New Age Artists

Chapter 654 Deconstruction
In its previous life, "Life of Pi" attracted audiences with its visual spectacles and philosophical narratives, and explored the complex relationship between faith, human nature and truth through a miracle of survival at sea.

It unfolds with a double-layer narrative structure. On the surface, it is a fantasy adventure story, but at its core it is a philosophical inquiry into the nature of human existence.

Indian teenager Pi grew up in a zoo family and believed in Hinduism, Christianity and Islam, which helped him to develop a diverse understanding of the world.

Due to political unrest in India, the family decided to immigrate to Canada, taking their animals with them on a cargo ship.

The cargo ship sank in a storm, and Pai, a zebra, a hyena, an orangutan and the Bengal tiger Richard Parker boarded the lifeboat and became the only survivor.

A fight broke out among the animals, and in the end only Pai and the tiger were left.

Pi drifted in the Pacific Ocean for 227 days by training tigers, fishing and collecting fresh water.

You will experience fantastic scenes along the way, including a sea of ​​fluorescent jellyfish, an attack by schools of flying fish, a whale leaping out of the night, a cannibal island, etc.

Double ending.

Fantasy version.

Pi eventually drifted to the coast of Mexico, and the tiger disappeared into the jungle without looking back.

Realistic version.

Japanese investigators questioned the authenticity of the story, and Pi hinted that the truth was that the zebra was a sailor with a broken leg, the hyena was a vicious chef, the gorilla was Pi's mother, and the tiger was the beast within Pi.

What really happened on the ship was a bloody massacre of cannibalism. In order to escape the traumatic memory, Pi made up an animal version of the story.

In the past, when it came to "Life of Pi", most audiences were at the "receiver" level, subconsciously accepting the narrative and giving many philosophical explanations.

The film is given meaning and its theme is elevated by the idea that "when reason cannot explain suffering, people need stories."

The essence of stories is choice, and humans need fiction to carry truths that cannot be faced directly.

A lot of symbolic meanings can be interpreted from the film.

The tiger represents human's primitive animality and survival instinct. It is also the object of Pi's fear and survival partner.

The Cannibal Island, which appears to be a paradise on the surface, is actually a trap that devours lives. It implies that numb calmness is more dangerous than despair.

The fluorescent ocean and surreal beauty contrast with the loneliness of despair, suggesting nature’s indifference to human suffering.

The notebook sank, and Pi lost the notebook that recorded his science, symbolizing that rationality is ineffective in the face of survival, and only faith and stories can sustain life.

There is also agnosticism, existential dilemma, postmodern narrative, etc.

"Life of Pi" has become a soul allegory constructed by Li An using visual poetics.

Through the symbiosis of the tiger and the boy, and the entanglement of reality and fiction, the film questions the most essential proposition of mankind: how to anchor the meaning of survival in nothingness, and whether human nature can bear the weight of the truth when the cloak of civilization is torn apart.

Going in this direction, everyone has a Richard Parker in their heart, and they all have wildness and tigers. They need to have a tiger in their heart and sniff the roses.
This set of interpretations places oneself in the position of a recipient, a disciple, in a low position, accepting the narrative output by Li An.

If we look at the plot of the movie from a straight perspective and peel off the outer layer of visual spectacle and philosophical narrative, what is the true core of "Life of Pi" and what group does it serve?
Tigers eat people!

In a limited space, a tiger is bound to attack humans, as it is a man-eater.

If people want to live, they must kill the tiger.

Movies are symbiotic.

The film confuses two contradictions, confusing the contradiction between the enemy and us into an internal contradiction, and turning it into part of the Western narrative.

Imperialism is cannibalistic and plunders the markets and industries of the Third World. It is an irreconcilable contradiction between us and the enemy.

"Symbiosis" conceals cruelty and whitewashes the cannibalism of the "tiger" imperialist hegemony, giving people the illusion that it can be reconciled, negotiated, and fought for.

As carnivores, tigers pose a threat to the survival of the pie, just as imperialism plunders resources and violently suppresses the Third World.

Pi establishes a relationship with the tiger through feeding, taming and dependence, which implies that the colonized can exchange living space for compromise, and alludes to the hidden nature of economic dependence and cultural infiltration in neo-colonialism.

In the end, Pi chose to tell the story of the tiger and hide the "truth of cannibalism", using aestheticized narrative to cover up the essence of colonial violence.

A typical pattern of Hollywood narrative, reinforcing individualized survival narrative.

Transform structural contradictions, class, colonization and colonization, oppression and oppression into issues of personal spiritual growth.

Then package it with universal values ​​and use abstract concepts such as "humanity" and "faith" to replace specific power relations.

This is a common strategy of Western-centric discourse.

The movie does not seem to completely cover up the cruel truth of "cannibalism" and provides narrative selectivity - the audience can choose "which story to believe."

There is also questioning of faith, "God is noise", and a rejection of any absolute ideology, including Western-centrism.

There is even room for the subject to resist. Pi finally gains control of the narrative as a storyteller, which can be seen as a metaphor for the narrative's regaining the right to speak.

This reflexivity, refusal, resistance.
This just proves the truth that "if the stance is wrong, the greater the ability, the greater the consequences."

Let me ask you, under imperialist oppression, can the oppressed just say “I don’t want to be oppressed” and then get out of being oppressed?

Hollywood is conquering the world, and Western-centrism is eager to occupy all cultural soil. It does not pretend to be in the areas it already controls, but infiltrates the areas it does not yet control in various ways, engages in post-colonialism, and even color riots?

Can any country just say no and refuse something?

A sickly young man and Tyson at his peak were thrown into a cage for a life-and-death battle, regardless of life or death.

Give young people the freedom to decide on their stance angle, how to start, how to fight, how to cry out in pain, etc. Set enough details to give them ample "personal choices".

Is this a personal choice?
Indeed, given the opportunity.

But it's just a more advanced way to get away with it. It allows "Tyson" to take action without even the most basic sense of guilt. After all, you can also choose, you can resist, you can also take action, it's all because you are not strong enough!

What's more, the seizure of power in the movie "Life of Pi" still needs to be achieved through Western-dominated media.

The narrative of a movie is nothing more than a more advanced way of playing, which makes the leader more excited.

The freedom to be "killed", the choice to be "killed", is neither freedom nor choice.

The freedom and choice to say no, the freedom and choice not to participate in this cruel game, is the real freedom and choice.

The more thoroughly a cruel story is deconstructed, the more beautiful and romantic it is filmed, the more cruel it is, and it is also a supreme irony.

Just as the consequences caused by "The Flowers of War" are far greater than those of "Nanjing Nanjing" and "1942".

"Nanjing Nanjing", which has the worst historical perspective, has caused the least harm, and even had a counterproductive effect, because Lu Chuancai couldn't even deconstruct it properly.

Li An is different; he was chosen by Western narrative.

He is a master of films from an Orientalist perspective, even better than Zhang Yimou.

The stance of Chinese people who have made it big in the United States may be questioned, but one cannot doubt their ability, especially men, who are bound to be capable.

From an Eastern perspective, Li An depicts an Indian teenager's eclecticism of three religions, suggesting that non-Western subjects can make their own choices for multiple narratives rather than unilaterally accept Western Enlightenment rationality.

Li An used his powerful abilities to create a false illusion and avoid the facts.

In fact, Western subjects do not accept non-Western narratives.

Li An is a determined and capable ideological fighter in Hollywood.

Let’s go back and examine the relationship between Li An and Western narrative.

Li An's works always wander between Eastern ethics and Western forms. He grafts the martial arts philosophy of "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" with Hollywood genre films. Objectively, he is Hollywood's cultural agent in the Chinese world.

The Indian background and Canadian immigration ending of "Life of Pi" also meet the Western consumption demand for "the cultural wonders of others".

When non-Western directors enter the global market, they are often forced to adopt Western-approved narrative grammars.

In order to gain recognition from Western narratives, Li Amin must also cater to the West's imagination of "Eastern mysticism."

The honors given to him by major film festivals and the Oscars are precisely a reward for his loyalty.

And all of this is probably not intentional, but the entire systemic chain of the West has opened up such a loophole.

If you want to get in through this hole and break through the ceiling, you have to cut yourself into this shape.

If you don't castrate yourself, you won't be able to break through the ceiling, and if you force yourself to break through, there will be no good ending.

The postcolonialism of "Life of Pi" is hidden in the story, which transforms colonial violence into an allegory of individual spirit, avoids the criticism of the structural violence of imperialism, and further expands the multiculturalism of imperialist hegemony.

Li An uses his cross-cultural identity to incorporate himself into the myth of "coexistence of diversity" in the neoliberal globalization narrative through his own works, making it a cultural commodity that dissolves political confrontation.

Shen Santong waved his big hand and pushed the wave of reflection and discussion launched by "1937" to a climax.

This is true reflection.

Of course, in the eyes of some people, the grand deconstruction has begun.

With Weibo as the main battlefield and several movie celebrities taking the lead, a deconstruction of the film has been launched.

This kind of discussion is useless in the United States, and no one will understand it even if we talk about it.

Dongda is different. The average cultural quality and common sense are high, and a hearty deconstruction begins from this.

(End of this chapter)