Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This scoping review critically examines how fatness and fat people are represented – and often misrepresented – within archival collections. Although scholars are engaged with writing histories of fatness, the archival sources which inform these histories are given minimal attention. In response, this review article seeks to critically explore representations of fat within the context of archive and memory studies, considering both how such materials are used within research and community spheres and how they are managed, interpreted and described by information professionals. Drawing on academic sources published over the past 25 years, it situates its analysis at the intersection of Fat Studies and Critical Archival Studies, two fields united by a shared commitment to challenging structural inequalities and pursuing liberatory approaches. The review highlights how archival processes, policies, and archival professionals can pathologise or obscure fat bodies, rendering records difficult to find or absent within archives. I also identify potential interventions, including inclusive vocabularies and descriptive standards and the co-creation of fat archives with communities. Finally, I identify a series for future directions for research in this field.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kirsty Fife (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: