Aziraphale: The Sword that Guards the Tree of Life
Looking where the furniture isn't
This post is dedicated to @meatballlady's excellent insistence that if we want to try to predict where season 3 will go, we need to look at where the furniture isn't. That is, what must have been there but wasn't shown?
For this one, my source material is going to be Genesis. That is, in no small part, because it does in fact fuck severely that Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett took the angel with the flaming sword and the serpent of Eden and made them kiss (@joycrispy, @ouidamforeman). It's also because Genesis, quite simply, exists, and it seems safe to assume that most everyone in Gaiman and Pratchett's intended audience has been exposed to at least its first few chapters dozens of times.
What does Genesis tell us about Aziraphale's purpose?
3:22 Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might reach out with his hand, and take fruit also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”—
23 therefore the Lord God sent him out of the Garden of Eden, to cultivate the ground from which he was taken.
24 So He drove the man out; and at the east of the Garden of Eden He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life.
@joycrispy's analysis above highlights Aziraphale's role as given in the last verse: as the angel chosen to wield the flaming sword, he was sent down after Adam and Eve were expelled to prevent them from returning. Instead, he chose to protect them by giving that sword away. His desire to protect humanity is indeed beautiful (@give-soup-please, @snek-eyes).
But wait, what came right before that? "And take fruit also from the tree of life...?"
2:9 Out of the ground the Lord God caused every tree to grow that is pleasing to the sight and good for food; the tree of life was also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
That's right: What we see in the show is that Adam and Eve were sent out of Eden so that they'd have to deal with the rain and the animals and have to work for their food, but that was never the primary motivation. God planted two special trees, and after Eve and Adam ate from one of them, God was terrified at the prospect of them turning around and eating from the other. And thus, the Garden of Eden was made off-limits and set to be permanently guarded by an angel with a flaming sword.
So, the flaming sword.
Twice now, Aziraphale's sword has helped humanity survive complete and total destruction (@nottobehornyonthemain). The first time, he handed the sword to the first two humans, which protected not just them but the entirety of the human race via Adam and very pregnant Eve.
The second time, he let it be wielded by The Them, who used it to best the Four Horsepeople of the Apocalypse and save the billions of humans already alive as well as unborn generations.
Perhaps the flaming sword was only intended as a plot point in the first season. However, if its purpose were completed, it could have easily been destroyed. As a narrative piece, it could have broken dramatically at the end of the face-off against the Four Horsepeople. Or, Watsonianly, God could have chosen to break it Herself; after all, it was already used against its intended purpose twice, so why let it keep existing?
Instead, it's carefully taken away to... where? Heaven?
The place Aziraphale is now going?
Or at least a place where he could likely find a record showing where it's being stored?
Whether you call it "rule of threes" or "Chekhov's gun," I think it likely that Aziraphale will be getting his sword back in season 3. He probably doesn't want it (@createserenity, @ineffableigh, @doctorscienceknowsfandom), but he'll need it.
The question, then, is what would Aziraphale do with the flaming sword he was given to prevent humans from reaching the tree of life?
If we're looking at where the furniture isn't, the biggest stretch of an interpretation would be to say that the missing furniture is the tree of life. If anyone knows where Eden is, it would be Aziraphale, Guardian of the Eastern Gate. We know that both Heaven and Hell want to end humanity. The opening credits have humanity walking to their judgment after their deaths; what better way to prevent that than by preventing those deaths?
The most intense version of this theory says that the audience should be familiar with the story of the Garden of Eden and know damn well that there are two special trees there and that Aziraphale was put in place to guard the second one — the one humanity hasn't eaten from yet, the one that grants immortal life. That's where, if I were truly trying to swing for the hills by aiming at where the furniture isn't, I would ideally like to end this post. If that were the case, season 3 could even open with Aziraphale walking towards the Garden of Eden, sword in hand, but this time approaching it from the outside with the intention of tearing the wall down.
But, let's be honest, making individual people immortal doesn't feel like it would fit with the themes of Good Omens, nor with Neil Gaiman or Terry Pratchett's world views.
So, let's take the tree of life symbolically: Instead of the tree of life granting individual humans immortality, it could instead represent giving humanity immortality. In that case, the thing that's where the furniture isn't is Aziraphale's sword. You know, the sword that's already saved the human race from extinction twice now, with both times being because Aziraphale gave it away.
I suspect that the sword will wind up in Aziraphale's hands again in season 3. I also quite suspect that it won't be staying there. In the end, I expect it will once again be up to humanity to reach out their hand to take the apple from that second tree.
71 notes
·
View notes
just rambling bc i have feelings and i need to put them into words :))
it's so so weird to me that punk is often stereotyped as aggressive or portrayed as dark and gritty and aggressive outcasts who hate everything or whatever because like, it is not that at all??
Like, in my experience, yeah - we do refuse to fit in, it's a conscious choice to reject societal norms and yeah, it is supposed to provoke, and yes, there's quite some aggression building up against fascists and the system and stuff, but that's not the core of it.
Like, that's what you usually see, especially in the music, but what I've seen is that really it's about community.
Yes, we're misfits, we're outcasts, and you know what, we're not fitting in together. Yes, we're fighting the system, because people deserve better than that. Yes, it's a fight, but we're standing together and change can come but it doesn't *have* to be violent. It's not about the violence. It's about the change. It's about making things better.
And the music isn't all "everything sucks, burn down the world as it exists" it's "the world is really fucked so we have to do something about it, we can and will CHANGE this and we'll do all we can to create a better world." it's "listen, see, notice these fucking issues we HAVE to deal with!"
the concerts aren't all "jumping around knocking into everyone randomly and aggressively" it's "if someone falls we'll shield them and help them back up and make sure they're okay" and it's "if someone behaves like an asshole we'll kick them out immediately, no questions asked, no second chances, with physical force if we have to", it's "everyone is safe here"
it's not dark and gritty and aggressive. it's colourful and joyful despite despite despite. it's seeing the issues, and building community to change that together. it's not subscribing to the world's bullshit and whatever lying narrative the media picks up next.
All I've ever seen in punk culture is community and acceptance and the fierce push for change. Punks are some of the nicest and most intelligent people I know. I have never, not once, felt unsafe at a concert or around those people. And that's mostly strangers thrice my age because I'm like, the only teen punk in my fucking town.
And I mean, it's not the point for everyone to know that. We'll do what we do regardless. We'll be who we are. And having a reputation for kindness and acceptance would not work because we ARE trying to provoke, to draw attention and weird side-looks, to not fit in.
But whenever I see punk used as an insult, or just another word for delinquent, or aggressiveness for violence's sake, I'm just so so so confused.
6 notes
·
View notes