the main thing, the main thing that is from the main

character in the object. Pi Patel as Richard parker in the

game of symbolizing, they play well, so thus the

author. However, it will make something to break

because the hidden presentation of this novel is soon

going to be unveiled.

First of all, it has to be dragged again to the part

where Pi meets firstly to Richard Parker. Richard

Parker is a Bengal Tiger, and it is deadly animal to

whom it may try. Pi seems to have feeling of this

animal, and their story really begins on the boat. To the

skipping, after the Zebra and the Orangutan are killed

and eaten up the Hyena, Richard Parker is on, on its

appearing, it looks so hungry, then it soon eats the

Hyena. As what God has written, the jungle rule, the

better class, the tiger eats the deadly smaller killer

animal, the Hyena.

At the same plot, Pi also kills someone for the first

time, and it will so strange to accept because the Cook

is strong enough to kill by a boy with age about

sixteen, thin and weak. However, Pi kills the Cook. But

it has to be delayed before, because Pi kills a living

creature firstly is to a poor fish, and it is drawn on these

assembled words,

I put the hatchet down. I would break its neck, sight

unseen, I decided. I wrapped the fish tightly in the

blanket. With both hands I started bending it. The more

I pressed, the more the fish struggled. I imagined what

it would feel like if I were wrapped in a blanket and

someone were trying to break my neck. I was appalled.

I gave up a number of times. Yet I knew it had to be

done, and the longer I waited, the longer the fish’s

suffering would go on.

Tears flowing down my cheeks, I egged myself on

until I heard a cracking sound and I no longer felt any

life fighting in my hands. I pulled back the folds of the

blanket. The flying fish was dead. It was split open and

bloody on one side of its head, at the level of the gills.

I wept heartily over this poor little deceased soul. It

was the first sentient being I had ever killed. I was

now a killer. I was now as guilty as Cain. I was

sixteen years old, a harmless boy, bookish and

religious, and now I had blood on my hands. It’s a

terrible burden to carry. All sentient life is sacred. I

never forget to include this fish in my prayers.

(Martel, 2012: 231).

It is the first time for Pi to kill an animal, and he

eats it. For mostly human, it is very common to eat

fish, but it is not for a vegetarian. Pi is known as the

religious one, he has three religions in his life, Islam,

Hindu, and Christian. In Islam, it is possible and even

suggested to eat fish, and it is not a kind of fault or

sins, it is also for Christian. There is no rule of

prohibition to kill fish and to eat it up. But, In Hindu, it

is a prohibition for someone to kill living creature such

as animal. Brahmin, is the highest class in Hindu

system of caste, and to be like Brahmin is the greatest

one. Thus, being vegetarian becomes the reason of

doing this way. It is what Pi feels and chooses.

However, this decision, this way finally should be

faced to a condition where he has to kill living thing.

Moreover, he has to eat, he has to fill the energy that is

from food. But there is no food in the middle of the

Pacific ocean, and the only thing that can be eaten up is

fish. This possible thing finally drives Pi to kill and eat

meat for the first time. Probably, it can be said as the

raising of the dark side, the black side, the evil side of

Pi. And this first speculation will bring it into the

symbolizing Richard Parker as Pi Patel, and what is

meant by Richard Parker or the Bengal Tiger that is

wild and deadly, is the evil side of Pi.

To support what is inside of Pi, the evil side, this

quotation can be grabbed as the regard because it will

show how fast Pi adapts to be killer.

You may be astonished that in such a short period

of time I could go from weeping over the muffled

killing of a flying fish to gleefully bludgeoning to

death a dorado. I could explain it by arguing that

profiting from a pitiful flying fish’s navigational

mistake made me shy and sorrowful, while the


excitement of actively capturing a great dorado

made me sanguinary and self-assured. But in point

of fact the explanation lies elsewhere. It is simple

and brutal: a person can get used to anything, even

to killing. (Martel, 2012: 234).

Here Pi explains that, the first time he kills the

Dorado fish, he feels shy and sorrowful because the

Dorado is a pitiful flying fish, but when he tries to

capture the Dora fish, he finds an excitement and it

makes Pi feels sanguinary and self-assured.

What can be inferred from this fact is that Pi has

been adapting with his evil side of killing living

animal. He has changed, he has turned, he has been the

opposite side of himself, from being a vegetarian, thin,

and small boy, to a living killer, strong, and evil.

That must be giving some signs to signify what Pi

has done, what Pi behaves, and adapts, to the signified

that Richard Parker is himself, the evil side of a

vegetarian and religious Pi. To what Pi has done by

killing the fishes and giving it to Richard Parker,

Richard Parker feels comfortable.

It occurred to me that with every passing day the

lifeboat was resembling a zoo enclosure more and

more: Richard Parker had his sheltered area for

sleeping and resting, his food stash, his lookout and

now his water hole. (Martel, 2012: 238).

Indeed, in the quotation, there is mentioned that

Richard Parker feels comfortable because Pi looks so

comfort of what Pi treats on him. However, it seems to

trap every signs that sign Richard Parker is Pi self.

First, it is the comfort feeling. As what the action that

has been exposed before, that Pi has been adapted of

being killer and he feels excitement of killing fishes.

This feeling is also what Richard Parker feels. Thus,

can it be taken as the first sign that signs Richard

Parker is Pi through symbolizing?

The second, Pi must feel satisfied and fulfilled

because of the eating the fishes, so must Richard parker

that is fed by Pi. The two is fulfilled, and it makes a

sense that the two is same, because the moment they

act is in the same time, and it delivers an understanding

that the Pi is the Richard Parker, or Richard Parker is

Pi. After killing, and fulfilled of fishes, then the second

sign of the symbolizing Richard Parker as Pi Patel.

Killing is something that is never coming over into

his mind, something that is almost never been in stuck

in his life, and something that is very different

oppositely with his vision of religion. However, he has

been adapting of being this changing, when his evil

side appears, there is told the Richard Parker. With

regarding on this quotation,

What I remember are events and encounters and

routines, markers that emerged here and there from

the ocean of time and imprinted themselves on my

memory. The smell of spent hand-flare shells, and

prayers at dawn, and the killing of turtles, and the

biology of algae, for example. And many more. But

I don’t know if I can put them in order for you. My

memories come in a jumble. (Martel. 2012: 242).

What Pi remembers is only routines on the boat, it

is caused by the time Pi is on the floating boat. Killing

is one of his routines, he becomes like a carnivore. He

is no longer a vegetarian, as the portrayal before that he

is actually a religious who is vegetarian. A perfect

portrayal of a good man that will not kill any living

creature. But it has changed, Richard Parker, his inside

part has risen up.

Everyday Pi has been adapting of killing fishes, he

even does not have disgusting feeling toward the killed

fishes. He eats it, he eats every meat, Pi has no longer

been a vegetarian boy.

Pi has been like Richard Parker. He eats meat, so

does Richard Parker. He does not wear nay cloth, so

does Richard Parker. It is strange to say that the two is

still different character, although it is known that the

existence of Richard Parker is when Pi becomes

another Pi that eats meat, kills animal, and losing his

temperament, although he is a religious one.

In his religion, that is not what Pi wants, everything

has been structurally. However, he does not realize that

within human’s side, there basic natural instinct, and

what differentiates between human and animal is only

to the way they live with mind. Animal lives with brain

but no mind, human lives in the two. The mind controls

human because it is the way human think to survive in

this earth. Too much using mind finally buries human’s

basic natural instinct.

The meant basic natural instinct is the animal side

of human. For instance, human must want to eat,

human must avoid something disturb, when human

feels angry or disturbed, he must want to kill what

disturb him with regardless the moral human has.

However, the moral side, the religion, attitude that

dictates mind finally makes human to rethink

everything to what they want to do.

Therefore, the appearing Richard Parker at the same

time when Pi becomes like animal can be analogized as

the symbol. The symbol of the two, Pi is Richard

Parker because Richard Parker is the another side of Pi.

Being murder, being cruel, being something opposite

from Pi before.

Pi realizes that he has changed, he has been another

Pi, not a weak thin boy. He has changed at all to

become a killer, deadly and having agility. It is like a

tiger. Of what he utters, “With time and experience I

became a better hunter. I grew bolder and more agile.


I developed an instinct, a feel, for what to do.” (Martel,

2012: 246).

Based on the quotation, it shows that the

characteristic Pi has is like the characteristic of a tiger,

he has agility, he has cruelty of eating the prey, and he

has been the animal. He has the hunter instinct, and his

instinct makes him becomes a fast and agile character,

and it is too Richard Parker. A Bengal tiger that is

known as the deadly killer animal. This below here

shows one of his instinct and cruelty,

Only the crabs didn’t have an unpalatably bitter or

salty taste. Every time they appeared, I popped

them one after another into my mouth like candy

until there were none left. I couldn’t control myself.

It was always a long wait between fresh crops of

crabs. The hull of the lifeboat invited life too, in the

form of small gooseneck barnacles. I sucked their

fluid. Their flesh made for good fishing bait. I

became attached to these oceanic hitchhikers,

though they weighed the raft down a little. They

provided distraction, like Richard Parker. (Martel,

2012: 249).

It is the portrayal of the greediness of Pi, the greedy

is a character of animal, especially carnivore animal. Pi

eats everything that passes in front of his boat like

taking candy. He cannot control his mind.

To control a mind is the job of moral, something

that differentiates human with animal, but Pi has no

longer had this moral. He has no longer become a

human, because he has changed into like animal,

Richard Parker. Then, the symbol of Pi as Richard

Parker becomes clearer.

In a moment there is told that Pi kills a turtle, and

apparently, turtle is something hard to be eaten up, but

because Pi has been controlled by his animal side, he

did it.

Butchering a turtle was hard work. My first one

was a small hawksbill. It was its blood that tempted

me, the “good, nutritious, salt-free drink” promised

by the survival manual. My thirst was that bad. I

took hold of the turtle’s shell and grappled with one

of its back flippers. (Martel, 2012: 253—254).

Here, Pi confesses that killing the turtle is very hard

and it needs much more energy. However, because he

has no longer become Pi previously who is vegetarian

and weak, he can kill the turtle. He can eat the animal

that is known as a difficult animal to kill. Pi even kills

it cruelly like a predator in forest to the prey that is

weak and alone.

It can be inferred that what makes a human changes

is the limitation and the unconsciousness of human to

do something. It is completely different to what Pi has

been characterized, however, to live on the boat that

floats on Pacific Ocean lonely, he has to keep living

although he has to kill something to eat. However, to

kill finally becomes his daily activity, when it becomes

the daily activity, he can be said as the predator

because it what a predator lives.

He eat greedy, very greedy like a hungry predator

that has forgot to the God that he thinks has given this

prey. Pi has been far away from who he really is

before, along this Pi’s side, the Richard Parker exists,

lives, and breathes. Thus, to compare this, the symbol

becomes keener to slice to the blurry fact that Pi is the

Richard Parker. Moreover, what Pi is doing free or

doing nothing, he is busy of seeking the next prey.

That shows something strange happened in Pi’s

character. He becomes like animal, the real animal, not

only animal but also a killer predator that always

hurries of hunting the prey. Richard Parker is really

dictated to what Pi has to do, and it has eaten and

swallowed Pi’s human side.

In the edge of getting frustration of his life, Pi

realizes that he lives to eat and feed the Richard Parker,

and even the way Pi eats has been like Richard Parker

eats. It can be taken the important thing that Pi lives to

eat and feed Richard Parker. This quotation happens

when Pi is still floating on the Pacific Ocean with

frustrations and complains to God. Then, the symbol

that Pi is Richard Parke becomes clearer, it is the

utterance that Pi has to live to eat and feed Richard

Parker. How important Richard Parker for Pi, Pi can

kill Richard Parker if he wants although it is hard.

However, Pi seems to hook his life to Richard Parker

although Richard Parker never feeds him. Then, the

question arrives, how can Pi be so naïve of feeding

Richard Parker. The question is very beautiful to

answer.

The thing is, Richard Parker is Pi’s animal side.

The side that can make Pi survives by killing fishes. If

this side is killed pi will be dead. It is possible, because

without killing fishes and eating it, Pi will no longer

live and take a breath. Thus, Pi has to feed Richard

Parker, that means he has to keep this side alive in his

side.

On the contrary, Richard Parker lives like king, he

is fed, he does not have to hunt the fish, because Pi has

caught it for it. Thus, it can be concluded that Richard

Parker does not exist at all, it is the representation of Pi

to keep alive to eat, to kill, and to survive.

Here it is shown that Pi really likes Richard Parker,

and he thinks that Richard Parker has made him keeps

alive,

“I love you!” The words burst out pure and

unfettered, infinite. The feeling flooded my chest.


“Truly I do. I love you, Richard Parker. If I didn’t

have you now, I don’t know what I would do. I

don’t think I would make it. No, I wouldn’t. I

would die of hopelessness. Don’t give up, Richard

Parker, don’t give up. I’ll get you to land, I

promise, I promise!” (Martel, 2012: 298).

The important thing from the quotation is, Pi feels

happy of the characteristic Richard Parker has. It is

strong, heavy, cruel. Without this characteristic, Pi

probably does like Richard Parker. Then, how can Pi

love this character although he is a religious and

vegetarian. This thing that can be caught is Richard

Parker is Pi’s character that has been buried by the

religion and the moral he has because of living

humanly.

However, this side finally changes into animal side

when he floats on the Pacific Ocean. This is caused by

the reason of keeping survive, without this animal side

Pi can be killed of the starvation. Then, Pi says that he

promises to Richard Parker to bring him to the land.

Land, this is the place where Pi lives, where the

human live, the place where Pi is taught to live

humanly and bury all things relate to live animally.

Then, after knowing the fact on the floating boat on the

Pacific Ocean, Pi finds himself, something hidden, and

it symbolized by the existence of Richard Parker.

Richard Parker has taught P to live rightly, and he

promises to bring Richard Parker of his another side to

the land that means to the real life Pi lives in, stays in,

and socializes.

The meant something the character of human

within Pi, and it has disappeared along with his life on

the floating boat.

The adventure is almost gone, Pi finally reaches

land, and he reaches a beach in Mexico. There, Pi

faints after touching the soft sands, but Richard Parker

does not so. Richard Parker leaves Pi, and Pi hopes

Richard Parker does not leave him,

The glance gave me one of my last images of

Richard Parker, for at that precise moment he

jumped over me. I saw his body, so immeasurably

vital, stretched in the air above me, a fleeting,

furred rainbow. He landed in the water, his back

legs splayed, his tail high, and from there, in a few

hops, he reached the beach. (Martel, 2012: 359).

Pi feels so sad because of being left by Richard

Parker. He thinks that Richard Parker has saved his

life, Pi cries like a child, and it is so sad moment for

him. That fact, raises something, something that

strongly strengthens the symbol Richard Parker as Pi

Patel because by being sad, Pi worries that his another

side, his animal side will be dead also. Be gone like

Richard Parker, and it is true, after living humanly, Pi

feels missing of Richard Parker. That means, Pi misses

of having life like animal, killing and eating meat.

What makes Pi becomes sad is, Richard Parker

does not look back and even say an adieu. Richard

Parker seems does not have any feeling to Pi, that is

animal. That is the evil side, there is no moral, no

attitude that has to be followed, because instinct cannot

be put into rule. Instinct is wild, instinct has no moral,

and instinct must be fulfilled with regardless what

reality offers.

It shows that Richard Parker has no any ceremony

to say farewell as human has to do, as human’s relation

among the other. Some say, Pi’s father says, that

animal is different with human. They use instinct, they

do not have any mind.

Thus, it becomes something to hide the symbol

Richard Parker as Pi because Richard Parker is like

what animal usually behaves, they do not have a any

feeling they do not have any attitude, and they do not

understand to say good bye. Apparently, when Richard

Parker disappeared, Pi cries. He thinks he will never

meets again to Richard Parker.

The sadness of Pi until he cries, when Richard

Parker leaves him with no farewell has dug Pi’s feeling

up. In the past life, Pi loves something that has attitude,

and structured harmony, but Richard Parker does not. It

is animal, and it what Pi has inside himself. Until, Pi

cannot erase Richard Parker in his mind.

Pi does part to Richard Parker, and Pi is found in

unwell condition. He is brought to a nearest hospital to

be treated, and Pi is interviewed by two Japanese that is

from the Cargo.

He tells two stories between he and animals and he

with human. It has to be uttered literally, that what the

story that Pi delivers, is too ambiguous to catch

obviously because the two can be the truest story. The

story that tells about the Hyena, the Zebra, the

Orangutan, and Richard Parker that is on a floating

boat on the Pacific Ocean, Pi himself is on the floating

raft on the Pacific Ocean. The Zebra is killed and eaten

up by the Hyena, so is the Orangutan that is tragically

and ironically killed and eaten up by the Hyena. Then,

the Hyena is ended up by the Richard Parker.

In the another story, there is the Sailor, Pi’s Mother,

and the Cook, who are on a floating boat on the Pacific

Ocean. The Cook kills and eats up the Sailor, and he

also kills Pi’s Mother. It drives Pi gets angry, and he

finally ends the Cook. He becomes lie an animal, he

kills fishes, and he is no longer becoming a thin, weak,

and small boy who is vegetarian.

Based on this two stories, it can be released an

presumption that the two is really similar, both the

plots, the conflicts, even the rolling characters of the


two stories. Therefore, it can be assumed that the two

are true, because the true are the two stories, thus it can

be seen that it is only symbolizing.

Affording to what the two stories have been

delivering, the characters of the animal can be drawn

clearly to see what they do until they are known as the

symbol of the human. Additionally, in a plot, there is

told that Pi says to the two Japanese men that the story

of the human characters are too cruel to tell.

CONCLUSION

Based on the recent analysis of the data, the result

can be concluded that actually what lays on the story in

Yann Martel’s Life of Pi is two stories about human

and animal where the plots are same. There is told Pi

lives on floating boat on the Pacific Ocean with

Richard Parker, a Bengal tiger, and also with the other

animals. Before that, there are the Zebra and the

Orangutan, but the two is killed by the Hyena, then the

Hyena is killed by Richard Parker. Another story, Pi

lives on floating boat on Pacific Ocean with the Cook,

his Mother, and the Sailor. The Sailor and Pi’s Mother

is killed by the Cook, and Pi kills the Cook after all.

This explained the relationship of the characters in both

stories. The relationship may vary. For an example in

the animals story, the Hyena barely know Zebra, it is

because at the zoo they were not like in a jungle. Their

relationship is like in the jungle. The Hyena killed the

Zebra right away after realizing that the Zebra couldn’t

stand a chance to fight against the Hyena. In the other

story, which is similar to the story before, the Sailor,

who broke his leg, was killed by the brutal Cook. The

Cook purposely killed the Sailor to make the his meat

as his food and to make the rest of the meat to catch

fish. This greediness explained the relationship of the

two characters in a story that is contained with the

human characters.

The similarity of the two finally emerges a question

that gives seduction of raising a presumption that the

animal is only the symbol of the human. The Sailor is

the Zebra, the Orangutan is Pi’s mother, the Cook is

the Hyena, and Pi is Richard Parker. Talking human

and animal, it is actually classically fact that human is

similar with animal and what differentiates them is

only the way think or in simpler word, the mind.

Animal does not have it, and it is what the thing that

differentiates human and animal.

However, in the insisted condition, when human

have to survive, human finally must have used their

instinct with regardless to the mind, to morality, and to

religion. Therefore, it is the animal side of human, and

so is Pi. In the edge of frustration and anger, he kills

the Cook although he is religious one, he eats fishes

although he is vegetarian, and he becomes cruel when

he eats the dead Cook.

This symbolism out of the two stories is very stand-

out. Like explained above, the animal story is the

symbol to represent the human’s beast side to survive

in a survival condition like in a lifeboat.

REFERENCES

Chandler, Daniel. 2007. Semiotics: The Basics (2nd

Edition). New York: Routledge.

Goldwater, Robert. 1980. Symbolism. Colorado:

Westview Press.

M. Plemons, April. 2008. “Commodifying Fido: Pets

as Status Symbols.” Thesis is unpublished. Texas:

A&M University.

Martel, Yann. 2001. Life of Pi. New York: Houghton

Mifflin Harcourt.

Martin, Bronwen & Felizitas Ringham. 2000.

Dictionary of Semiotic. London: Cassell.

Najid, Moh. 2003. Apresiasi Prosa Fiksi. University

Pers: Surabaya

Nurgiyantoro, Burhan. 1994. Teori Pengkajian Fiksi.

Gadjah Mada Pers: Jogjakarta

Setyani, Turita Indah. 2009. “Simbolisme Air dalam

Teks Tantu Panggelaran.” Paper is unpublished.

Bali: 3rd SSEASR Conference.

Symons, Arthur. 1908. The Symbolist Movement in

Literature. London: Archibal Constable & Co. Ltd.

Theodore A. Rees Cheney, Writing Creative

Nonfiction: Fiction Techniques for Crafting Great

Nonfiction. Ten Speed Press, 2001

Wellek, Rene & Austin Warren. 1949. Theory of

Literature. New York: Harcourt, Brace and

Company.

www.animal.discovery.com

www.animals.nationalgeographic.com

www.awf.org

www.outtoafrica.nl

www.sandiegozoo.org

www.seriousseekers.com

www.biblicalhorizons.com

www.ehow.com

www.library.arkansas.gov


Symbolism of the Characters in Yann Martel’s Life of Pi

Documents

main characters

animal characters

concept of characters

human characters

characters thats

dan detil

scattered symbolism

orangutan adalah ibu