Notsomuchempowerment

Watson’sroleisnothingbutanempowermentofa“regular”woman:she’snotattractive,notsmart,always“takingtimeinthinkingaboutit”overthetrivialmattersjusttoshowhowseriousherdecisionsareandtomakeothersrespectthemtoo.However,she’snotanregularwomanatall,everyonerespectsherandbelievesinher,especiallyHolmes,shecamefromawealthyfamilyandwasfortunateenoughtowentthroughmedicalschoolandbecameasurgeon.Sheistooluckyforanactualordinarywoman,whileunderqualifiedasapartnertoHolmes.HerexistenceisjustaninsultforanantagonistlikeM.WatsonwaschosebyHolmesbecauseofhissubsidiaryintheoriginalbook;inotherwords,Watsonwasthe“woman”intherelationship.Makingawomantoplayasymbolicwomanrole,throwingawaysomesubsidiaryandaddingsomerepeatedlystressedindependence,hasabsolutelynothingtodowiththeempowermentofwomen.Ifthecastingofawomanasaleadingroleshouldbesomehowempowering,thenthiswomanshouldbeHolmes.