Can We Show An Actual Fat Teen On A Book Cover?
The good news: there’s been more young adult fiction lately featuring fat teenage protagonists. The bad news: the covers of the books don’t actually show any fat teens. This post at Stacked offers a nice string of examples showing body parts instead of girls, pictures of food instead of girls, and girls who are supposedly “plus sized” but are in fact not plus sized at all.
I’m sure you can’t forget the Liar controversy, where the cover featured a white girl when the main character was clearly not white. Why is it we put thin on the cover when the character isn’t (and in some cases is JUST ALRIGHT WITH THAT?).
So I want you to tell me: why can’t we do this? Can you find me a cover with a fat girl who is — how do I say this — a normal, every day person? We know our world isn’t full of perfect bodies and we know we want people to come to love who they are, but if we can’t see it in the world (especially in books that are meant to highlight these said issues) how can we make people believe they are ok?
The comments are good too; Amanda brings up a related point right off the bat:
I think there’s a tendency in general to show only pieces of women on book covers. It’s true there are books with whole thin women on the covers, but in general most covers are pieces of women. I think it’s odd because it objectifies women and has us seeing them as it. “IT’s a butt.” Not “oh there’s a woman with a big round butt.”
It’s true; it’s like a variation on the headless fatty. I guess because body parts are less specific than a specific person? Also chicklit often = a pair of shoes on the cover. Because GIRLS LIKE SHOES.
I’m actually writing a YA novel with a plus sized protagonist right now, which makes this issue even more complex for me. I understand that many teen girls who think they’re “fat” and relate to the world like they’re “fat” are actually pretty average looking or what most would call “chubby”; that was certainly true for me. By avoiding putting a specific person on the cover, that does eliminate the compare-and-contrast problem–“I can’t relate to her, she’s not even fat!”
When my book is inevitably published in mass market paperback (just throwing that out there, universe), I’m not sure I’d want to have my main character on the cover, now that I think of it; I don’t usually like covers with people on them because it gets in the way of my ability to imagine the characters. Maybe I will select (with all my power that I will have as a bestselling young adult author, right, universe?) something else emblematic of my story, more universal.
Certainly not, however, an Oreo cookie.
Thanks to Wendy for the link!
Posted by mo pie
Filed under: Art, Books, Fat Positive, Fatism, Feminism, Media
The whole body vs. body parts question has been discussed in art and film history since the 70s. Laura Mulvey’s “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema” (1973) lays it out like this: films are made for the male gaze, and therefore treat women’s bodies like meat, and male bodies like actual human beings. Photography, film, and media haven’t changed much since that essay was published in 1973. Women are pieces and parts, even to ourselves sometimes. We assimilate the male gaze by being subject to it our whole lives.
When you publish your book, you should ask to put a picture of an antelope on the cover. And when they ask, “Why?” just say, “Because” and leave it at that. When they publish your book with a picture of a fat girl’s pinkie, then you can go all ballistic and ask where the fucking antelope is.
I’m sure it will help, somehow.
Peace,
Shannon
I have always been a big fan of those monthly Harlequin/Silhouette novella’s that come out. Yes, their mindless, and yes they have about as many plot twists as an episode of Blues Clues, but that’s probably why I like them. Now those novels do tend to have an entire female on the cover. Or at least a female waist up in the arms of a delicious man. And while there are occasions where the female in the story is described as “curvaceous” as opposed to stick-thin, never does the cover reflect this (unless of course she’s pregnant). Granted, these types of novels are published so often and all of the covers tend to blend together. If Harlequin could get away with not having a cover image I’m sure they would.
I also read erotica from time to time, and most of those covers do not have women at all. Instead there’s usually a gorgeous hunk a man shown from the lower half of his face to his upper thighs. Objectifying men just a bit? I’d say so. Do I feel guilty for buying such books? Not really.
But back to YA fiction. It’s been years since I used to stroll the YA section, but the last series I read that I can remember with actual “bodies” on the cover was probably Gossip Girl and maybe The Clique. And it’s not such a stretch to guess what kind of girls (or rather, what size of girls) would be gracing these covers?
That’s really interesting, Jezebella… I first learned about the male gaze in the context of classical art, and I didn’t really think about it translating into body parts instead of whole women. But of course that makes perfect sense.
I’ve noticed that, most erotica covers I’ve seen have had men as headless torsos. (Especially if it’s an M/M or M/M/F story, apparently any hint of gayness means you don’t warrant a head.)
Great criticism of book covers! I had to fight with my publisher and actually threaten to walk away from having them publish it at all, in order to make them put a whole fat body (albeit a cartoon) on the cover.
While I recognize the importance of FA and bringing attention to societal discussions of beauty & body shape…I think this is one time it’s a little over the top. Honestly, I think the article alluded to the real issue at hand in her comments on the book Fat Chance. That was the art of the time. This is the art of the time. I flip through the older YA lit I have on my classroom shelf and gaw! The cheesy artwork is awful – and oftentimes full body/character shots end up looking silly and so…nineties (remember The Babysitter’s Club covers?). The more modern covers look a lot like the modern covers of contemporary pop lit – a few very bright or saturated colors with a narrow focus or scope. Honestly, I prefer this. I would rather my students have to use their imaginations than be locked in by the character depicted on the front. Also, I think teens can more easily put themselves into the narrator’s position if they aren’t predisposed to some image from the cover.
I’ll second that – I don’t like covers that depict and entire person because I prefer to build the person’s face in my head. I think cool graphics focused on a particular part are more fun and interesting. When I think back to the Christopher Pike’s I used to read, I remember always finding the cover art annoying and off base (and it normally depicted a whole person).
I was sort of surprised to see “Fat Chance” on that list (please note though that it’s the only one of those books that I’ve read!). I read it quite awhile ago, but as far as I can remember the main character wasn’t actually fat (more of a chubby/bigger than the skinny ideal, but not necessarily even medically overweight.) I don’t think there was anything particularly wrong with that cover; yeah, the skeleton is creepy, but I think that adds to the point of the book.
I often don’t like seeing pictures of “fat” people on book covers – I’m semi-recovered from an eating disorder, and I think there is too much of a tendency to compare oneself with the book cover. It’s similar to when a character’s weight or size is explicitly mentioned. On the one side there’s the debate over whether the character *really* qualifies as fat. On the other side there are people who are still struggling with size acceptance who look at the character and panic “if she’s fat, what does that make me” and then commence the self-deprecation.
With no picture, no clothing size, no weight value, that’s less likely to happen.
P.S., I like the antelope idea!
Sorry to say this, but as with Liar, authors have little power over their book covers. It’s usually the publishing company that chooses covers they think will sell, not covers that are true to the story.
Pingback: Body Impolitic - Blog Archive - » Bodies on Book Covers: A Secret, Complex, and Evolving Language - Laurie Toby Edison: Photographer
Pingback: teen book overweight girl romance | My book blog