The Life of Pi Critique - Essay Example

? The Life of Pi Abdalwahab Yousif Portland The Life of Pi The Life of Pi is a movie review of a young Indian boy d Pi. He is about sixteen years old and belongs to the Indian race. He comes from a well-off family, i.e. considered to be of a higher social class in the society with privileges and rewards. His father owns a zoo where they keep a wide range of wild animals. However, his mother is a stay-at-home mum, i.e. a housewife whose main duties are to procreate and take care of the family. He goes to school, and later he enrolls to dancing classes where he meets the first love of his life. Pi is a Hindu child. Nevertheless, his curiosity and passion to know God more drives him to pursue three different religions at a go, i.e. his native Hindu, Islam, and Christian religions (Castelli, 2012). The Life of Pi exhibits several examples of the Feminist Family Theory as well as the Structural Functionalism Theory. Feminist Family Theory refers to the search of rights, identities, opportunities and privileges that women think and believe they deserve. This theory tackles issues that make women be second-class in the society, such as being inferior to men. On the other hand, the theory of Structural Functionalism proposes that division of family roles should take a natural course, generally basing on gender affiliations of family members. In this regard, Structural Functionalism proposes that men work in order to provide basic needs for their families such as earning money to buy food, clothes and pay rent. On the other hand, the tasks of women are expressively taking care of family members, especially household chores (Hamon, Ingoldsby, Miller & Smith, 2009). Feminist Family Theory is very evident in the movie the Life of Pi. One of the major incidences occurs when Pi’s mother supports her son to pursue multiple religions even though this was against the family and religious values of Hinduism. The family belongs to the Hindu religion. As such, they have to adhere to only one religion, and this is what Pi’s father, a strict follower of traditions, ensures by forbidding his son from pursuing any interests in any other religion apart from Hinduism, i.e. Islam and Christianity. Pi’s mother argues that God is the same in all religions. Therefore, her son is not wrong in following his interests in exploring other religions. She therefore allows her son to follow his religious interests only for the father, as the head of the family, to overrule the decision and forbid Pi from doing so (Hamon, Ingoldsby, Miller & Smith, 2009). This is a perfect example of a case proving that the society considers women as the second-gender behind the men. As such, they were not to make any decisions that would go against the decisions made by the first gender, i.e. the men in their lives, and in this case the father of the boy. Consequently, the decisions made by Pi’s mother do not have any authority because she is a woman. However, the directive given by the father of Pi overrules the permission given to him by his mother to pursue different religions because he is the man. Most societies consider men as the head of the family. This is contrary to the feminists’ movements that advocated for equality in gender and appreciation of the roles women play in the society, i.e. as supporters to the men and not as their subordinates. Women have every right to make decisions that they consider fit to benefit their household, just as advocated for in the Feminist Family Theory (Castelli, 2012). This case is very important to women because it clearly indicates the way the society disregards decisions or opinions voiced by women. This is clear evidence of oppression against women, far against the movements championed by women to fight for equal rights and privileges as their male counterparts. There have been several movements to fight for the emancipation and empowerment of women as equal partners in the society. Some of the modern feminist movements witnessed in the 1960s to the 1970s include liberal, Marxist, radical, and social feminists. Liberal feminists fought against career subjugation of women barring them from taking charge of significant roles within the society. Marxist feminists fought against the reproductive exploitation of women, i.e. as childbearing machines. Radical feminists were against male dominance in the society, whereas social feminists were against oppression of women according to class and patriarchy (Hamon, Ingoldsby, Miller & Smith, 2009). The above case whereby Pi’s father overruled Pi’s mother decision to allow her son to pursue divergent religious interests falls under the radical feminists movements. Advocates of this movement emphasized that male dominance was the root cause of all the problems in the society. This was especially so when these men used their authority and power to oppress women. These protagonists argued that it was not appropriate to limit individuals to their feminists or masculine traits. However, the society was to strive and achieve a state of androgyny whereby both male and female traits commanded equal authority in the society. Therefore, in the above case, the best course of action would be to let Pi continue with his pursuit for multiple religions in order to satisfy his thirst for knowing God, just as the mother allowed him. By consenting to the decision made by his wife to give their son permission, the father of Pi would be realizing the radical feminists’ dream of an equal society free of male dominance (Castelli, 2012). Similarly, the movie review of the Life of Pi has evidence of structural functionalism. Pi’s father is the breadwinner of the family. He owns a zoo full of wild animals which people come to see at a fee. On the other hand, Pi’s mother is a common housewife. She does not engage in any income generating activity and her main role is to take care of the family. This kind of socialization promotes male dominance and power, so evidenced when the father overruled the decision of the mother in allowing Pi to follow three religions simultaneously (Hamon, Ingoldsby, Miller & Smith, 2009). However, much as the feminist agenda is commanding a strong wave across the settings of the society, there are several issues which it disregards thereby losing support across the entire divide. For instance, the feminist movement disregards family parameters. Traditional settings demand that a woman should belong to a family and should be under the man. The man is always the head of the family and his decisions are final. On the contrary, these feminists’ movements want to overrule this fact and demand that women should have equal rights as men. This evidently erodes the morals of our society because most women might become bigheaded and refuse to obey their husbands (Castelli, 2012). References Castelli, J. C. (2012). The Making of Life of Pi: A Film, a Journey. New York City: Harper Collins Hamon, R.R., Ingoldsby, B.B., Miller, J.C. & Smith, S.R. (2009). Feminist Family Theory. In S.R. Smith, R.R. Hamon, B.B. Ingoldsby, and J.E. Miller [Eds.]. Exploring Family Theories. New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. 230-244 Read More