big persons, small voices: on governance, obesity, and the narrative of the failed citizen

8/8/2019 Big Persons, Small Voices: On Governance, Obesity, and the Narrative of the Failed Citizen

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/big-persons-small-voices-on-governance-obesity-and-the-narrative-of-the 1/17

Journal ofCanadian Studies * Revue d'6tudes canadiennes

Big Persons, Small Voices:

On Governance, Obesity,

and the Narrative of the Failed Citizen

Charlene D. Elliott

This essay probes the connection between obesity and citizenship In Canada, outlini

the ways in which the fa t body or "failed body project" is equally positioned as that

the "failed citizen." It examines how the personal body has been connected to that of t

citizen, and traces the evolving narrative that explains why the Ideal citizen is, litera

and figuratively, a "fit" citizen. Contradictions emerge, because the figurative concept

citizen "fitness" is often mistakenly conflated with the visible look of leanness. The the

retical and practical implications of framing the larger body as a lesser citizen are th

explored In light of these contradictions. Given that nearly 60% of adult Canadians-

14 million people-are classified as overweight or obese, the framing of the fa t body as t

failed citizen is of considerable significance.

Cet essal, qui analyse le lien entre l'ob6sit6 et la citoyennet6 au Canada, se penche sur

faýons dont le corps ob6se ou le <vprojet physique rat6 , rejoint celui du v citoyen rat6 ,.

examine comment le corps humain est relii Acelul du citoyen et fait le r6cit qui expliq

pourquoi le citoyen idWal est o en forme o, au propre comme au figur6. Le concept de

v bonne condition physique Pdu citoyen, lequel se confond souvent avec le look visi

de ]a minceur, donne lieu Amaintes contradictions. On y explore aussi les implicatio

th6oriques et pratiques qu'entramne l'6tiquetage du corps obse en tant que citoyen mo

dre. ttant donn6 que pr8 de 60 % des adultes canadiens, soit 14 millions de personnont un exc6s de poids ou sont obses, l'tiquetage du corps gros en tant que citoyen r

rev&t une importance considerable.

n March 2006, Prime Minister Stephen Harper made a visit to the Canadi

troops in Kandahar. What proved fascinating about the news coverage th

followed was the extent to which the commentary focussed, not on t

political, national, social, or moral implications of the visit, but on the prim



Journal of Canadian Studies - Revue d'6tudes canadlennes

being prime minister (Taber 2006), the NationalPostobserved the "wide berth"

at the PM O (Smyth 2006), and the VancouverSun's lead was "PM Fights Battle of

the Bulge in War Zone" (Weeks 2006c).1 Days later, the prime minister was backin the spotlight over his refusal to meet with Brigitte Bardot regarding the East

Coast seal hunt-yet, once again, the "news" focussed more on Harper's fat than

the plight of the baby seal. Sue Bailey's CanadianPress article (2006), picked up

by several newspapers, announced, "PM Takes Flak about His Weight ... Denies

Photo Op with Film Star." The article raised the question of whether the prime

minister was setting a good example for Canadians by being so visibly out of

shape, and then ended by discussing animal rights activists and Brigitte Bardot.

What proves interesting about this coverage is the way in which the bodyof the politician is framed as if relevant to the interests of the body politic.

More specifically, this "news" captures some of the central issues surrounding

Canada's preoccupation with fatness and the ways in which the fat body-what

Samantha Murray identifies as the "failed body project" (2005, 155)-is equally

positioned as that of the "failed citizen."

While issues related to health and well-being rank extremely high with

Canadians2 and the problem of obesity receives consistent media coverage, little

focus has been placed on the relationship between obesity and Canadiancitizen-

ship. This article seeks to probe how obese individuals are implicitly and explic-

itly framed as "less equal" citizens, and how the conspicuous body is read as,

not merely the sign of moral failure, but the failure of personal responsibility as

well. To this end, I briefly examine how the personal body has been connected

to that of the Canadian and American citizen, and then trace the evolving nar-

rative that explains why the ideal citizen-one in good health and/or visibly

lean-is figuratively framed as a "fit" citizen. This narrative, I argue, is problem-

atic on various levels, including those pertaining to questions of morality, per-

sonal accountability, and responsibilization. Moreover, the figurative concept

of "fitness" is often (incorrectly) equated with the visible look of leanness. The

discussion of the narrative of the "good" citizen provides the basis for some

theoretical interventions pertaining to the construction of the obese body as a

physically and morally failed body, or what Bahktin (1984) would classify as a

carnivalesque body.

Since this article focusses on the relationship between the body and citizen-ship, the final section explores how the issue of the "citizen consumer" brings



Charlene D. Elliott

are classified as overweight or obese (Salinas 2006, F10),3 the framing of the fa

body as the failed citizen is of considerable significance.

From Healthfully Fit to Visibly Lean: Tracing Shifts in the Citizen's Body

In their 2002 article entitled "Citizen Bodies," Carol Lee Bacchi and Chris Beas

ley observe that the academic literature on citizenship and the literature on bod

ies (or embodiment) rarely overlap. Connections between body and citizenshi

are infrequent, they argue, because the body is generally "constituted in singula

terms and as quintessentially private," whereas citizenship is framed "as a publi

activity concerned with establishing ... boundaries between people and group

of people" (2002, 328). The fact that academic literature on citizenship generall

fails to connect to bodies, however, does not mean that citizenship and the bod

have not been consistently linked elsewhere. There is a rich literature on th

body and society.4 On the "citizenship" front, recognition of the relationshi

between the individual body and the health of modem democracy traces bac

to de Tocqueville's 1840 tome Democracy in America. De Tocqueville observe

that Americans have a remarkable passion to satisfy "even the least wants o

the body" and that the unique characteristic of this young democracy is tha"everybody"-and every body-works because "work opens a way to everything

(chap. 18). For de Tocqueville, "It is not the ruin of a few individuals ... bu

the inactivity and sloth of the community at large that would be fatal to suc

a people" (chap. 18). In the context of the working body, sloth is not merely

frame of mind but the physical failure to carry out the responsibilities accorde

to a member of the democracy. It is the active body, the working body, the non

slothful body, that makes democracy strong.In the Canadian context, this connection between the healthy body an

the (figuratively) fit citizen was powerfully articulated during the Second Worl

War, when the requirement of physical health became nothing less than a patr

otic duty. In 1942, the federal government created Canada'sOfficialFoodRule

which listed a range of "health protective" foods that would improve the stam

ina of the nation's citizens: "Canada at war cannot afford to ignore the powe

that is obtainable by eating the right foods," affirmed the CanadianPublicHeal

Journal (Pett 1942, 565), essentially echoing de Tocqueville's sentiment abou



Journal of Canadian Studies - Revue d'dtudes canadiennes

headlines published in the Toronto Star in January 1942 bear this out: "Good

Health Said [a] Vital Victory Tool"; "Keeping Well [is] Now Everyone's Duty";

and "Adequate Nutrition Helps Bolster National Stamina" stand as representa-tive examples. Promotional materials distributed in support of the Official Food

Rules directly stated the social and civic responsibility of proper eating. As a pro-

motional spot published 4 January 1943 in The Globe andMail counselled:

Now we've got to think of more than just flour or tastiness ... because we

must have more strength and energy to do the jobs we have to do to win

this war.

... After all, to eat carefully is an important part of our war effort and we'll

be all the better for it, too ... healthier, happier and better fitted to help ourcountry. (The Globe andMail 1943, 10)

In this context, the media discourse surrounding national nutrition during

the war years clearly reflects Foucault's notion of "biopower," which focusses on

power, "control of the body," and how "the body is viewed as something to be

manipulated" (Welland 2001, 117). Foucault argues that the "inapt body" can

be formed and deliberately constructed:

The classical age discovered the body as object and target of power. It iseasy enough to find signs of the attention then paid to the body-to the

body that is manipulated, shaped, trained, which obeys, responds, becomes

skilful and increases its forces.... The body is docile that may be subjected,

used, transformed and improved. (quoted in Welland 2001, 118)

Improving the personal body, in the war context, was in the best interests of the

nation. Media discourse surrounding national nutrition during the war years

also underscored the proposition that Alan Hyde has observed in the context of

the legal treatment of the body: namely, that "individuals' right to control their

own bodies is not absolute and may be subject to public demands" (Hyde 1997,

242). Again, the public demand here is a national one, in which one's com-

mitment to national duty is physically inscribed on the individual body. The

body, in other words, visibly displays whether one has followed Canada'sOfficial

Food Rules, rules that make the individual-and in aggregate, Canada-strong.

Since rationing of foods such as fats, meat, and sugar was positioned as central

to Canada's war effort, heavier people might be assumed to be undermining



Charlene D. Elliott

of health have been dictated and sanctioned by governmental authority for

public purpose. These were not guides for food consumption; rather, they we

labelled "Official ... Rules"--connoting a much more formalized and politicalsanctioned directive for eating.

Victory in the Second World War did not terminate the rhetorical or concep

tual link between war and physical bodies. In fact, the physical war against Hitl

which demanded strong soldiers' bodies and productive bodies as a patriotic dut

has evolved into a conceptual war against the non-productive and slothful bod

which equally weakens our nation but for different reasons. Canada'sOfficialFoo

Rules, introduced in 1942, has softened its language over time, transforming int

Canada'sFoodGuide and reflecting a less militant approach to eating in a postwa

post-rationing context. The language of war is still evident, and particularly fre

zied in the United States, where skyrocketing obesity rates make Canadians appea

positively svelte in comparison.

US Surgeons General C. Everett Koop and David Satcher "respectively launche

Shape Up! America in 1994 and the 'war against obesity' in 2001" (Hemdon 200

128). The Shape Up! America initiative repeatedly called for the need to "comba

obesity, while David Satcher initiated his 2001 "war" by holding a press confe

ence with Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy G. Thompson in whic

they announced that "all Americans-as part of their patriotic duty-[should

lose 10 pounds" (128). Thompson's call for patriotic weight loss underscores a

interesting shift, in which the idea of a healthy body becomes reframed as on

pertaining to size. That is, the healthy body becomes equated with a lean-lookin

body.

Canada, it seems, proves no less conciliatory towards fat. On 23 Octob

2006, Quebec unveiled a "national" plan for dealing with obesity, entitled Inveing in the Future. This initiative commits $200 million over 10 years to preve

weight-related problems and promote healthy living habits, and articulates a

objective closely aligned with that of our Amercian counterparts: by 2012,

reduce obesity in Quebec by 2% and overweightness by 5%. This provincial mov

reflects developments that have occurred on the national stage. Just months aft

America's 2001 Inaugural War on Fat, Canada's then-health minister Anne McLe

lan announced our own patriotic "war": "We are a nation, or becoming a natio

of obese people," she said (Kennedy 2002, Al). This war against fat, however,



Journal of Canadian Studies * Revue d'dtudes canadiennes

fact a citizen's responsibility because the consequences of personal consumption

will impact all taxpayers. McLellan's "war on fat" was announced by the National

Post under the headline "Fat Canadians Imperil Health Care," quoting McLellanas stating that "the medicare system could become unaffordable unless citizens

take more responsibility fo r their health" (Kennedy 2002, Al).

This responsibilization theme dominates much of the popular and politi-

cal rhetoric surrounding adult obesity. Responsibilization, "the social process that

imposes specific responsibilities on some category of social agents" (Rous and

Hunt 2004, 826), is clearly framed within the political discussion surrounding

Canadian obesity. In July 2005, for instance, Ontario's Minister of Health Promo-

tionJim Watson argued that civil libertarians may not approveof his government'scampaign to direct health habits; however, it is in fact the government's business.

"As a taxpayer," Watson argued, "I don't want to fund this person's quadruple

bypass because they haven't taken care of themselves" (Dare 2005, B1). Canadians

are treated to a host of statistics that underscore the staggering public costs of the

individual obese citizen. Recent research has pegged the annual direct health-care

cost for obesity at $4.3 billion (Salinas 2006, Fl); Canadians are repeatedly urged

to take responsibility fo r their health because otherwise it will be impossible to

sustain our health-care system.5

Assessing the Citizen Body: The Logic of Larger and Lesser

The previous overview intends simply to introduce the link between the body

and the citizen, and more importantly to sketch the way in which the lean

body (framed as the healthy, active body) is regarded as somehow more worthy,

whereas the obese body is presumed to be unhealthy,6 and stands as that of

a "lesser" citizen. Indeed, researchers have documented a widespread bias and

discrimination against obese people; "weight stigma" is very strong in North

America, and discrimination based on weight has "been documented in key

areas of living, including education, employment, and health care" (Puhl and

Brownell 2003, 213). What are the theoretical and practical implications of

framing the larger body as a lesser citizen, and how has it come to pass? The fol-

lowing section will address this question in three parts. First, I would like to sug-

gest that part of the problem is rooted in the tension between Mikhail Bakhtin's

concepts of the "classical body" and "carnivalesque" body-with the classical



Charlene D. Elliott

a Canadian environment that is increasingly recognized to be obsogenic. Sin

obese citizens are not silent citizens, I will conclude with a brief look at some

the strategies employed (and problems encountered) by those who demand to bviewed as equal regardless of size.

ClassifiedBodies: The Classicaland the Carnivalesque

Feminist scholarship and cultural studies offer a rich literature on the heavily ge

dered framing of size and obesity. We know that "fat is a feminist issue" (Wan

1999; Schoenfielder and Wieser 1983), and scholars such as Eve Sedgwick hav

long argued for the possibility of "speaking" one's fatness or "coming out"

fat in order to renegotiate the representational contract between one's body an

one's world (1993). In turn, Samantha Murray (2005) has penned personal an

provocative articles on the challenges of "coming out" as a fat woman, questio

ing whether it is even possible to make the fat body visible in new, enabling, an

politically empowering ways. The narrative of the failed citizen, however, tra

scends gender. In this context, the obese body is, ironically, democratic-open

all, irrespective of gender, race, or class. While one might reasonably focus on th

connection between race and obesity, or the control over women's bodies, it

the idea of the body itself that proves of interest. The tension between the classic

and carnivalesque body, I suggest, is what allows the moral framing of the obes

"lesser" citizen.

Bakhtin outlines the presence of two bodily archetypes: the classical bod

and the carnivalesque body. The classical body "represents the dominance of th

body by the mind" (Carolan 2005, 89). It is a body ruled by reason, and reaso

indisputably, is one of the principle tenets of democratic participation. Cam

valesque bodies, in contrast, represent the triumph of passion over reason, withe body ruling the mind (89). Certainly, we can read bodies as classical or ca

nivalesque. As Michael Carolan has observed, the fit, toned body is a well-reg

lated and restrained body, and it represents the body of beauty, of productivi

and of superiority (92). Through the lens of public policy, the classical body

the autonomous body, the one in which the neo-liberal model of governanc

works best and where the concept of citizen responsibility is utterly validated. Th

responsible citizen is the citizen in good health, the metaphorically "fit" citize

who does not inflict (self-created) problems on health care. The carnivalesqu

to



Journal of Canadian Studies - Revue d'dtudes canadiennes

Participaction programs, and statistics on the precarious state of our health-care

system. It is significant to note that Bakhtin's carnivalesque body bears remark-

able likeness to Samantha Murray's definition of the fat body, which "exists as adeviant, perverse form of embodiment"--one that demands transformation "in

order to be accorded personhood" (2005, 155). The transformation demanded is

to that of a lean body.

What proves particularly problematic for Murray is the fact that, unlike other

bodies that have been constructed as deviant (such as the gay body), fat bodies

are always and irrevocably "outed." She observes, "w e read a fat body on the

street, and believe we 'know' its 'truth': just some of the characteristics we have

come to assume define fatness are laziness, gluttony, poor personal hygiene, anda lack of fortitude" (2005, 154). What might also be added to this list is a lack of

concern about the health (including the health care) of the nation.

The dichotomy between the classical and the carnivalesque body presents

a new context for framing the issue of obesity and public health. This distinc-

tion between the two bodily archetypes is supported, however, by other theo-

rizations explaining why obese individuals are stigmatized or viewed as lesser.

Puhl and Brownell, for instance, document that "obesity stigma results from a

social ideology that uses negative attributions to explain negative life outcomes"

(2003, 215). Attribution theory suggests that people search for the "cause" of

certain outcomes; in the case of obesity the "cause" is presumed to be found

in individual decision-making and due to a lack of self-discipline (215). Nega-

tive judgements on obese people, Puhl and Brownell relay, are rooted in "tradi-

tional conservative American values of self-determination and individualism ...

where people get what they deserve and are responsible fo r their life situation.

This notion closely resembles a Protestant work ethic that emphasizes internal

control and self discipline" (215). Attribution theory, which Puhl and Brownell

categorize as the most empirically driven theory of weight bias, is also evident in

Regina Lawrence's analysis of the framing of obesity in American news coverage

from 1994 to 2003. She found that the most conventional way of understanding

obesity is as a problem of individual behaviour (Lawrence 2004, 62), with "many

news articles, op-ed pieces, and especially letters to the editor articulating general

claims about the need fo r individuals to take responsibility fo r their own health-

relatedchoices"

(68). Lawrence theorizes this as an "individualizing frame," which

limits the responsibility to particular individuals afflicted with the problem. Even



Charlene D. Elliott

Whether viewed through the lens of the camivalesque, attribution theory, o

individualizing frames, the link between responsibilization and obesity remain

central. Hidden in this theory, however, is the idea of the citizen. While the individual adult may be responsible for creating his or her own size, where (beyond

the burden placed on health care) is the citizen in the question of obesity? In

part, the citizen resides within the role of the consumer.

ConspicuousBodies,ConsumerBodies

The dichotomy between the classical and the carnivalesque body unveils a sec

ond, provocative tension within contemporary society. As citizens of a capital

ist democracy, one's primary function is to consume. One might recall that, in

the wake of September 11, President George W. Bush exhorted all Americans t

show their patriotism via consumption. President Bush declared that the Ameri

can economy was "open fo r business" (2001b); he insisted that "individual con

sumer confidence remains high" and argued for the need to "act boldly at hom

to encourage economic growth" (2001a). Vice President Dick Cheney similarl

advised Americans not to let terrorists "throw off their normal level of economi

activity" (Reich 2001, B1). This call fo r patriotism through consumption is on

instance of how consumption is becoming "increasingly suffused with citizenship

characteristics and considerations" (Scammell 2000, 351). Citizen consumerism

acknowledges that the "site of citizens' political involvement is moving from th

production side of the economy to the consumption side" (351). Citizen consum

erism overtly plays out in marrying dollars to political projects: purchasing envi

ronmentally friendly products, socially responsible brands, pink ribbon goods, o

organic foods; yet it also exists in the everyday activity of ordinary people "whos

regular conduct of leisure and consumption has an ever-stronger political edge(352). As Bush and Cheney implied through their calls to consume patriotically

all consumption has political overtones.

Despite the fact that consuming is both a core value and a core function

of an individual, there is a near-visceral disgust at those who show their (over-

consumption on their fleshly bodies. As attribution theory suggests, conspicu

ous bodies that are visible simply due to size are subject to social condemnation

Fat bodies represent the "failed body project" and are rejected for their aestheti

transgressions (Murray 2005, 154). The only acceptable form of conspicuou

body is the classical, athletic, muscular body-the body that is disciplined an



Journal of Canadian Studies * Revue d'6tudes canadiennes

body. As Carolan argues, "the classical body is a body in possession of money-the

'right' foods to eat are not cheap, nor are gym memberships, tanning sessions,

personal trainers, or dietitians" (92); but the personally incurred cost bolsters theeconomy instead of straining tax dollars.

Or so it seems. Bacchi and Beasley have argued that the classification of

citizenship in relation to the physical body pivots entirely on the perception of

control. Those who are deemed to be in control of their bodies are considered

autonomous, constituted as "full citizens," and remain generally free from gov-

ernment surveillance. Political subjects surmised not to exercise this control,

"who are considered to be controlled by or subject to their bodies, do not mea-

sure up on the citizenship scale" (2002, 348), and are therefore subject to gov-ernment regulation projects: "Conceptions about bodies act as a dividing line

between full and lesser citizens, with citizenship itself understood in terms of'autonomy' from government" (348). The conspicuous body,whether conspicu-

ously sized or conspicuously sculpted, may have equal problems with control,

however. To underscore Bacchi and Beasley's point: "citizens" are perceived to

be in control of their own bodies. This creates an ambiguity of ownership. The

classical body represents a successful performance, although it might equally be

a control manifested through bulimia, surgery, diet pills, and smoking (and all of

these, too, place burdens on health care). The classical body, then, may also be a

charade.

This means that the indulgence that is read into the obese body, and that

works to justify its position as lesser citizen, might be unfairly allocated. "Virtu-

ous" health is grounded in a particular aesthetic of looking good (Jutel 2005,

12), or merely looking lean, but this aesthetic does not necessarily mean the

reality of rational control.7 Beyond this, the indulgence (which is so disparaged

when displayed on the body) is one that can be equally promoted as virtuous.

The Atkins diet, which took Canada by storm in 2004, operated solely on the

premise of virtuous indulgence. Rich sauces, gourmet cheese, steak, butter-all

of these promised to work in favour of a lean body, along with the assurance

that deprivation was unnecessary in the pursuit of a classical physique. Nota-

bly, Atkins promised that one could give in to cravings or relinquish control to

bodily demands for indulgence and still look lean; and so, while a key problem-

atic surrounding fat bodies is the presumption that they express a moral laxitythrough indulgence or lack of restraint autel 2005; Murray 2005), the fact that



Charlene D. Elliott

IndividualLives, NationalImplications:Lookingat the System

Canada's government under Prime Minister Stephen Harper was elected on the

platform of accountability. "Accountability" stands as the government's keystoneand the articulation of accountability to the Canadian public is concomitant with

the expectation that the Canadian public is accountable to the government

Accountability places emphasis on individual actions and choices, and suggest

(along with attribution theory and individualizing frames) that combating obe

sity is a personal responsibility.

Environmental factors are increasingly recognized as influencing persona

choice, however. An emerging body of research in Canada scrutinizes how th

built environment, from the number of parks to proximity to fast-food outlets

contributes to being overweight or obese. This look at the obsogenic environmen

suggests that the individual Canadian thrives in a larger Canada, and that the per

sonal might be properly framed more broadly. It might be viewed through wha

Lawrence identifies (in her analysis of American news coverage) as a "systemi

frame," one that views obesity as the consequence of larger social forces and there

fore invites governmental action (2004, 57). The systemic frame suggests that th

body politic might "bear someresponsibility fo r the shape" of individual bodie

(57). Indeed, that philosophy underpins the requirement for nutrition labelling

the reassessment of urban design, tax deductions fo r sports lessons, and, amon

other initiatives, the tabling of Bill C-283 (whichwould require nutrition labellin

on menus at large chain restaurants) in Parliament on 8 November 2006.

Treating obesity at a policy level, then, can span the spectrum of "responsi

bility," ranging from McLellan's "war on fat" (in which individuals must assum

complete responsibility) to the government-funded obesity programs focussin

on the obsogenic environment (in which individual responsibility is lessened)While individual responsibility may be lessened by focussing on the environ

ment, however, the adult consumer citizen is rarely absolved. In popular new

discourse, the pattern is to use an individualizing frame to respond to a sys

temic frame (Lawrence 2004). That is, while one might accept that an unhealth

environment contributes to obesity, the call for personal accountability is sti

paramount. A classic example of this resides in Dr. Diane Finegood's 8 May 200

discussion of the solution to Canada's obesity crisis. Finegood, scientific directo

of the nutrition, diabetes, and metabolism unit of the Canadian Institutes o



Journal of Canadian Studies - Revue d'1tudes canadiennes

succeeded in denormalizing tobacco smoking as cool and desirable. Now we have

to denormalize obesity" (quoted in Lem 2006, 15). As such, the obsogenic envi-

ronment is still only host to a series of micro, and personal, choices. Beyond this,Finegood's call fo r denormalization of obesity is rather jarring. In light of attribu-

tion theory and camivalesque bodies, one might reasonably argue that obesity

is already denormalized. Calling for its denormalization places another layer of

stigma on an already overburdened form.

Even when considering the system, then individual accountability and

responsibilization factor strongly; yet a second strategy, found in Quebec's

recently released action plan to combat weight-related problems, also operates

to foreground the citizen's location in relation to obesity. The 49-page actionplan released 23 October 2006 argues that overweight people give off "negative

externalities." One of the government's articulated priorities is to employ social

campaigns to "promote favorable social standards" that help to develop healthy

practices. Significant about framing the initiative around the idea of externalities

is that it appeals to an individual's self-interest. The negative externalities of obe-

sity are the burdens it places on the health-care system. So if another Canadian

loses weight (which is presumed to be an indicator of improved health), then

even "classical" bodies benefit because health-care costs drop and (technically)

classical and carnivalesque bodies alike may enjoy lower taxes. The key lies in

the individual recognizing the benefit of fostering the public interest. Investing

in the health of others, as Quebec's action plan suggests, ultimately will benefit

the individual financially. Note, however, that the obese body is still framed

here as if symbolically polluting (or literally taxing) the social system.

ReclaimingSpace

Given democracy's long history of equating fit citizens with good health and/or

visibly lean bodies, and the various ways that the carnivalesque, over-conspicuous,

and consuming bodies are routinely marginalized, one question remains: what is

the large body to do? One wonders whether "coming out as fat," as Sedgwick

suggests, can really allow individuals to reclaim their rightful position as equal

citizens. Advocacy groups, such as the American Obesity Association, seem to

undermine the very prospect of equality by arguing that obese bodies are, in fact,

failing: "Wewant

obesityunderstood by the health-care community and patients

as a serious disease of epidemic proportions," they claim. Other organizations,



Charlene D. Elliott

not officially classify obesity as a disease. However, our incessant reference to th

obesity "epidemic," raises strong images of contagion-and contagious bodie

are always bodies to be avoided.

Notes

1. Similar headlines include the OttawaCitizen's "Harper Lampooned for Bulging Belly

(Weeks 2006a) and "Harper Gets Flak over Bulging 'Spare' Tire," (Weeks 2006c), a

well as the MontrealGazette's "Harper's Bulging Belly Steals Spotlight: Prime Minister

Fondness for Soft Drinks Sets Bad Example for Canadians" (Weeks 2006b).

2. Indeed, a recent Ipsos Reid poll indicated that 34% of Canadians currently rate healthcare as the most prominent issue, well in front of terrorism and national securit

(21%), education (13%), and the environment (10%) (Pynn 2006, A17).

3. It is important to note that the criteria for classifying overweight/obese are contestedThe categorization is based on Body Mass Index (BMI), such that persons with a BM

over 25 are tagged as "overweight" and those with a BMI over 30 are labelled "obese.

Several researchers, however, claim that this classification is inappropriate (i.e., weighdoes not necessarily predict health); and as such, it should not be at the centre o

public health debates (Gaesser 1996; Campos 2004; Campos et al. 2006; Oliver 2005)Astudy conducted by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, in fact, showed

that people in the "overweight" category actually had the lowest rate of mortalityStatistically significant increases in mortality due to weight were not seen until th

BMI reached 35 (Flegal et al. 2005).4. See, for instance, Chang and Christakis (2002), Brown and Zavestoski (2004), Lup

ton (1995), Crawford (1980), Turner (1992), Richardson and Shaw (1998), Woodward

(1996), and Prout (2000).

5. This is precisely the message advanced by Ontario's Ministry of Health Promotionestablished in 2005 by the McGuinty government.

6. Campos's The ObesityMyth (2004) provides an exhaustive critique how the publi

health scare of obesity is wrong-headed. Size does not indicate good health, argueCampos, and there is little scientific evidence to support the argument that exces

weight causes excess risk for health issues (with the exception of a minority of people

that are at the extremes of body weight on both ends of the spectrum; namely, thextremely thin and the extremely fat.

7. Indeed, there islittle rational about bulimia, the abuse of laxatives, diet pills, and sforth.



Journal ofCanadian Studies - Revue d'6tudes canadiennes

References

Bacchi, C., and C. Beasley. 2002. "Citizen Bodies: Is EmbodiedCitizenship a Contradiction

in Terms?" CriticalSocialPolicy 22 (2): 324-52.

Bailey, S. 2006. "PM Takes Flak about His Weight in Stride, Declines Photo Op with Film

Star." Western Star,Corner Brook, NF,20 March, 9.

Bakhtin, M. 1984. Rabelaisandhis World. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Brown, P. , and S. Zavestoski. 2004. "Social Movements in Health: An Introduction." Sociol-

ogy ofHealthand Illness 26 (6): 679-94.

Bush, George. 2001a. "President Unveils Back to Work Plan." Office of the Press Secretary,

4 October, http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2OO1/1O/2OO11OO4-8.htmfl.

-. 2001b. "Statement by the President in his Address to the Nation." Office of the Press

Secretary, 11 September,

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/o9/20010911-16.htiLn.

Campos, P. 2004. The ObesityMyth.New York: Gotham Books.

Campos, P. , A. Saguy, P. Ernsberger, E. Oliver, and G. Gaesser. 2006. "The Epidemiology of

Overweight and Obesity: Public Health Crisis or Moral Panic?" International ournalof

Epidemiology35 (1): 55-60.

Carolan, M. 2005. "The Conspicuous Body: Capitalism, Consumerism, Class, and Con-

sumption." Worldviews 9 (1): 82-111.Clendening, L. 1992. "Keeping Well Now 'Everybody's Duty.'" Toronto Star, 3 February,

30.

Crawford, R.1980. "Healthism and theMedicalization of Everyday Life." International our-

nal ofHealthServices 10: 365-88.

Chang, W., and N. Christakis. 2002. "Medical Modeling of Obesity: A Transition from

Action to Experience in a Twentieth-Century American Medical Textbook." Sociology

ofHealth& Illness 24 (2): 151-77.

Dare, P. 2005. "Don't IkeJim Watson's Tough Talk on Health? Too Bad: Health Promotion

Chief Says He's Only Trying to Save Lives, Money." Ottawa Citizen, 27 July,B1.

de Tocqueville, A. 1998. Democracy in America.New York: Vintage Books, 1945. Orig. pub-

lished 1840. AmericanReformationProject,

h tp://www.americanreformation.org/Tocqueville/ch3_18.thtm.

Flegal, K.M., B.I. Graubard, D.F Williamson, and M.H. Gall. 2005. "Excess Deaths Associated

with Underweight, Overweight, and Obesity." Journalof the American MedicalAssocia-

tion 293: 1861-67.

Gaesser, A. 1996. BigFatLies:The TruthaboutYour Weight andYourHealth.New York: Fawcett

Columbine.The Globe andMail. 1943. "There's a New Note to the Noon Whistle." 4 January, 10.



Charlene D. Elliott

Jutel, A. 2005. "Weighing Health: The Moral Burden of Obesity." Social Semiotics 15 (2

113-25.

Kain, Ij. 1942. "Adequate Nutrition Helps Bolster National Stamina." Toronto Star, 1

January, 26.

Kennedy, M. 2002. "Fat Canadians Imperil Health Care: McLellan." National Post,22 Fe

ruary,Al.

Lawrence, R. 2004. "Framing Obesity: The Evolution of News Discourse on a Public Heal

Problem." Press/Politics9 (3): 56-75.

Lem, S. 2006. "Make Obesity Uncool: Expert." Toronto Sun, 8 May, 15.

Lupton, D. 1995. The Imperative of Health: Public Health and the Regulated Body. Londo

Sage.

Murray, S. 2005. "(Un/Be)Coming Out? Rethinking Fat Politics." Social Semiotics 15 (2): 15

63.

Oliver, J.E. 2005. Fat Politics: The Real Story behind America's Obesity Epidemic. Oxfor

Oxford University Press.

Pett, L.B. 1942. "Food Makes a Difference." CanadianPublicHealthJournal33 (12): 565-70.

Prout, A., ed . 2000. The Body, Childhoodand Society. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Puhl, R., and K. Brownell. 2003. "Psychosocial Origins of Obesity Stigma: Toward Chang

ing a Powerful and Pervasive Bias." Obesity Reviews 4: 213-27.

Pynn, L. 2006. "Global Warming a 'Top Worry'." Vancouver Sun, 14 October, A17.Reich, R. 2001. "How Did Spending Become Our Patriotic Duty?" Washington Post, 2

September, B01.

Richardson, J., and A. Shaw, eds. 1998. The Body in Q ualitativeResearch. Aldershot: Ashgate

Rous, R., and A. Hunt. 2004. "Governing Peanuts: The Regulation of the Social Bodies

Children and the Risks of Food Allergies." Social Science &Medicine 58: 825-36.

Salinas, E. 2006. "New Frontiers in the Fight against Fat." The Globe andMail, 28 Octobe

F10.

Scammell, M. 2000. "The Internet and Civic Engagement: The Age of the Citizen-Con

sumer." PoliticalCommunication17: 351-55.

Schoenfielder, L., and B. Wieser. 1983. Shadow on a Tightrope: Writings by Women on F

Oppression.Iowa City: Aunt Lute Book Company.

Schwartz, H. 1986. Never Satisfied: A CulturalHistory ofDiets, FantasiesandFat.New Yor

Free Press.

Sedgwick, E. 1993. Tendencies. Durham: Duke University Press.

Smyth, J. 2006. "PMO Gives Wide Berth to Diet Talk: Harper's Office Says Leader Health

Despite Generous Waistline." NationalPost, 18 March, A6.

Taber, J. 2006. "Being Prime Minister, It Seems, Really Is Heavy Duty." The Globe andMa



Journal of Canadian Studies * Revue d'6tudes canadiennes

Weeks, C. 2006a. "Harper Lampooned for Bulging Belly." Ottawa.Citizen,15 March, 1.

-. 2006b. "Harper's Bulging Belly Steals Spotlight: Prime Minister's Fondness for Soft

DrinksSets Bad Example for Canadians." Montreal Gazette, 15 March, A4.

-. 2006c. "Harper Gets Flak over Bulging 'Spare Tire."' Ottawa Citizen, 15 March, AS.

. 2006d. "PM Fights Battle of the Bulge in War Zone: Kandahar Picture Shows Tubby

PM with Can of Pop." Vancouver Sun, 15 March, A4.

Welland, T. 2001. "Living in the 'Empire of the Gaze': Time, Enclosure, and Surveillance in

a Theological College." SociologicalReview 49 (1): 117-35.

Woodward, K. 1996. Identity and Difference. London: Sage.



COPYRIGHT INFORMATION

TITLE: Big Persons, Small Voices: On Governance, Obesity, and

the Narrative of the Failed Citizen

SOURCE: J Can Stud 41 no3 Aut 2007

The magazine publisher is the copyright holder of this article and it

is reproduced with permission. Further reproduction of this article in

violation of the copyright is prohibited. To contact the publisher:

http://www.trentu.ca/

big persons, small voices: on governance, obesity, and the narrative of the failed citizen

Documents