#and the body snatching minisode | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

bowtiepastabitch · 5 months

Text

Historical Analysis: class and injustice in 'The Ressurrectionists' minisode

Alternate title: why we're tempted to be upset with Aziraphale and why that's only halfway fair

Okay so first off huge thanks to @makewayforbigcrossducks for asking the question (and follow-up questions lol) that brought me to put these thoughts all together into a little history nerd ramble. That question being, Why is Aziraphale so clueless? Obviously, from a plot perspective, we know we need to learn some lessons about human moral dilemmas and injustices. But from a character perspective? A lot of this minisode is about Aziraphale being forced to confront the flaws of heavenly logic. This whole idea that "poverty is ineffable" basically boils down to 'yeah some people are poor, but their souls can be saved just as if not more easily that way, so it's not our problem and they probably deserve it anyway for not working hard enough,' a perspective that persists in many modern religious circles. Aziraphale isn't looking at the human factor here, he's pretty much purely concerned about the dichotomy of good and wicked human behavior and the spiritual consequences thereof, because that's what he's been told to believe. His whole goal is to "show her the error of her ways." He believes, quite wholeheartedly, that he's helping her in the long run.

"the lower you start, the more opportunities you have"

So here's what we're asking ourselves: Why did it take him so bloody long to realize how stupid that is? Sure, he's willing to excuse all kinds of things in the name of ineffability, but if someone in the year of our lord 2023 told me he was just now realizing that homelessness was bad after experiencing the past two centuries, I'd be resisting the urge to get violent even if he WAS played by Michael Sheen.

Historical context: a new type of poverty

Prior to the 19th century (1800s), poverty was a very different animal from what we deal with now. The lowest classes went through a dynamic change leading up to the industrial revolution, with proto-industrialization already moving people into more manufacture-focused tasks and rapid urbanization as a result of increasingly unlivable conditions for rural peasantry. The enclosure of common lands and tennancies by wealthy landowners for the more profitable sheep raising displaced lots of families, and in combination with poor harvests and rising rents, many people were driven to cities to seek out new ways of eeking out a living.

Before this, your ability to eat largely would have depended on the harvest in your local area. This can, for our purposes, be read as: you're really only a miracle away from being able to survive the winter. Juxtapose this, then, with the relatively new conundrum of an unhoused urban poor population. Now if you want to eat, you need money itself, no exceptions, unless you want to steal food. Charity at the time was often just as much harm as good, nearly always tied deeply up in religious attitudes and a stronger desire to proselytize than improve quality of lie. As a young woman, finding work in a city is going to be incredibly difficult, especially if you're not clean and proper enough to present as a housemaid or other service laborer. As such, Elspeth turns to body snatching to try to make a better life for herself and Wee Morag. She's out of options and she knows it.

You know who doesn't know that? Aziraphale.

The rise of capitalism

The biggest piece of the puzzle which Aziraphale is missing here is that he hasn't quite caught onto the concept of capitalism yet. To him, human professions are just silly little tasks, and she should be able to support herself if she just tried. Bookselling, weaving, farming, these are all just things humans do, in his mind. He suggests these things as options because it hasn't occurred to him yet that Elspeth is doing this out of desperation, but he also just doesn't grasp the concept of capital. Crowley does, he thinks it's hilarious, but Aziraphale is just confused as to why these occupations aren't genuine options. Farming in particular, as briefly touched on above, was formerly carried out largely on common land, tennancies, or on family plots, and land-as-capital is an emerging concept in this period of time (previously, landowners acted more like local lords than modern landlords). Aziraphale just isn't picking up on the fact that money itself is the root issue.

Even when he realizes that he fucked up by soup-ifying the corpse, he doesn't offer to give them money but rather to help dig up another body. He still isn't processing the systemic issues at play (poverty) merely what's been immediately presented to him (corpses), and this is, from my perspective, half a result of his tunnel-vision on morality and half of his inability to process this new mode of human suffering.

Half a conclusion and other thoughts

So we bring ourselves back around to the question of Aziraphale's cluelessness. Aziraphale is, as an individual, consistently behind on the times. He likes doing things a certain way and rarely changes his methodology unless someone forces his hand. Even with the best intentions, his ability to help in this minisode is hindered by two points: 1)his continued adherance to heavenly dogma 2)his inability to process the changing nature of human society. His strongest desire at any point is to ensure that good is carried out, an objective good as defined by heavenly values, and while I think it's one of his biggest character hangups, I also can't totally blame him for clinging to the only identity given to him or for worrying about something that is, as an ethereal being, a very real concern. Unfortunately, he also lacks an understanding of the actual human needs that present themselves. Where Elspeth knows that what she needs is money, Aziraphale doesn't seem to process that money is the only solution to the immediate problem. This is in part probably because a century prior the needs of the poor were much simpler, and thus miraculous assistance would never have interfered with 'the virtues of poverty'. (You can make someone's crops grow, and they'll eat well, but giving someone money actually changes their economic status.) Thus, his actions in this episode illustrate the intersection of heavenly guidelines with a weak understanding of modern structures.

This especially makes sense with his response to being told to give her money. Our angel is many things, but I would never peg him as having any attachment to his money. He's not hesitant because he doesn't want to part with it, he's hesitant because he's still scared it's the wrong thing to do in this scenario. He really is trying to be good and helpful. So yes, we're justifiably pretty miffed to see him so blatantly unaware and damaging. He definitely holds a lot of responsibility for the genuine tragedy of this minisode, and I think Crowley pointing out that it's 'different when you knew them' is an extremely important moment for Aziraphale's relationship with humanity. Up until now, he's done a pretty good job insulating himself from the capacity of humans for nastiness, his seeming naivity at the Bastille being case in point.

In the end, I think Aziraphale's role in this minisode is incredibly complex, especially within its historical context. He's obstinate and clueless but also deeply concerned with spiritual wellbeing (which is, to Aziraphale, simply wellbeing) and doing the right thing to be helpful. While it's easy to allow tiny Crowley (my beloved) to eclipse the tragic nature and moral complexity of this minisode, I think in the end it's just as important to long-term character development as 'A Companion to Owls'. We saw him make the right choice with Job's children, and now we see him make the wrong choice. And that's a thing people do sometimes, a thing humans do.

~~~

also tagging @ineffabildaddy, @kimberellaroo, and @raining-stars-somewhere-else whose comments on the original post were invaluable in helping me organize my thoughts and feelings about this topic. They also provided great insight that, in my opinion, is worth going and reading for yourself, even if it didn't factor into my final analysis/judgement.

If I missed anything or you have additional thoughts, please please share!!! <3

#this was a monster of a post to write #in no small part because I was relying more on my own historical knowledge than usual so I had to double check myself constantly #but I had a lot of fun and I hope you enjoyed it as much as I did #good omens #good omens 2 #neil gaiman #good omens analysis #good omens meta #the resurrectionists #good omens season 2 #good omens minisode #nerd shit #ineffable husbands #aziraphale good omens

560 notes · View notes

fuckyeahgoodomens · 9 months

Text

#good omens #gos2 #season 2 #polls #hehe mine is jobs :)

542 notes · View notes

ineffably-poetic · 9 months

Text

i finished good omens 2, here’s my list of things that made me go insane

spoilers below the cut, of course

First of all. In the scene where Crowley is making stars, he shelters Az under his wing, mirroring them in Eden. Thats’s amazing.

Good Old Fashioned Lover Boy plays. my life is complete (except not really because The Ending.)

going back to the angel!crowley scene: Az thought he called him gorgeous, when crowley was talking about the stars lol

Nina truly believed that Crowley was gay. As in there was no way he was straight. “Have you got a husband? A boyfriend? Is bookselling just your bit on the side?” AHGH

Beelzebub and Gabriel <333333

Shax saying she heard a rumor crowley and aziraphale were “an item”

THE MAGICIAN MINISODE. AND THE JOB ONE HA

Crowley and Az danced together. THEY DANCED TOGETHER. AND HELD HANDS FOR A MOMENT.

Gabriel read the first line of the Good Omens book. “It was a nice day.”

“You’re a good lad” “I’m not actually, either.” finally the fact that they have no gender is addressed in the show :00

”that’s the point. no nightingales.” sorry, neil, who GAVE YOU PERMISSION TO BREAK MY HEART.

“we could have been an us.”

”if gabriel an beelzebub can go off together we can too.”

crowley mentioning alpha centauri and Az giving him a Look

The kiss.

Maggie and Nina telling Crowley to confess

the poison/body snatching scene :)))

”I forgive you.” “Don’t bother.”

yellow bentley

the signs in hell: “Heaven looks down on you because you are pathetic” “we hate you” and, the classic, “please do not lick the walls”

“you told him to shut his stupid mouth and die already, and i. did not. care for it.”

and very other time crowley got protective over Az.

i cant think of anything else right now. but it was amazing. can’t wait for season 3 to be confirmed (someday soon, hopefully. if the studios could, you know, stop being so terrible and just talk to the writers.)

talk to me in the comments if you like, it’s 1am and i’m not gonna be able to sleep any time soon :,)

#good omens #ineffable husbands #crowley #aziraphale #good omens season 2 #good omens 2 #good omens s2 #gos2 #gos2spoilers #good omens 2 spoilers #spoilers #SO MANY SPOILERS #ineffable bureaucracy

392 notes · View notes

takeme-totheworld · 4 months

Text

Aziraphale is incredibly frustrating to watch in the Edinburgh minisode (and, if you're an exvangelical like me, incredibly vicariously embarrassing), but it must be pointed out that he changes his opinions very quickly when presented with new information, which is...not something one normally associates with heavily indoctrinated religious types.

I feel like this tells us one of two things:

The rhetoric he was parroting at the beginning of the episode about the virtues of poverty and body snatching being evil and so forth was not actually propaganda from Heaven, it was just some pious-sounding human rhetoric he'd been taken in by, or

By this point in history he's gotten a lot more comfortable questioning the party line from Heaven on things. He believes what they tell him, but when Crowley points him to evidence that it's wrong, he is capable of thinking, "Okay, Heaven got this one wrong" without too much internal struggle over it.

I don't know which one it is, but it's interesting either way.

#good omens #good omens 2 #good omens meta #aziraphale

118 notes · View notes

drconstellation · 7 days

Text

Stocktaking in the Basement

Aziraphale's Edinburgh Journey: Part 3

Usually one would think of going through their memories as a learning experience as more of a "rummaging around in the attic" metaphor, since the brain, the keeper of memories, is in the highest part of our bodies. But one of S2's underlying themes is the looming Second Coming and the resurrection of the dead, so its underground that we need to head - to the basement.

Aziraphale does a great deal of "stocktaking in the basement" during his trip to Edinburgh. He recalls the encounter with the body-snatcher Elspeth and her companion wee Morag in 1827 on the way up, has his memory jolted by the statue of Gabriel to something more recent, then thinks about what happened in 1941 on the way back. We are largely going to deal with aspects of the 1827 minisode in this meta, and some possible implications for S3.

Lets have a look at why this year, 1827, was chosen for this minisode. The Anatomy Act of 1832 gave doctors and medical students legal permission to use donated bodies for research and educational purposes, and was made so to stop the distressing trade of body snatching that was occurring at the time. But this minisode isn't necessarily about stopping that activity, rather the reasons for doing it in the first place. Looking at Strong's Concordance, as we must, in the Greek, 1827 gives us "convince" or "prove to be in the wrong." This sounds about right for this minisode, which includes the conversation about poverty inducing more opportunities to be wicked, which somehow leads to holiness, from the book. The minisode shows how Aziraphale has this idea turned around for him - he's convinced otherwise, and shown how his initial beliefs about the practice turn out to be wrong.

Also, around 1827 is the time when the building of private mausoleums was at its peak. A mausoleum was (and still is) a display of wealth, so featuring one here plays into the story in the minisode of the virtues of poverty versus the rich. (It's also a call back to the origin of the Bentley's number plate, which was written on a mausoleum in a Monty Python sketch.)

Digging Up the Past

Shax does her own stocktaking when she receives the above push-back from Crowley, and realizes that Aziraphale is not in the bookshop at all at that moment, and goes looking for him. Later, she digs up his own dirty past to taunt him with, in an effort to make him crack and give up Gabriel.

But why is Aziraphale digging up this particular memory at this time? We know he is fond of Edinburgh and has visited many times, so this particular memory must contain something of importance for us to see.

There is the title of the minisode, some Masonic symbology and the metaphorical act of the snatched bodies as the dead rising from their graves which all point us in the direction of the Second Coming and Judgement Day, which we will cover in Part 4, so we'll put that to the side for the moment.

Changing Sides

Let's have a look at some of the blocking of the scenes in the Resurrectionists minisode. This wont cover everything, so if you do go back to have another look at it yourself, do pay close attention to who stands where.

When we first meet Crowley and Aziraphale in 1827, they are standing on what we think of as their "normal" sides, angel on the right and demon on the left. Elspeth, caught in the act of body snatching, is even further to the left, the real demon on the scene, which actually pushes Crowley back to the middle ground.

Straight afterwards, we see all three of them walking together through the streets of Edinburgh. Crowley is still in the middle, but now Elspeth is in the angel's position and Aziraphale on the far left as a demon, as they all discuss the virtues of poverty. Oh dear, Aziraphale, you're losing the argument here, and losing badly!

Inside Mr Dalrymple's rooms, Aziraphale decides to take matters into his own hands, where he thinks he is doing the right thing, and miracles the first body into soup. Elspeth is caught innocently in the middle of this, and Dalrymple is on the demonic left.

A conversation is had with Dalrymple following this. Crowley is hidden in the right-hand chair, Aziraphale, who needs to be swayed, is in the middle, and Dalrymple is still on the demonic left.

After heading back to the cemetery for another body, Crowley and Aziraphale inspect some of the protective measures set up to guard the graves. Crowley is still on the moral right, questioning if the rich are more worthy of being protected from body snatchers than the poor.

Despite changing his mind about body snatching, Aziraphale still ends up on the wrong side of the argument in the end. As a giant Crowley looks down on the two of them, its Aziraphale standing on the demonic left side as the virtues of poverty lose out once more.

Timely Lessons

Back to the fireside chat with Dalrymple. We have this heartfelt reaction from Aziraphale when he learns the preserved specimen he is holding came from a seven-year-old boy.

AZIRAPHALE: [takes the jar] Well, that's a foot. So it's definitely not a foot. [laughs] DALRYMPLE: That's my point. If you two smart gentlemen can't identify it, then what are my students to make of it? I removed this tumor from a seven-year-old boy. AZIRAPHALE: Oh. Oh dear. And… Is he…? DALRYMPLE: [shakes head] And that is why we need a steady supply of cadavers. We need to cut. If we can't cut, we can't learn. If we can't learn more, a lot more, then how on earth are we going to win the battle against monstrosities like this one? I'm just trying to save lives and teach students. I either end up with a knighthood or condemned as a resurrectionist and hanging from a rope.

This, I feel, is an important lesson for them, and it seems for Aziraphale in particular. Why? This part focuses more on his reaction to the tumor, rather than Crowley's, and when we focus on Aziraphale it has ramifications for the future.*

A physical problem is usually easily identified (such as the foot). But what if the problem is invisible, because its on the inside? How do you see into a body, find a problem and make it visible, if you have not been presented with this problem before? Or perhaps you know something is wrong, but don't know what to call it?

It doesn't even have to be physical, it can be a mental, or a psychological problem. One still has to learn how to "see" the problem, to identify what it is (such as a particular pattern of behaviour) and to know the best course of action to overcome it.

Crowley wishing for more murderers to facilitate Dalrymple's research is one thing, but not being able to save a 7 year-old boy...this is the theme of the death of innocent children we've seen repeated throughout the series (the Flood, Job's children, the aborted attempt on Adam, the Crucifixion, and the implications around Crowley's Fall, to name a few.)

This also plays into the "representation matters" theme from the end - you can't be what you can't see.

This is not a lesson about the fact that they care, because they do, but how they learn to see the real problem in the first place.** I'll be interested to see the matching scenes/parallels to this in S3.

The Two Dalrymples

It has not gone unremarked that there is a Dalrymple mentioned in S1 as well - Witchfinder Colonel Dalrymple, who made the fancy Thundergun that was taken to Tadfield to shoot the antichrist with.

Now we can talk about the connection between the two Dalrymples - they are both about removing "monstrosities" from humanity.

Take the line in the passage above: "If we can't learn more, a lot more, then how on earth are we going to win the battle against monstrosities like this one?"

As I've mentioned before, the root of the word monster is from the Latin for monstrum, "a divine omen (of misfortune)," but also monstrare, which means "to point out," which bring us back to this scene in S1, on the tarmac of the Tadfield Airbase:

Aziraphale took Witchfinder Colonel Dalrymple's Thundergun to remove the monstrosity that was Adam the antichrist to save humanity, and Mr Dalrymple the surgeon is trying to learn how to remove and save humanity from the monstrosity we know as cancer. I'm just making a spot now on my S3 bingo card for a third Dalrymple mention, that will no doubt have some connection to the removal of monsters and/or monstrosities from the world.

Balancing the Books

The final bit of stocktaking might just be the coldest part of the whole recall process.

When Aziraphale calls from the cemetery in Edinburgh, he mentions Dalrymple's fate to Crowley:

AZIRAPHALE: Oh, do you really think so? Um, Crowley… Do you remember Dr. Dalrymple, The one who bought, err… CROWLEY: Wee Morag's body. Not a doctor… A mister, yes! Yes, whatever happened to him? AZIRAPHALE: [reading pamphlet] He left Edinburgh in disgrace. And then he killed himself. CROWLEY: Mmm.

Mmm, indeed. They might have saved Elspeth from Hell to meet up with wee Morag again, but the count of souls was still balanced out in the end, with Dalrymple heading the other way. The last time we see him he is still on the demonic LHS of the screen in blocking as he pays for wee Morag's body. Hell had him marked well in advance of his demise.

Time to move on to Part 4: Judgment Day, where we look at all the signs that the End Times are approaching. Again.

Thanks to @vidavalor for the thematic inspiration for this post.

For further reading:

You Say Potato, I Say Excellent! Or blocking, accents and legacy of morality tales in ‘The Resurrectionists’ minisode PART II by @pommedepersephone

The linked post at the beginning Historical Analysis: class and injustice in 'The Ressurrectionists' minisode by @bowtiepastabitch is here.

An intro to Elspeth and wee Morag being parallel characters to Aziraphale and Crowley by @good-soupmens I'm going to follow up on this in Part 5.

*I explained in Part 2 that I believe we are being shown the future through Aziraphale and his parallel characters, Beelzebub and Maggie. Another reason for this is that in S1 is that Anathema is one of his parallels, and she is also caught up with living in the future through the prophecies of Agnes Nutter. In contrast, Crowley's story, and that of his parallels, such as Gabriel and Newt, are about the past and trying to live the life you want that isn't bound by expectations. Urrgghh, I can see I might have to expand on this somewhere later.

**Crowley, with most of his story in the past, shows us an example of this with his "looking where the furniture isn't" comment.

The other posts in this series can be found here:

Part 1: Detective Aziraphale Part 2: Aziraphale-Beelzebub Parallels Part 4: Judgement Day Part 5: I Know Where I'm Going

#good omens #good omens 2 #good omens meta #aziraphale #mr dalrymple #witchfinder colonel dalrymple #elspeth and wee morag #good omens 1827 #edinburgh 1827 #the resurrectionists #scene blocking #body snatchers #strong's concordance

59 notes · View notes

snek-eyes · 4 months

Note

Hi Vee! 🤗 I hope you had a wonderful few days! I'm back with more meta questions 🤭 I hope that's okay, if not, just ignore me pls 😅 I've seen some people say Aziraphale isn't empathetic, some say Crowley isn't empathetic, but I think both of them have a LOT of empathy. They just show it very differently, and I think the perfect example is the Edinburgh minisode. Azi is caught in his Heavenly indoctrination a lot of times, like when he thinks body snatching is bad before actually thinking about it in a more complex matter instead of just black and white and as soon as ge does, he's suddenly all in favour of it and what made him change his mind is his empathy. With Crowley, he seems very cool and suave on the surface but he always acts and helps and protects, like with Elspeth; he didn't just save her from suic*de but he actively changed her situation as much as he could (he couldn't bring Wee Morag back for her because it wasn't in his power so he chose the next best thing he could change which was her poverty) to give her a reason to live, too. Or when he talks to Job and Sitis - you wrote an amazing meta about that already but I think the gist of it was that he sees the big picture which is that he needs to find the kids in order to save them and knows he will save them and that they'll all be fine. I think they both possess a great deal of empathy but express it in different ways which I think actually mirror their love languages: Crowley acts on his empathy, he does what he can to help people but isn't vocal about it, and Azi is vocal about it but he sometimes needs a nudge from Crowley to see the big, complex picture for that. Whats's your view on the matter? I'd love to hear your thoughts! 😁🤍

- 💫

Aziraphale (and Crowley) vs Empathy

Hey there! This was really interesting to think about!

So from my understanding (and if you're someone that has a better one, please feel free to chime in!), empathy is the ability to understand someone else's emotions, whether intellectually or by sympathetically feeling them yourself. But lacking empathy doesn't necessarily mean that you can't care about people, it just means that you don't exactly understand their emotions.

I'm saying this because after thinking about it, I actually don't think Aziraphale is very empathetic. Despite the fact that he does care a whole lot! Aziraphale is a protector, from Adam & Eve to Job's kids to that one nameless child Dalrymple couldn't save to Wee Morag, etc etc, we see him acting against what he Should be doing because he cares so damn much. But it seems to be because he has a strong moral code and believes that the alternative to acting is an injustice, more than he is putting himself in anyone's shoes and thinking about how they might be feeling. It's the difference between "I care that this sad thing is happening to you" and "I care because I can tell you are sad."

Like in the Edinburgh flashback, when he realizes what happened to the child, he's devastated because it's a tragedy that a child died, horrifically, and that all that's left of them on this earth can be contained in a bottle. His previous moral rule that digging up bodies is a sin because it's just wrong is overwritten because he's been shown an actual tangible consequence.

It would explain a lot about the number of times, especially in s2, when he either does not recognize how upset Crowley is, or if he does, he doesn't get why or take it seriously.

Saying things like "Still a demon?" or "I haven't seen you since, the flood?" without realizing why Crowley might find those upsetting and not friendly banter material.

While he doesn't seem to pick up on Crowley's bad mood in Uz, by Rome it seems like he has learned to at least see it, if not understand it. Regardless, he's still making a go at cheering Crowley up.

Aziraphale doesn't get why changing the Bentley is personally upsetting to Crowley, until Crowley connects it to something equally relevant for Aziraphale: Selling his books.

This also made something click for me wrt his scene with Maggie when she suddenly starts crying about striking out with Nina. He is completely at a loss as to why all these details are upsetting her, right up until she mentions being in love. He understands love, aww! But, crucially, his initial reaction is more "Oh, being in love is wonderful!" than "Oh, I see that must be hard for you." And he responds by wanting to solve her problem, he doesn't get that she's probably just looking for advice from an older queer to help her feel better about it, more than an actual solution.

The scene that kicks off the modern day where Maggie is upset about not being able to pay her rent. Aziraphale doesn't really engage with the fact that she's breaking down in front of him, he's doing whatever he can to placate her so he can just leave with his records.

Alright, let's get to the final fifteen because this would explain something that's always caught me. During Crowley's confession, Aziraphale looks SO confused as to why Crowley is getting upset. Aziraphale is coming at this from what he sees as a logical perspective, and Crowley is making an emotional plea. Aziraphale straight up does not understand how the two halves of this argument are connected.

When Crowley says he understands better than Aziraphale, it's like he's saying he has the intellectual high ground, and that's why Aziraphale decides they've reached an impasse.

Again, this isn't a knock on Aziraphale at all, it's just how he sees the world.

Meanwhile Crowley... I'm honestly not sure how to read Crowley on this.

He'll either project his own trauma onto other people or possibly recognize shades of it in their circumstances at the drop of a hat (the goats, the plants, lonely Muriel in heaven, the scene in S1 when he's hanging off his throne and goes from lamenting about how his fall was unfair right into to calling out God because testing the humans to destruction is unfair)

He is pretty good at knowing how people are going to react when he does his demonic mischief, although that might just be a logical extrapolation from experience.

On the other hand, he seems very confused when people go against his expectations (Jane Austen, Maggie and Nina not wanting help).

He seems to have a good handle on how Aziraphale feels in most situations, although Aziraphale's need to protect people is a huge blind spot he does not understand. So maybe that's just years and years of studying him and trying to understand. "Just enough of a bastard to be worth knowing," after all.

While he understands Elspeth's circumstances, he's not exactly, comforting? to her? When Morag is like "tell me that's not what I think it is" he immediately throws her under the bus in favor of chaos ("8D oh it most certainly is"). And when Aziraphale melts the body, he doesn't even look at Elspeth who's freaking out, his eyes are entirely on Aziraphale.

What do other people think?

#And thank you I have had a good week :) hope you are having a nice time too #Good Omens Meta #v watches good omens #aziraphale #crowley #edinburgh flashback #vee replies #💫 anon #Suicide mention

71 notes · View notes

tallerthantale · 3 months

Text

What Does Aziraphale Actually Believe, Part 6: Philosophy Time

This is a series of my takes on what Aziraphale believes through the timeline of the show. It is all my personal interpretation, and I am happy to hear others. You don’t need to read them all in order, but know that I am coming from a perspective on Aziraphale’s machinations that can be difficult for people without a psychology background to follow without the first two as a primer. The quick version is that Aziraphale has a set of beliefs that exist in some form or another within his mind. However, at any given moment, only some of them exist ‘with awareness’ or as I am putting it here, conscious!Aziraphale only has access to the beliefs that the rest of his mind, veil!Aziraphale, allows him to know about. The context of the moment will determine what lives on the surface and what stays buried behind the veil, whatever arrangement best prevents a threat to Aziraphale’s sense of self and makes whatever he is inclined to do feel right.

This post finishes the minisode and flashback content, starting from 1800's Edinburgh through to the 1960's bit. There is a lot of attention given to how Aziraphale conceptualises good and evil, and the roles of angels, demons, and humans within the divine system. About 3k words.

A Spot of Body Snatch

Some juicy bits of philosophy show up in the Edinburgh flashback. While Aziraphale has been able to disagree with the archangels, or think that they are misguided about God’s will, the general moral esthetics of what heaven is supposed to represent have largely been left intact. The idea is you put a bunch of people out in the world, you see who does the good things and who does the bad things, and you reward and punish accordingly. Aziraphale still believes that is a component of the ineffable plan, and advocates for some version of it in the modern era. At this point he thinks that it’s all going rather well, and you can easily sort the good and bad humans apart. He doesn’t look too closely, because that’s not going to help preserve his sense of self. He has been on the earth for over 5800 years at this point. His ignorance to the disadvantages of the poor is willful. See end note.

At the start of the adventure, Aziraphale believes body snatching is wicked. It is a morally bad thing to do, people who do it are morally bad. People who finance it are morally bad. This is an intuitive judgement, it feels wrong. As is commonly the case with intuitive judgements, it gets messy on the application, the devil's in the details. When he miracles the freshly dug up body into a skeleton, why does that feel right? Ostensibly the wickedness of the body snatching is the desecration of the dead. By turning the body into skeleton soup, Aziraphale has personally desecrated the dead. You could make the argument that it was a necessary evil in the name of a greater good, but Aziraphale doesn't make that argument, he claims that what he did was directly a morally good act. Why? Because it felt good to him to do it. He was sticking it to the morally bad people by making their life harder. Sometimes Aziraphale is a petty bitch like that.

When he learns that the body snatching operation functions to alleviate human suffering, his feelings change first, then his judgement changes. After the talk with the surgeon, holding the tumour in a jar, participating in the body snatching feels like helping to relieve human suffering, therefore his involvement in it is in alignment with the ineffable plan, therefore let's go do it. It is worth noting that for all Aziraphale emphasises forgiveness in his interactions with Crowley, he doesn’t ask for it here. There are many factors involved in that, and @takeme-totheworld has some very relevant things to say on the way Aziraphale engages with forgiveness from ex-Christian perspective.

I think one of the other factors involved is that Aziraphale is pretty normalised to reshuffling his beliefs to feel better about himself, and a feature of that normalisation is not fully taking accountability when you shuffle a disavowed belief out. Veil!Aziraphale allows just enough awareness for conscious!Aziraphale to express that his previous belief was incorrect, and then it’s yeeted like that belief never existed. Accountability, apologising, asking forgiveness, all of that would require conscious!Aziraphale to retain awareness of the offending prior belief and prior action. Believing he did a bad thing before breaks his ability to believe that as an angel he is incapable of doing bad things. He doesn't need to believe the absolutist stuff all the time, but it can't coexist in conscious awareness with the knowledge that he has been wrong. It is a known problem with shame responses, they sometimes motivate us to eliminate our awareness of our actions rather than motivate us to make amends.

When Wee Morag is mortally wounded, Aziraphale decides he is going to break heaven's rules, and asserts that the thing he will do, which isn't allowed by heaven, is the right thing to do. Since Uz Aziraphale has been able to believe that the policy of the institution of heaven is wrong and has been willing to go against it. He can shuffle that belief in when needed, and then shuffle it back out to go back to his day to day believing in heaven most of the time. His inclination to break the rules to save Wee Morag is in keeping with that shuffling ability, but we can observe that he slips into it a lot more comfortably than he used to, though not as comfortably as we might like, and not fast enough to save her.

People Get a Choice

What stands out in this era is his continued attachment, just previously in the minisode, to the idea that angel = good and demon = evil. For all he is willing to believe heaven is wrong, he will not let go of categorising the angels as ‘good,’ even into the modern era. It is deeply tied to his internal understanding of his personal relationship to God as an angel, and therefore his sense of self. He knows the other angels would deliberately let Wee Morag die. But the other angels are still angels, and therefore ‘good.’ Crowley, who is working to alleviate human suffering, is ‘evil’ so long as he remains a demon.

The exact phrasing is: "I am good. You, I'm afraid, are evil. But people get a choice." As for Crowley being evil, yes, Aziraphale thinks Crowley is nice. Yes, he thinks Crowley is a good person. Yes, he 100% loves Crowley as he is. But Crowley’s existence is conceptually evil in the abstract through no fault of his choices. Humans can choose. Crowley can't. Aziraphale’s attachment to this point drives most of the serious conflict between them. The worst things Aziraphale says to Crowley are on this theme. So why is he so defensive of it 5800 years in? What is this position doing for him? What does believing this save him from believing instead?

What Aziraphale is protecting himself from is the existential crisis of the pointlessness of it all. He is keeping himself from believing that the entire set up of the sides of good and evil, and humanity having the choice between good and evil, is all a sham. He is protecting himself from believing that he has no side. That there cannot ever be an idealised heaven that represents good. It isn’t just unachievable, it is incoherent. That his behaviour isn’t about furthering the cause of the greater good, he’s just doing what makes himself happy and deciding that is the right thing after the fact. That his sense of what feels right is no substitute for actual ethical principles. To prevent himself from processing all that, he will believe that Crowley is ‘evil’ in the abstract.

Aziraphale's mind likes to protect itself from responsibility. "You're an angel, I don't think you can do the wrong thing." Aziraphale grasped at straws to take that at face value from a fallen angel, but he grabbed that straw and he didn't let it go. Believing angels are inherently naturally good helps support his inclination to intuit morality. He can just let his innate angel vibes tell him what the right thing is (it’s whatever feels right to do) and he can be confident that is good, because he was an angel when he wanted to do it, and he is still an angel after having done it.

However, this is a very precarious defence for a lot of reasons. If we are working with a definition of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ that have no relationship to personality or behaviour, that’s not very reassuring. Aziraphale cant prove to himself his actions are morally good actions if his continued status as an angel is utterly unconnected to his actions. If angelic / demonic status defining celestials as good and evil is connected to actions or inclinations, how does Aziraphale parse the questionable actions of the other angels, and does he think less of Crowley? I suspect that for the most part he is generating definitions moment to moment that serve the interests of whatever else he is trying to believe at the time. Entirely abandoning the association of good/angel and evil/demon feels too much like abandoning his internal concept of God, so he won’t. Thinking Crowley is a bad person because he is a demon would be equally horrific, so he won’t do that either. He will roll through shifting definitions and avoid looking too hard at the consequences of his positions.

One option for what he can believe that I suspect has been growing stronger, is believing that God has a plan for Crowley that involves a deliberately unjust fall, to return him from later. It solves a lot of the above conflicts. He doesn’t have to consider if Crowley had a choice in becoming a demon, he doesn’t have to believe Crowley ever ‘did the wrong thing’ voluntarily while an angel, it makes it easier for him to rationalise that he is personally incapable of doing the wrong thing, it helps him rationalise his own relationship with Crowley. The only real downside is the part where Crowley would never in a million years endorse this viewpoint, and at some level Aziraphale must be aware of that because he doesn’t tend to express anything like this openly. However it very much looks to me like the missing piece that makes everything else fit. See end note.

Obviously!

Sometimes thinking Crowley's fall is part of an ineffable plan won't stop Aziraphale from being petty about Crowley's demonic status when that opinion isn't on his mind. "We may have both started out as angels, but you are fallen." It might be the rudest version of all of Aziraphale's 'holier than thou' moments, and in the context of what Crowley had likely recently been through, that was really unnecessarily mean.

Now for one of my more counter intuitive takes; Aziraphale is mean to Crowley because he puts him on a pedestal. When you believe someone is so magnificent, so perfect, so destined, you can believe nothing you do or say is capable of causing them harm. Then you can get really careless, particularly if the person you're putting on a pedestal doesn't readily show you their pain. If they are so grand, and your opinion doesn't have any value anyway, why bother considering what you say?

When asked for holy water, Aziraphale's mind goes to a suicide pill, because Aziraphale could not cope with being a demon. He’s had a lot of time to think about it now, he has come to understand that Crowley really isn’t “free to do whatever [he] want[s]” and I think he would genuinely prefer not to exist than to be in Crowley’s position. He projects his feelings about how horrible it would be for him onto Crowley, but also thinks Crowley is the stronger one, and the better one. Crowley just got back from being yanked down to hell for doing a good deed. A good deed that involved bullying Aziraphale into giving his money away, which he wouldn’t have done on his own. Crowley’s good deed for which he was likely tortured involved pressuring an angel into doing the right thing, after Aziraphale had been too slow to properly help the humans, while accurately sassing him for not understanding the impacts of poverty on humanity. It's not hard to see why Aziraphale might believe Crowley would prefer not to be a demon. There are times he makes a better angel than Aziraphale. Although to be fair, Crowley did overdo it on that hole.

Date Night

A toast ‘to shades of grey’. Aziraphale’s choice of words, Aziraphale’s choice to make it a toast. It’s an interesting pair of choices. Aziraphale has been in the middle with Crowley for thousands of years, but this is the moment he lets himself acknowledge the value of shades of grey. What does it mean, given everything Aziraphale has already done? Aziraphale had been believing everything he had done was 100% good, he just had convoluted justifications. Now his convoluted justifications only get him as far as very light grey, and he is finally starting to make his peace with that.

Does that mean he isn’t thinking of himself as 100% aligned with God? I think sometimes yes, but also sometimes no. The other option is that he doesn’t think God is 100% good anymore. Each version represents a massive shift. If we understand Aziraphale’s journey to being at peace with himself as a Daoist one, and I think there is a lot of subtext to that effect, Daoism doesn’t do absolutist good and evil. Things just… are. The divine isn’t a refined extreme. The Dao isn’t ‘good.’ It is. Full stop. I think Aziraphale will consider God less good more readily than he will consider himself misaligned with Her.

Why now? Because he realised, fully into his conscious awareness, that he was in love with a demon, as a demon. Nothing else fits the toast because nothing else changed in terms of Aziraphale’s philosophical alignment. Many flashbacks have brought us new things Aziraphale is willing to do that might distance himself from the ranks of the institution of heaven. Nothing new happened on that front in 1941. Many flashbacks have shown Aziraphale having new ways he is willing to understand the human world. Nothing new happened on that front in 1941. Something shifted in the way he understands his sense of self and his relationship to God, and one of the few things that still ties back to that is the role of angels and demons in the universe. It wasn’t what he was willing to do that broke new ideological ground, it was what he was willing to feel.

That willingness to feel broke a psychological wall for Aziraphale, and I believe with that wall down he can now think of himself and Crowley as somewhat ‘human aligned’ when it comes to certain aspects of their morality. Aziraphale talks with Crowley about the shades of grey they prefer. The way the term prefer is used here implies they have options. Options implies a choice. Choice was supposed to be for people. They may not have the ability to choose their employer, but they are both choosing to be a bit grey, and now they can say it to each other out loud. I will come back to this point in a future post.

You Go Too Fast For Me

He knows he is in love with a demon, but he still isn’t ready to act on it. He says maybe one day. I think all of him wants Crowley, but not all of him wants to want a demon. I think some of the fandom doesn’t want to process this about Aziraphale, but really think about it. If Crowley was an angel rescuing him and the books in the church, then in the 60’s offering to take him anywhere he wants to go, do you really think he would still say no? There is of course a conflation between their roles on opposite sides of celestial conflict and Crowley’s metaphysical status as a demon. It's the being on opposite sides that's the problem. I don’t think Aziraphale has any sort of disgust reaction or aversion to demonic features or demonic energy. But the metaphysical status of demon is the origin of their opposite sides situation, and Aziraphale isn’t prepared to feel like that is entirely arbitrary, even if it’s part of a bigger ineffable plan. Too fast isn’t a forever no, it’s check back later. Aziraphale knows it will ‘feel right’ down the line, and I don’t think that depends on demonic status going away, just on him needing time to process his feelings. For Aziraphale’s lifetime, 1941-1967 is the blink of an eye.

Part 6/10

End Notes

On willful ignorance: In my opinion, IRL willful ignorance mostly takes the form of a motivated lack of awareness. If a particular perspective, interpretation, relevant factor, explanation, ect… doesn’t line up with a person’s sense of self or behaviour, it stays out of awareness because the background mechanisms of the mind work to keep it out of awareness. The information they do not absorb is targeted. It isn’t random, it follows a strategy, and yet, they have no idea that they are doing it. It is… exhausting… to engage with that.

On pedestals: It has been observed that the level of misogyny in a country correlates very highly with a tendency to put women on pedestals. The more prevalent attitudes about how wonderful and perfect women are for doing all the womanly things so well predicts both a strong demand that women conform to those expectations and harsh penalties when they don't. Putting a person on a pedestal is a way to feel like you are honoring that person when you are actually threatening them.

On God having a plan for Crowley: I’ll be going into further detail as to why I think Aziraphale believes this and what it means in a future post, probably the final post. The closest we see him get to expressing this perspective to Crowley is the “May you be forgiven,” and if that is where he was going with it, that was like, the worst way he could possibly have put it. I do wonder if the 1941 apology dance could have come from Aziraphale telling Crowley he thinks God has a martyr plan for him. I think internally acknowledging that he was in love could have led to him saying it, and I think Crowley would be very valid in wanting an apology if he had. That said, I think the apology dance could also be explained by Aziraphale almost getting them caught with the magic show, and taking his time to reveal that he had swapped the photos.

While we're talking about old apology dances, I think the 1650 one probably had something to do with Anne Greene.

#good omens #good omens meta #go meta #aziraphale #ineffable husbands #aziracrow #ineffable spouses #what does aziraphale actually believe

34 notes · View notes

kai-ni · 8 months

Text

The Resurrectionist minisode is easily my favorite of the three in s2.

Partially because the costuming is so good yeah, and silly David is silly, but mostly because it excellently demonstrates the very root of Aziraphale and Crowley's differences / disagreements. It's also touched on in the zombie minisode where Zira sort of starts to question it (sort of) but the main root of their disagreements over heaven and hell is that Aziraphale only sees in black and white, and Crowley has a more nuanced view borne of experience and a bit of trauma (his 'shades of grey'). Aziraphale immediately labels Elspeth as 'wicked' because she digs up graves. This is an Evil activity, Aziraphale has decided, and therefor she's Evil, cut and dry. Crowley asks 'is it wicked, though? she needed the money.' He can see that she's not necessarily a bad or evil person, she's just in a poor situation and hungry, starving, and wanting to keep herself and her partner alive. There's nuance to the situation that he tries to explain to Aziraphale and promptly gets brushed off / ignored. Zira tries to change things so she doesn't dig up any more bodies, and it hurts her. He still thinks he's done well until he talks to the surgeon and realizes what he's trying to do is 'good' - learn about anatomy and help people, cure people. stop little seven year olds from dying of tumors. Aziraphale then decides that digging up graves is Good Actually, because he's found a reason to label it so, but again it's a complete 180 that is only Black and White. It's good now! decreases human suffering. So do it all you like! Which isn't... correct either. His meddling again hurts her and her friend, getting Morag killed, and if he hadn't done anything at all none of it would have happened. But things continue, and Aziraphale again stumbles when Elspeth suggests taking Morag to the surgeon, because suddenly that's different, even if it's for the greater good as he declared earlier, it still feels... wrong. Which again, Crowley points out! 'It's a little different when it's someone you know.' Crowley just kind of goes along with all of Aziraphale's mistakes and points out the nuance, which continually and repeatedly goes over the angel's head. But he's trying SO HARD to let him learn it on his own. At the end Crowley finally snaps, because he can't stand to watch this festival of errors any longer and watch any more humans die, so he snatches the laudanum and stops Elspeth from killing herself at great personal risk. But the thing is, Aziraphale is STILL in this mindset in present day. 'Of course you said no to hell, you're the bad guys!' Crowley has only been trying to tell him for hundreds, thousands of years! Crowley gets it, understands the nuance, and Aziraphale doesn't. And Crowley finally got tired of being dragged along with it / Aziraphale wanted to drag him to the oneee place he isn't willing to go. I dunno what it'll take for Aziraphale to learn, honestly. He's seen plenty... can't wait for season 3 to find out tbh.

#good omens #good omens season 2 #the resurrectionist #ineffable husbands #aziracrow

26 notes · View notes

demontobee · 8 months

Text

S2 and Resurrections

In the Job minisode, the whole moral argument that Aziraphale has to fight out with Heaven and then in his head is about the fact that Job’s first set of children are to be killed and not brought back. Instead they want to give him new ones, and twice as many. Aziraphale: “But I think he quite likes the old ones.”

The Edinburgh minisode/episode also deals with resurrection in several ways: Elspeth is a resurrectionist as she digs up dead bodies, the pub’s exterior plays on the word’s two meanings: someone who brings people back from the dead and someone who snatches bodies; in the end, Aziraphale wants to save Wee Morag but it is too late and she dies and he does not have the power to bring her back

The extended 1941 minisode shows the Nazis being brought back from the dead (as zombies, but still)

The power of the miracle Aziraphale and Crowley perform together is measured in Lazarii (from Lazarus, who was resurrected by Jesus)

We thought the demons had killed Mr Brown but Crowley makes him reappear in the end (not really a resurrection, but still)

The Second Coming, the next step in the Metatron’s plan, includes dead people walking the earth again

#what does that mean for S3 tho #I hope they don't have to use resurrectionist powers on each other #good omens #good omens s2 #aziraphale #crowley #ineffable husbands #crowly x aziraphale

9 notes · View notes

spock-smokes-weed · 9 months

Text

I think the body snatching minisode is probably my fave in all of season two

One thing I completely forgot about when I watched it the first time was how heaven and hell are VERY real, and how Aziraphale’s ignorance over the situation does come from a very genuine place of not wanting Elspeth to suffer in hell for eternity. It’s essentially Christian guilt on steroids.

Seeing Aziraphale experience the cognitive dissonance between heaven=good and the complexities of humanity was just *muah*

This minisode is mostly about Aziraphale and getting a peek into his psyche, but I also LOVE the roll Crowley played. He can’t do anything to really materially help her because that would be doing good, which he can’t do, but understands the moral complexities of humanity and is there to challenge and nudge Aziraphale. and he does it all while like “ahaha yes this is amazing, damned she will be my side will love it.”

#good omens #aziraphale #crowley

8 notes · View notes

captaincolorblob · 9 months

Text

The thing is, even if the coffee theory turns out to be false it would still make sense.

If we look at how Aziraphale has been characterized in the past and the events leading up to his conversation with the Metatron, from his point of view it makes sense. It definitely wasn’t the best choice he could’ve made, no doubt but you can understand why he did it.

After the whole thing with Ineffable Bureaucracy, Aziraphale was threatened by Micheal to be erased from the Book Of Life (aka erasing him from history as if he had never existed which is fucking TERRIFYING), then he’s given the chance to be in the position to have that power. Remember, the only reason why Micheal wasn’t allowed to do that was because they’re not the next Supreme Archangel if Gabriels gone, but now Aziraphale was chosen to be. If he’s one of the few, if not the only person, who can erase people out of history then that means the chance that that happens to him or Crowley is significantly lessened. Aziraphale can’t actually admit to himself that Heaven isn’t good, he can’t stand the thought of being part of the ‘’Bad side’’. Subconsciously he’s aware that Heaven has done things he doesn’t agree with (example: clue minisode, him changing his mind about body-snatching after seeing that tumor jar from the seven year old) but he doesn’t entertain those thoughts for long.

He thinks that if he’s the one in charge that he can fix things, that if he could just talk with the right people then everything would sort itself out. Like he did in season 1 when he first contacted the Metatron. Another thing is that he’s not doing this because he likes being in charge. This is Aziraphale we’re talking about here. He’s doing this for Crowley. Just like Crowley refused being Duke of Hell for Aziraphale, Aziraphale accepted being Supreme Archangel for Crowley. As Supreme Archangel he could make Crowley an angel again, could make him as happy as he was Before the Beginning, creating stars and nebulas and this time, they’re on the same side, they can be together. But it wouldn’t be their side. Because Aziraphale doesn’t understand why Crowley wouldn’t want to be an angel again. He thinks Crowleys kindness and goodness come from him being an ex-angel, not because Crowleys more human then demon at this point. He doesn’t understand that he himself and their precious, peaceful and fragile existence that they carved out for themselves here on earth would be enough for Crowley. Maybe he thinks he can have the things he’s sacrificed back if he does this, I dont know. I’m rambling at this point. Is this still coherent? Was it ever? Anyway

That doesn’t mean the coffee theory makes no sense, it would explain some weird details (like the sudden change from a dash of almond to a hefty jigger of it, Azirapahle including Crowley when saying “You’re the bad guys!”, having Micheal “King of Micro-expressions” Sheen act like Aziraphale’s fighting down that uncanny ass smile during that whole take in the credits, the barely hearable miracle sound before he takes the coffee, etc). It would explain those but it could also just be the good ol’ fashioned confirmation bias

PS: A character doing something you don’t like doesn’t mean its ooc, this is Neil Gaimans writing we’re talking about here

#good omens #good omens s2 spoilers #gos2spoilers #dia rambles #aziraphale #no matter if its true or not it makes sense why metatron would want them seperated cause he knew crowley wouldnt agree to it #they thwarted the first Armageddon they performed a miracle together that only strong archangels could of course heaven wouldnt want them #working together #i really hope this is coherent cause i'm bad with words #synopsis is basically: from aziraphales pov his decision makes sense he thinks he's doing the right thing #from an outsider perspective of course going back to the place that mistreated him for millenia is a bad idea #you can understand where he's coming from you dont have to agree with him but you get why did it #fucking newsflash neil is really good at writing three dimensional and humane characters with consistent flaws fucking deal with it #i wrote this all in one sitting i hope this comes across okay #pretty sure i forgot some things but i got my main point across

18 notes · View notes

fuckyeahgoodomens · 10 months

Text

The minisodes are going to have 25 minutes each! :) ❤ 🐍😊

Minisodes are 25 minutes long history scenes similar as S1 cold opening ones :) There are three and within episodes :).

Biblical times minisode called A Companion To Owls by John Finnemore in Episode 3, in all likelihood about Job played by Peter Davison

Victorian times minisode called The Resurrectionists by Cat Clarke in Episode 2 in Edinburgh 1827 - our favourite angel and demon get into a wee bit of a pickle there, there’s little stint of body snatching in the era.

Blitz minisode called Nazi Zombie Flesh Eaters by Jeremy Dyson and Andy Nyman which takes up much of Episode 4. Andy Nyman called it ‘very naughty’.

:))

#good omens #gos2 #season 2 #minisodes

649 notes · View notes

number1wah · 9 months

Text

rambles on go2

I think GO2 feels a bit off for people (me included tbh) for a couple of reasons. The big one, obviously, is that it's mostly New Material and Sir Terry wasn't around to help write it, so it's only Neil's voice (and I'm sure at times Neil attempting in some ways to channel Sir Terry, which is just an impossible task), so it lacks that extra special spark that only Sir Terry could really bring it. And there's absolutely no way it ever could have, frankly. (A fact I'm certain everyone on set or in the writing room was aware of. Neil is a wonderful writer. Sir Terry was a wonderful writer. Together they made a particular kind of magic that can never be captured again.)

Secondly though, is that it feels like a bunch of side stories. While things do change and progress in many ways there's just this feeling, to me anyway and I think to others that struggled with it, that a lot of it doesn't actually go anywhere in particular. There's a lot of fluff that doesn't fully impact the story that we see currently (but I do think will enlighten us for next season)

Rather than pushing the story forward in some large way it seems more like it's just expanding on what was there. (Which is definitely not a bad thing by any means.) The first time I watched GO2 I had multiple moments where I straight up just said: "Wait why are we doing things? What's the point of this scene???" And a lot of that was Aziraphale and Crowley's 'minisodes' (which tbh i hate the concept of. why call them minisodes when they are interwoven with the episode?? idk thats a rant for another time). Like their whole bit in Edinburgh and body snatching has little if anything to do with the mystery of Gabriel and it's kinda weirdly thrown inbetween the Main Story in a way that I don't think hits the way they intended it to.

Again, It's not that I don't love seeing the backstory of the Ineffable Idiots but it's done in a way that gives you a bit of whiplash I think. The first season put all (or at least most of) the historical flashbacks in a contained episode, with the intent to show just a bit of the progression of this relationship.

Also, as much as I absolutely adore Azriphale and Crowley, this season focused so so heavily on them that the rest of the cast felt so small. Season 1 had a whole slew of characters that you were able to sit with longer, and I think that's missing here. (And that might also be in part due to filming in the middle of a pandemic) You saw Aziraphale and Crowley interact with each other but you also had a sense of the whole world around them and how they interacted with it more, and how the people in the world interacted with each other. Not just the two or three shops on Aziraphale's street. (And thinking of it now they do interact with people in the flashbacks but because they're one off characters for the episodes and not series regulars it just doesn't have the same impact)

Don't get me wrong, I had some issues with Season 1 (particularly some lines by Pepper that felt wild lol) but I think it was more balanced in it's approach to all the characters and their journey.

This also isn't to say that I dislike Season 2 at all, just that on first watch I can definitely understand why some people struggled a bit with it. I think the biggest thing that helped me appreciate GO2 was understanding that this was more of a "bridge" (for lack of a better term) to get to the sequel. That this was just ramping up to get people to that place. (They absolutely could have chosen to jump in to the sequel story and do some creative story telling to fill us in on the important bits and I am very grateful they chose to tell this story and walk with us to that jumping off point instead.) And I think a lot of trilogies struggle with the second part in particular because so often it is a bridge from the start to the conclusion, but this just feels like that x10 to me?? Because the first season is a complete story, even if there's room to grow from that, it's a closed book essentially.

Idk I'm very much rambling here and can't get my thoughts down in a very coherent way.

I do just want to say that I just finished my second rewatch and, again, I so thoroughly enjoyed it, even though I still think it fumbled parts in comparison to the first one. And I'm absolutely not mad at it in any way for expanding on the both Aziraphale and Crowley individually and together. I just think it may sit better with people when the 3rd season is out (fucking fingers crossed so help me) and the story is a complete entity again.

edit to add: I also don't really think TV executives have ever really given us this style of story before. (fucking especially with a queer couple jfc)Where you go from this crazy story of an apocalypse to a story very obviously about love. Like this feels very much like New Territory and I am so grateful to have it, wort's and all.

#this is just like #my opinion though #i've grown to really love it for what it is #but it's definitely not as good as the first season #good omens thoughts #this is just me rambling into the void #good omens spoilers #good omens 2 #good omens #go2 #go2 spoilers #you are very much allowed to disagree with me and think i am wrong lol #part of me diving so deep into this and really thinking about it is because so much of the fandom was so overjoyed with it #idk even writing this made me love season 2 more so who knows

6 notes · View notes