The secret of Life of PI is in the narrator’s opening preamble.  The whole structure and even the ending is contained in the statement:

If we, citizens, do not support our artists, then we sacrifice our imaginations on the alter of crude reality and we end of believing in nothing and having worthless dreams.

I will argue in this response that this book is an extended metaphor; that it is a political allegory.  The contrived ending is not so contrived after all; it is an essential part of the story; it is Martel’s ‘crude reality’ and part of his political commentary.  You are not supposed to like the ending, the crude reality he imposes at the end of his story.  This negative reaction should make you ‘support your artists’, so that more endings don’t get sacrificed in this way.

When Pi Patel asks Mr. Okamoto, “So tell me, since it makes no factual difference to you and you can’t prove the question either way, which story do you prefer? Which is the better story, the story with the animals or the story without the animals?” isn’t he really asking him, ‘hey Okamoto, do you like Art or not.  What’s your thing, Novels or Newspapers?”

Pi Patel’s story has become a mythology with cultural power that a newspaper article could never have.  This is the point Yann Martel makes above when talking about funding for the Arts, and the point he makes again through the voices of his characters.

There is a concept in philosophy that states that if you have two possibilities in your life, and there is no proof for either one definitively, then you are free to choose the one you like, the one that makes you feel the best.  You as a human should choose the optimistic idea because it has the most utility for you, it makes you feel good instead of bad or indifferent.  It doesn’t have to be a belief in God.  I don’t personally believe in God.  I do however believe that on the whole humans are good.  I can’t prove it, but I feel better believing this than that all humans are murdering evil jerks at heart.

Martel offers two possibilities in his book and he presents a choice that costs us nothing to make.  Art or reality?

The origin of these ideas for those interested can be traced to Blaise Pascal (among others) who wrote that:

God is or He is not.  But to which side will we incline?  …  What will you wager?  … You must wager.  It is not optional … Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is.   …  If you win, you win everything, if you lose you lose nothing.  Do not hesitate then; wager that he does exist.