You're a big girl now

So here's something I never thought I'd say (or write): I was reading an interview with Danielle Steel in USA Today.

It was tied into her new book, Big Girl, in which the main character "struggles with her weight, body image and self-esteem from childhood through her 20s." Okay. If there's a cheesy romance to be found in any subject, chances are Danielle Steel will dig it out. But as I read through the interview, it started to feel insulting--specifically, Steel's answers to the insipid questions about her inspiration in writing about a fat heroine. Oh, and about her expertise on weight issues (she gained weight during pregnancy. Twice!).

If you replaced "overweight" with any kind of "other"ness in the piece, would this be such a breezy book feature? If this were a white author writing about a black character, a male author writing about a female character--would we be patting her on the back for making such a noble choice? I don't think we would. So doing it here feels hollow.

"Books are always written about beautiful people who find other beautiful people, but most people are regular people, and weight is an issue for a lot of them. I thought, it must be a drag to always have beautiful people highlighted in books. Why not make a heavier woman the star of the show?"

Why not, indeed? But hey, here's a thought: why not write a heavier heroine without fetishizing it in the title, or making her weight the central issue of the book?

"If you notice, I do not have Victoria lose weight by the end of the book, but she gets a great guy."

Congrats. A great guy, no less! It must have been agonizing to write a romantic lead character with such an obvious flaw!

Steel clearly means well, but it's still ridiculous to treat this as a bold choice. Even if Bridget Jones hadn't already jumpstarted the whole "he loves me just as I am" fairytale trope fourteen years ago, this would still feel cliched. Steel asks the right question ("why no overweight heroines?"), but answers it in the most shallow and pandering way possible.

And then there's the cover. While Steel is fighting the good fight for "big girls" everywhere and graciously allowing them to appear lovable, what image is chosen to represent all of this? A model-perfect face, licking an ice cream spoon. Because we can't show an overweight girl on the cover--heavens, no. That might scare the natives. It reminded me a little of last year's cover controversy, where jackets were whitewashed to be more "appealing." Apparently brown people and fat people are literary kryptonite on the shelves. Who knew?

Clearly, this is what I get for continuing to read past "Danielle Steel" and "USA Today." Chances are that nothing good was ever gonna come of that. But this was particularly irksome and disheartening.