While I don't believe that Life of Pi is a perfect book by any standard, I'm rather annoyed with Mounica Porandla's review. In my opinion it put little focus on the greater themes and messages of the book.

In particular, I disliked Mounica's criticism of the survival story. I felt that the wandering, anecdote-filled odyssey that Pi told gave not only an interesting viewpoint into the prison-like life aboard the raft, but also retold and distilled classic original myths of major religions. Not to mention that each smaller story added up to the reveal at the end.

I think that Mounica's review lacked a deeper search for meaning at the end of the book. Both of Pi's stories were entirely possible, and yet his interviewers chose to believe the much more fantastical story that took up the majority of the book. In Mounica's words this was “the author saying that belief in God is more interesting than reality.” This is false. The author is saying that belief in a god, though less plausible than ­belief in the bare facts, allows humanity to perceive a more beautiful story. Similar to how Richard Parker's belief in Pi's dominance lent Pi power, belief in a divine force brings rhyme, reason, and motivation to an otherwise brutish and sparse existence.