The performance of “Life of Pi” was something I couldn’t miss. I read Yann Martel’s book in Russian, then—for educational purposes—in English, later I listened to the audiobook in English for the same reasons, then spent time during a long family car trip listening to the audiobook in Russian, and eventually watched Ang Lee’s film. And now, I’ve finally gotten around to the play.
I always thought of a play as something much simpler than the show we just came from. The “Broadway standard” keeps the audience awake not only with an interesting script (which reflects the book 99% of the time) but also with some amazing audiovisual effects: projections on four walls, intricate set designs, actors’ movements synchronized with programmed effects. The use of puppetry was particularly impressive; considering the story involves many animals, all of which are crucial, transferring this to the stage always seemed to me an incredibly challenging task.
The plot is as follows: after a shipwreck in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, an Indian boy named Pi Patel survives on a lifeboat with four companions—a hyena, a zebra, an orangutan, and a Royal Bengal tiger.
When I first read the book, I didn’t even know that somewhere at the end of the first third the “intensity” with the shipwreck and the struggle with hunger and fear would begin. Because the first third is philosophical—about religion and how the young Pi simultaneously combines several beliefs in himself. For me, it was almost a meditative reading: measured, thoughtful, with reflections on God, the meaning of life, and how to find one’s place in the world. It seemed that the book was moving towards something profound but unhurried. And then suddenly—shipwreck. Pi’s life is turned upside down, and a completely different story begins—harsh, severe, filled with despair and the struggle for survival. But there is also a third part, quite psychedelic, but I won’t spoil it. This third part was compressed into one minute in the play, but it was done very organically.
Perhaps, the play added new shades to my perception of this story. If the book and film focused more on emotions and philosophy, the play emphasized visual and emotional shock. However, all of them highlight the main question: where does reality end, and fiction begin? What part of what Pi experienced was reality, and what was a product of his imagination, trying to cope with the horror?
After the play, I thought again that each art form shows this story in its own way. The book is about reflections, and the play is a visual explosion, perhaps even stronger than the film of 2012. But the main thing is that after all versions of “Life of Pi,” I realized one thing: sometimes a well-told story is enough to step out of the theater and discuss it over dinner, recalling the brightest moments. This play is definitely worth seeing.
Hi, I'm Rauf Aliev. 