Amitav Ghosh’s latest novel, “Ghost-Eye,” published by Farrar, Straus and Giroux, continues the author’s longstanding engagement with climate change, history, and cultural memory, though it has elicited mixed assessments regarding its execution. Set primarily in 1969 Calcutta, the narrative explores themes of reincarnation, ecological crisis, and supernatural phenomena against the backdrop of the Sundarbans, the world’s largest mangrove forest facing rapid environmental degradation.
The story centers on Varsha, a three-year-old girl from a wealthy Marwari Hindu family who claims to be the reincarnation of a Bengali fisherwoman named Isha. Varsha’s inexplicable knowledge of riverine fish and emerging paranormal abilities prompt the involvement of Shoma Bose, a psychologist specializing in cases of children who remember past lives. Shoma, alongside her skeptical pediatrician husband Monty and their Burmese Nepali driver Dev—who has his own guardian spirit—navigate the complex interplay of family dynamics, spiritual claims, and empirical investigation.
Narrated through Dinu Dutta, Shoma and Monty’s nephew, the novel follows his recollections of the events as a seven-year-old and his reflections as a nearly 60-year-old man living in Brooklyn during the COVID-19 pandemic, which separates him from his family in India. The plot is further propelled by Tipu, an activist with shamanic powers linked to a secretive “ghost-eye guild,” who seeks Dinu’s help to find the mysterious patient Shoma treated decades earlier. The guild’s members believe that this figure holds the key to altering the global climate trajectory.
“Ghost-Eye” serves as a spiritual and ecological sequel to Ghosh’s earlier works “The Hungry Tide” (2004) and “Gun Island” (2019), forming an informal Sundarbans trilogy. The novel encompasses a broad spectrum of elements, from reincarnation and shamanism to intergenerational secrets and activism, creating a layered narrative that reflects Ghosh’s ambition to contend with the planet’s complex crises through fiction.
Critics note that the novel’s ambitious scope leads to an occasionally crowded and uneven narrative. Several plot points rely on coincidental connections that require suspension of disbelief, such as overlapping relationships and fortuitous encounters that advance the story’s supernatural and ecological themes. Some readers find that "Ghost-Eye" attempts to integrate too many ideas within its relatively concise 322 pages, leading to underdeveloped threads and a sense that the material might have been better served by a more expansive treatment.
Additionally, the novel’s reliance on supernatural elements to frame climate activism has prompted discussion about its relationship to Ghosh’s earlier critique of literary realism’s failure to address environmental collapse. While the presence of paranormal abilities in the story aims to underscore the urgency and complexity of the climate crisis, some interpretations suggest the approach risks implying that supernatural intervention is necessary to confront ecological challenges, rather than human action alone.
Despite these criticisms, “Ghost-Eye” offers readers a rich, if sometimes unwieldy, meditation on memory, identity, and the intertwined fate of humans and nature. It continues Ghosh’s characteristic fusion of history, ecology, and speculative imagination, providing insight into the struggles of marginalized communities and the enduring impact of empire. Although viewed by some as the weakest installment in the Sundarbans trilogy, the novel remains a notable contribution to contemporary climate fiction and an invitation to reconsider how novelistic form can engage with planetary change.