Which brings us to Moffat. Notably, Moffat starts with what looks like a faithful imitation of the Davies approach. But five episodes in he shifts the game, with the Doctor actively refusing Amy’s interest in him (after a story in which the Doctor confronts his seeming wife) and Amy thereafter focusing her attention on her life with Rory. Which is how she remains for the next two seasons – a woman with her own life that travels with the Doctor sometimes. As does River. As does Clara. This is unheard of in Doctor Who – the idea that the companion might have a life outside the Doctor. For all that Moffat gets stick for defining female characters in terms of the Doctor, we shouldn’t forget that he’s the one who finally came up with a credible response to the problems posed by Sarah Jane’s anguished “you were my life” in School Reunion. The Doctor isn’t the life of any of his companions under Moffat.
So, I finally found Philip Sandifer and the Tardis Eruditorium, far later than I should have considering my love of all things Doctor Who and smart writing. It’s been bookmarked for further exploration, but I’m particularly taken with this defense of Steven Moffat from accusations of sexism and being anti-feminist.
I’m reminded of Sherlock, and the fact that in both series, the portrayal of women is problematic in that it’s very… objectified, but in a way in which the women of both shows are frequently smarter/more able to see through the pretense of the male leads than their male counterparts (This is especially true in Sherlock).
Food for thought.