Mission 2026: Binge reviewing all previous Reads, I was too slothful to review back when I read them
Weight Loss is not about dieting. If you come here looking for calories and cardio, you’re in the wrong queue. This is Upamanyu Chatterjee doing what he does best: turning the middle-aged Indian male psyche inside out and shaking it until all the loose change of hypocrisy, desire, self-loathing, and bureaucratic absurdity falls out.
The novel follows Bhola, a senior civil servant, who embarks on a weight-loss journey that is less about shedding kilos and more about confronting the grotesque excess of his own life—sexual, emotional, professional, and existential.
Chatterjee uses the body as metaphor with surgical precision. The fat is not just physical; it is moral, psychological, institutional. The Indian state itself feels obese in this novel—bloated with inertia, corruption, and rituals that no longer nourish anyone.
What makes Weight Loss uncomfortable (and therefore excellent) is its refusal to offer redemption arcs. Bhola does not “learn a lesson” in a neat, Instagrammable way.
Instead, the novel circles obsessively around desire—especially male desire—showing how it mutates with age but never really matures. Sex here is not liberating; it is compulsive, repetitive, faintly ridiculous.
Chatterjee writes these scenes with brutal honesty and zero sentimentality, which will offend some readers. Good.
Literature should offend when it’s telling the truth.
Stylistically, the book is classic Chatterjee: dense, ironic, allusive, packed with literary references and bureaucratic jargon. It demands attention.
This is not a skim-on-the-train novel. The prose mirrors Bhola’s mind—rambling, sharp, self-aware, and deeply cynical. The humor is dark, intellectual, and often savage.
You laugh, then feel slightly guilty for laughing.
At its core, Weight Loss is about decay—of the body, of institutions, of ideals. It’s also about the lie of self-improvement.
Chatterjee seems deeply suspicious of the modern obsession with optimization: better bodies, better careers, better selves.
His answer is bleak but honest—without ethical clarity, improvement is cosmetic.
This is not a lovable novel. It doesn’t want to be. It’s a mirror held up to privilege, masculinity, and late-capitalist India, and the reflection is not flattering.
But it is necessary.
Most recommended.