Descriptions are offensive. I think that’s disingenuous nonsense. Of course it’s OK to describe people and there are pretty well-known limits around descriptions that are considered racist or ablist etc, which have been accepted for ages.
I think one issue, on top of her apparent insensitivity to these widely known taboos, is that Clanchy is a poet and forgot that writing about real people who might recognise themselves is not the same as poetry and it’s not just about the author’s unfiltered thoughts being expressed as lyrically as possible, there’s a responsibility to people you’ve used as material for your book.
I do understand that some authors might be more cautious, and as PPs have said, this isn’t the only thing that applies to. But it’s not true to say physical description isn’t ok at all. Tell that to David Walliams.
There is a particular issue here in it being a non-fiction book, the power imbalance between the writer and the subjects, and a tone reminiscent of rich white attitudes to black, Jewish and poor people 200 years ago.
There are two issues here getting tangled up IMO. One over whether KC’s book and subsequent behaviour were out of order and it was reasonable to criticise them - I think they were but that’s something we can all debate and have different opinions on.
And another over “cancel culture” itself and how badly people behave and how extreme they are in their abuse to people on both sides of an argument. In this case, there was appalling bullying and nastiness on both sides - and I was shocked by some people I’d previously thought I liked. Also completely befuddled at some people who claimed not to be able to see the issue.
And yes the publisher is guilty of a massive fail. That’s one reason I’m sorry for her. They should have been on this at first manuscript stage.