SPOILERS AHEAD
One could argue that Yann Martel’s Life of Pi has a choose-your-own ending.
Did Pi really travel across the ocean, learning to peacefully coexist with a ravenous man-eating tiger along the way, a clever allegory that opposites don’t necessarily have to cancel one each other out and people can learn to live their lives without destroying each other?
Did Pi lie to the authorities who questioned him because it was easier than it would have been to insist that his incredible story was true?
Was Pi’s claim of sailing with Richard Parker the Tiger a lie? Did he, in fact, suffer a terrible fate in which his mother was killed and he made up the story about the animals to avoid thinking about it?
Personally, I thought the Richard Parker version of the story was very uplifting, and then to add in the possibility that it never happened was a little disappointing. But the dual ending possibilities could be a litmus test. Positive people probably gravitate to the Richard Parker version. Negative people say “a boy and a tiger never could have survived on a raft together, the boy would have been eaten in 2 seconds. The version where Pi’s mother is killed must be the true version.”
All I can say is the novel is a good read, very original, and the movie really brings it to life.
Bookshelf Battle 
I completely agree with you. Actually, it’s the only part of the book I cannot stand, and I’ve reread the book twice without it, and it’s much better. If the story is a metaphor–well, it’s a story, of course it’s a metaphor! I didn’t want my suspension of disbelief about the plot to feel like such a total waste.
Nice post!
It was a bit disappointing but I suppose the author’s point was to get us thinking and to leave us with some mystery.
I agree – I admit I was left wanting when the alternative version came around – I adored the Richard Parker story better. Excellent read.
It felt like Yann Martel had spun this great yarn and then ripped it up at the end just by giving the alternate version. But I suppose we can choose to believe which version we want.
I think the non tiger ending is meant to be the real one but Pi asks which story they (we) like better and of course it is the one with Richard Parker. And that is the point. Allegorical fiction can be more powerful than the truth and certainly can help us learn to live with the truth.
I still hope it was the tiger but I get what you mean!
I think this a story about religion and believing. After all, the book flap says this book will make you a believer. It’s about taking a leap of faith and believing something you have no proof exists. You Choose to believe the better story. There is a heaven, a benevolent God, life after death, Pi and Richard Parker on the boat.
I don’t believe the Richard Parker version is true. It is an allegory. I loved the ending. It made me think about religion, and why some believe and others do not. Some people just like the better story.
If you end up believing the Richard Parker version, does that mean you’re a believer, as the flap suggests? If you go with the alternative version, are you a cynic?
I don’t really know. I am not a believer and I went with the alternative version. I love the Richard Parker story but when he told the other story it made sense to me. The orangutan is his mother, the hyena is the cook, the zebra is the sailor and Pi is Richard Parker.
I saw the Richard Parker story as a survival mechanism, a story Pi told himself while lost at sea to keep his spirits up. Just as religion is a story to give you hope-there is a benevolent God who watches over us and you can pray to. There is life after death, etc.
But the writer doesn’t give us any definite answer. It’s up to the reader. Like faith is up to the believer or non-believer.
The first third of the book spends a lot of time on Pi exploring the three major religions and questioning faith. I feel the ending comes back to this. Pi wants to believe and his survival at sea made him a believer. However, the book flap says it will make the reader a believer and it didn’t make one of me. I believe the alternative story.
I found this to be a very unique story that could mean many things to different people and I don’t think there’s a right answer. Just like religion.
Oh dear, by your definition I’m definitely a negative person! I loved the fact that it ended that way which I realise makes me sound like a horrible person but it was such a rational explanation for something that sounds so fantastic that I thought it was very clever so it was that that I admired, not a young boy being orphaned in horrific circumstances!