LIKE A PANTHER

Is Sherlock sexist? Steven Moffat's wanton women

applecup:

In this context, what Moffat would do with Adler was always going to be interesting. From a certain perspective, Conan Doyle’s character is something of a “proto-feminist”, a woman of great intellect and formidable agency, who, above all, proves to be a match for Holmes. It’s not unproblematic that both author and protagonist respect Adler only because she has a “soul of steel” and “the mind of the most resolute of men”. She’s not a waste of space, it is suggested, because she escapes the weakness of her sex and can act, symbolically, as a man. But, importantly, she makes her own way in the world.

However, even this ambiguous portrait of female power proved too much for Moffat to stomach. Granted, he allowed her to keep her smarts. But, at the same time, her acumen and agency were undermined every which way. Not-so-subtly channelling the spirit of the predatory femme fatal, Adler’s power became, in Moffat’s hands, less a matter of brains, and more a matter of knowing “what men like” and how to give it to them; of having them by the sexual short and curlies, or, perhaps more aptly, on a nice short leash.

Gruniad article which basically sums up my feelings on Adler, and how she was handled by Moffat (ie, really fucking badly)

A++ spoilers at source. Also it’s CIF, so, uh, avoid the comments.

(Source: fuckyeahappo)

 




Page 1 of 1
Theme by maggie. Runs on Tumblr.