#original children of aziraphale and crowley

[wesalvarezart]

New Illustrations:

Oldest of Friends by WesAlvarez.Art

After the characters by Neil Gaiman

#Illustration #cutie #GoodOmens #Crowley #Aziraphale #Eden #illustration #NewArt

[dorliart]

My summary of art for 2022 🌲

for the first time, this year I am not counting my top posts on whatever social media site.

This year I am recounting my favourite and best works, hand selected by myself and no rigged algorithm.

I am extremely proud of these and I can’t WAIT to see what this template will look like next year. All my love.

[ineffectualdemon]

The more I sit with Good Omens, and I have to watch it again from the beginning of series one, the more the ending makes sense

Yes I believe that Aziraphale is being manipulated and being deliberately separated from Crowley because they are too powerful together

Yes I think what he said and how he said it was cruel

BUT

Of course Aziraphale is going to take this chance

Aziraphale is always going to do what he thinks is right even if he has to do it alone

1. He gives away his sword in the garden before he even meets Crowley again

2. He was fully ready and willing to save Job's children himself and then walk straight into hell with his head held high

3. When the original plan to stop the apocalypse went tits up and Crowley said "let's run away together" he said no. Not because he was just going to go along with the war but because he was going to keep trying

This is what he does

That's what made Crowley fall for him in the first place!

Aziraphale stays and he tries to do what he personally believes is right and if he fails he's willing to accept the consequences no matter how dire

And I think even if he had known what Gabriel said at "his" execution he still would have helped him

Because that's the right thing to do

And I hate how he went about it and I hate how he hurt Crowley

But of course he made the choices he did

If he made any other choice he wouldn't be the Angel Crowley fell in love with

God fucking damnit

[fuckyeahgoodomens]

Link 1, Link 2 :)

Digital Good Omens 2 Sountrack is coming out in 4 days! 🥳 CD version in October! :) ❤ Coming soon on vinyl…

Out to Stream/Download from 25th August. Out on CD 13th October. Coming soon on vinyl…

David Arnold’s ‘end of the world’ complex and multi-genre soundtrack.

From the Award-winning composer of Sherlock and Casino Royale comes a follow up to the hugely successful, Emmy nominated Good Omens soundtrack.

Good Omens series 2 premiered on Prime Video on 28th July. The series follows the odd couple, angel Aziraphale (Michael Sheen) and demon Crowley (David Tennant) in their quest to sabotage the end of the World. The six-episode sequel to the popular adaptation of the novel by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett, concerns the Archangel Gabriel (Jon Hamm) arriving without his memories to Aziraphale’s bookshop. Aziraphale and Crowley attempt to find out what happened to Gabriel, whilst hiding him from Heaven and Hell, both eager to find him.

The Soundtrack

David Arnold’s soundtrack to Good Omens was first released in 2019 to favourable reviews, with BBC Music Magazine calling it “a rollicking trip to hell and back”. Blueprint Magazine described it as “a great listen” and Sci Fi Bulletin commented on “plenty of memorable themes” to conclude that “This is another work of art from Arnold”. At times nostalgic and eerie but always varied, beautiful and full of excitement, the Good Omens 2 soundtrack showcases Arnold’s every skill from his composer arsenal. Featured here are orchestral arrangements with sprinkling of Sugar Plum Fairy pizzicato and percussion, jaunty strings and mighty choral sweeps from Crouch End Festival Chorus. Added to the mix are rock guitar riffs, and psychedelic 70s sounds and all together they create a haunting otherworldly feel, complementing the fantasy and the quirky humour of the show. The spirited Waltz of the opening theme is also present in the second series and it wonderfully sets the scene for fantastical mayhem. In series 2, this robust, evocative, and funny music entity, becomes yet again another character in the story. Award-winning composer David Arnold is well known for his blockbuster scores, including Stargate, The Chronicles of Narnia: the Voyage of the Dawn Treader, Hot Fuzz, Paul, Independence Day, 2 Fast 2 Furious and Casino Royale as well as for his TV work such as Sherlock and Dracula. Also available: The original soundtrack to the first series of Good Omens >

Tracklist

– Disc 1 – Chapter 1: The Arrival 1. Before the Beginning 2. Good Omens 2 Opening Title 3. Into Soho 4. Something Terrible 5. To The Bookshop 6. Maggie and Nina 7. He’s Smoking 8. Tiny Miracle 9. Heavenly Alarm Bells Chapter 2: The Clue 10. Avaunt! 11. The Song is the Clue 12. It’s What God Wants 13. A Mighty Wind 14. Whales 15. Gabriel Returns 16. His New Children 17. Am I Awful Now? 18. Fallen Angel Chapter 3: I Know Where I’m Going 19. Police Arrive 20. Scotland 21. We’re Going to Hell 22. People Get a Choice 23. My Car is Not Yellow 24. Beelzebub in Hell 25. The Book 26. The Fly 27. Mr. Dalrymple 28. We Need to Cut 29. I’m Going to Save Her 30. Crowley Goes Large 31. Not Kind 32. Beelzebub Isn’t Happy – Disc 2 – Chapter 4: The Hitchhiker 33. Hell-O 34. Nazi Zombies 35. March of the Nazi Zombies 36. Crowley Pep Talk 37. The Magic Shop 38. Catch The Bullet 39. Zombies in the Dressing Room Chapter 5: The Ball 40. I’ll Let You Have It 41. We’re Storming a Book Shop 42. Monsieur Azirophale 43. The Candelabra 44. Here Comes Hell 45. Gabriel Gives Himself Up 46. Shax 47. The Circle Chapter 6: Every Day 48. Bin Through the Window 49. Gabriel Leaving Heaven 50. The Halo 51. Gabriel Revealed 52. Gabriel’s Love Story 53. Leaving The Bookshop 54. Gabriel and Beelzebub 55. Crowley and Muriel 56. I Forgive You 57. Don’t Bother 58. The Biggest Decision 59. The End?

[fandom]

New year, new Fandometrics!

The world bid farewell to 2023 and rang in 2024, welcoming the initial Steamboat Willie version of Mickey Mouse into the public domain in predictably interesting ways, including drawing comparisons between the original Mickey and Sonic the Hedgehog’s eye styles. Fans are halfway through the live-action Percy Jackson and the Olympians show, and the general consensus is “protect these children at all costs.” Kenna Jean Harris, the story lead of Luca and director of Ciao Alberto, confirmed that Luberto is canon, so congrats to those fish boys and everyone who ships them. The highly anticipated anime adaptation of beloved manga Dungeon Meshi has begun airing. And we’ve made some small changes to this year’s Fandometrics lists. This is Tumblr’s Week in Review.

Percy Jackson and the Olympians

Mickey Mouse

Artists on Tumblr

Dungeon Meshi

Palestine

Happy New Year

Baldur's Gate 3

Annabeth Chase | Percy Jackson and the Olympians

Good Omens

One Piece

Percabeth | Percy Jackson & Annabeth Chase, Percy Jackson and the Olympians

Jujutsu Kaisen

Astarion | Baldur's Gate 3

Luca

Hannibal

Crowley | Good Omens

Jerusalem

Cats of Tumblr

Aziraphale | Good Omens

Sonic the Hedgehog

[noneorother]

The art director & the Good Omens book cover tier list of doom, part 1

part 1 l part 2

This is going to have to be a multi-part series because there are *checks notes* 64 different covers that I've found so far.

I am your resident Art Director/Good Omens enthusiast, and welcome to my completely meta-free book cover tier list. Listen, making a book cover is HARD. I should know. But while we salute these artists for their hard work and time, I think we can all admit that once in a while, the vision is just not on. And on very rare occasions, publishers seemed to have managed to commission the cover art directly from hell... 1. The original UK cover

Ahh, the standard by which all shall be judged. We're starting off with a nice & easy cover, with adorable woodcuts of Aziraphale and Crowley flanking a custom Good Omens font! While I have to take a few points off for the terrible kerning of the word "GoOD", the blockprint vibes and general bitchiness of Aziraphale's teeny weeny wittle face, along with the sick colour palette puts the orignial in my good graces. Tier: Great

2. The duelling US covers

Progress! Hail to the designer who figured out trying to make "GoOD" and "OMeNs" fit the same width was a fool's errand, and even managed to IMPROVE on the original handmade title by adding a little halo and devil's tale to the design. Aziraphale and Crowley are facing each other, while also managing to serve absolute cunt. Aziraphale is wearing EIGHTIES SNEAKERS. Crowley's little snake boots have HEELS. They've managed to keep the woodcut vibes and colour simplicity, while balancing out the full title of the book. Both authors get to trade off on who's name comes first! Dare I say, this is a work of genius. I could dock some points for Crowley's sad bat wings growing out of his right clavicle, but who am I to question greatness.

Tier: Blessed by God Herself

3. The Halo Master Chief(?) cover

How the mighty have fallen... As a Canadian child, I was subjected to maybe the most horrifying ad in existence by the War Amps warning children about machine safety. This cover is the paper embodiment of that ad. I am confused by the purple haze. I am frightened by the seeming ethereal flatness of Adam and Dog. I am strangely aroused by Aziraphale's eyebrows, and intensely saddened by the terrible outline/drop shadow they had to inflict on the type to fit "Pratchett" in that god awful space. Tier: WTF

4. Germany, Ein Gutes Omen covers

This cover inexplicably exists in two colour ways: red and teal. I put the audiobook cover here so you could experience the full illustration, and also how fucked up it is that they cropped the book version to include three horse-people of the apocalypse, but cut off DEATH on the regular cover. Points must be given for drawing a pretty slick Bentley, but I think we have to take even more points away for turning Crowley into a Ray Charles/Mike Wazowski hybrid. The ducks are nice. Tier: Not so Good (Omens)

5. Germany, Ein Gutes Omen covers continued

I don't know if the German designer of this cover *knew* that they were using western yeehaw cowboy woodblock letters when they made this cover, but judging by how they spaced the rest of the text at the bottom, THEY DID NOT CARE. And that seems to be a running theme for this one. We get kind of a duality thing going on with the black and pink background, but it just seems like somebody whispered the general themes of Good Omens into a jar, and threw it down a well, and this poor chap came along and picked it up. The baffling choice to align every piece of text on the cover *except* Neil Gaiman's name which is right aligned and rotated 90 degrees (not even real vertical type) will haunt my dreams, I think.

Tier: Bad

6. US, UK The Traffic Jam cover

For the love of Good Omens, WHY. I can think of so many more interesting symbols to put on the cover of this book than the ODEGRA SIGIL TRAFFIC JAM. Props for keeping the good colours and type, but like, I think this cover was secretly designed by @amtrak-official, or someone who just really, really likes public works. Tier: Does the Job

7. France, De bons présages cover

Leave it to France to make sure people know that Aziraphale and Crowley fuck severely. While I can't condone leaving out half the title of the book (and thinking a red carpenter's square counts as decoration), I can begrudgingly acknowledge that Ron Pearlman and Benedict Cumberbatch's love child is excellent Crowley casting. I think I give this a solid dark academia/10. Tier: Good (Omens)

8. France, De bons présages covers continued

Just imagine with me, if you will, the absolutely hilarious reality that this cover posits: Good Omens is exactly the same in every respect, but Crowley drives a pink 1950s convertible. Why do all of the colours on this cover look like they've been pre-digested? Why are the font choices and placement so bafflingly bad. My face is the demon's face holding that car. I feel his pain.

Tier: WTF

9. France, De bons présages covers continued

Minus points for not managing to write the full title of the book once again. I don't know what it is with the French. They seem pretty set on Good Omens being demonic. While I do appreciate a good Bosch-style demon party, the dude in the middle confounds me. All-caps Museo Sans that isn't even *centred* in the frame is just so lazy. I am le tired. Tier: Bad

10. France, De bons présages covers continued

Uhh. The font. The font is okay.... I think? Yeah. The font and kerning are. Okay. OHHH GOD I LOOKED DOWN BELOW THE TEXT WHYYYY. Tier: WTF

END of round one. I need a nap.

[actual-changeling]

Crowley does NOT want to run - A Summary

A small while ago, I wrote an extensive meta post about why Crowley's primary survival response is not flight, why exactly it is fight instead, and how it shows up throughout the centuries.

You can find the original post here, which is quite long but goes into way more detail than I will here.

I'm frankly getting tired of people claiming that Crowley always wants to flee, that this makes Aziraphale "right" in going back to heaven, and using it generally put Crowley down. It's a fundamental misunderstanding of who he is as a character and what that means for their relationship.

So, because long posts can scare people off, I will provide a summary.

Now, let's get into it, here are the reasons why Crowley is not a runner:

the Starmaker fought for their stars and against heaven in the revolution, which ended up with them falling and Crowley the demon emerging

by opposing existing rules and defying heaven's authority, he automatically started a fight; you cannot not fight under those circumstances

he continues to question God and defies both heaven's and hell's commands repeatedly, see Job, the subtextual implications that he saved children from the flood, hanging out with Jesus and taking him traveling, proposing the Arrangement, and acting based on what HE decides is the moral thing to do over and over

just because a fight is not physical doesn't mean it isn't one

Crowley's first response to the impeding apocalypse was to start coming up with a plan to stop it, Aziraphale had to be talked into it and only agreed for selfish reasons

to quote myself: The reason why both heaven and hell absolutely loathe him is not because he is a runner; it's because he constantly and consistently defies them. He fights.

Crowley wants to deal with the Gabriel problem and attempts to come up with plans over and over again while Aziraphale shoots him down and solves exactly nothing

Crowley is the one who wants to fight the demons outside to protect the humans inside the bookshop, meanwhile Aziraphale is abusing his powers to put on a puppet show with human beings

in the final fifteen, he does not suggest running away, he suggest finding a new safe space, because the bookshop can now be accessed by both sides without problems

the one and ONLY TIME Crowley actually wants to run away is not at the bandstand—he is talking about 'if' and running as a contingency plan—but later when he finds Aziraphale on the street; in that moment, he is 100% certain (and correct) that hell is about to drag him down to torture him for all eternity. Who wouldn't run from a fight you cannot possibly win?

When Aziraphale refuses to come, he STAYS AND FIGHTS despite everything, because freedom means nothing to him without Aziraphale there.

Questions? Feel free to ask them (politely), but please read the original post first and see if I answered them there.

[fellthemarvelous]

Invisible scars

(TW: religious trauma)

Looking at me, you wouldn't know that I've survived religious trauma. The marks of religious trauma are seldom visible. In fact, I had no idea for the longest time that I had religious trauma (I thought it was a thing that happened to other people). I simply spent decades questioning the reasons I felt like I was so broken on in the inside. I kept trying to figure out what I was doing wrong and why I never felt happy or like I was never able to connect to anyone. I had no idea that my experience with the church as a small child is what shaped me into the anxiety-ridden, majorly depressed disaster creature I am today.

I spent 12 years learning inside of Catholic schools. It has taken me more than 20 years to process and deconstruct, and I am always going to be a work in progress. I was brainwashed into believing the very worst about myself, and I was always just beyond saving because I had the misfortune of being a woman in a church that taught us that women experience pain during childbirth as a natural consequence of Eve eating the apple, which is why they enjoy making us suffer in the first place. They taught us that Adam ate the apple because Eve seduced him, so even though Adam also ate the apple, his sin still wasn't as bad as Eve's because she did it first and used sex to get him to do the same. They placed the blame for Original Sin squarely on Eve and thus onto every single girl who entered the church. If a boy did something to me that I didn't like, it's probably because I did something to provoke him first.

Do you know what I learned to do at a very young age just to be able to cope with that?

I learned to use humor to deflect when I was struggling. I smile when I don't want people to know I'm sad. I laugh at inappropriate times, especially when I'm uncomfortable. I learned to bottle up all of my emotions because expressing anything other than happiness is bad. I learned to compartmentalize. I taught myself how to pull out the right emotion for the right occasion because I was always striving to be who I thought everyone else wanted me to be. It was exhausting.

In the midst of all of this, I'm trying to figure out which parts of me are really me and which parts of me are things that were put into my head. If you've experienced indoctrination, you know what I'm talking about. They pulled us apart as small children and placed us in specific boxes and told us that deviating from the norm was bad.

Crowley is a fallen angel. His change from angel to demon is drastic on the outside.

You know he fell and that his wings turned black and he ended up in a pool of boiling sulfur. It's the reason Crowley is so easy to sympathize with. He suffered unfairly because of arbitrary rules that deemed him unforgivable. He's accepted that part of himself. He's clever and creative and it has helped him find ways to get out of doing his job for centuries. Hell doesn't care how jobs get done just as long as someone does them, and at this point humanity is doing more to damn themselves than the demons are able to keep up with. They're tired and overworked. Hell is overpopulated even though it should be infinite in size. Crowley wants no part of that system because he sees it for what it is, just as he sees Heaven for what it is. He has the marks to prove that he is one of the damned, but that has given him all the perspective he needs to see that both sides are fucked up and toxic and "irredeemable" (just like him). He has yet to fully let go of the hold Heaven has over him because of how badly he got hurt.

Aziraphale is still an angel.

He never fell, and he doesn't know why. He has lied to God. He has lied to Gabriel repeatedly. He lies to protect Crowley. He lies to protect humanity.

Remember, Crowley and Aziraphale started off in the same place.

They both started off as angels who were created to do God's bidding. Aziraphale is the one who told Crowley what he'd heard about everything shutting down in 6,000 years. He was simply trying to make conversation. He didn't think it was something Crowley would object to. Angels were just supposed to go along with God's plans, but Crowley had a different opinion and was vocal about it. Where did Aziraphale get his information in the first place? Why does nobody ever ask this question?

Aziraphale knows Heaven is toxic. He's not blind. We need to move past this idea that because he still has love for God that he doesn't know Heaven is fucked up. He never fell, and it's something he still fears because who the hell doesn't fear the thought of eternal torment, especially if you know it's real? God has never cast him out of Heaven though and he doesn't know why. It's probably something that hangs over his head like the Sword of Damocles.

Letting go is not an easy task. Aziraphale has always been an angel. He didn't have his identity ripped from him the same way that Crowley did. Crowley had to adapt to a brand new way of existing because he was cast out of Heaven.

Crowley's trauma is evident on the outside. Aziraphale's trauma is hidden on the inside. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it isn't there.

Crowley was an angel and then he was a demon, but he doesn't want to be labeled as either.

Aziraphale has only ever known how to be an angel. He's only ever known the ways of Heaven.

I'm only in my early 40s. It has taken me 20+ years to undo 12 years of religious abuse. Aziraphale is immortal. He and Crowley have abandoned their jobs, but four years in the space of millions isn't a lot. No one overcomes indoctrination in four years. Especially when you had millions of years of blind obedience indoctrinated into you. It simply does not work that way no matter how much you want to believe it can.

It has taken me more than two decades to learn how to stop hating myself. I still have no idea how to love myself, but it's something I'm trying to learn.

My entire identity was wrapped up in what the church told me it would be. Once I fully denounced it and all organized religion, I found out I had no idea who I was. No one had prepared me for a life outside of this one very specific identity and role that I was expected to fill based on a very specific box I was placed into.

I still struggle with black and white concepts. It's hard to unlearn when you have no other basis for comparison, but that doesn't mean it's impossible. It means that these changes do not and will not ever happen overnight.

The fall didn't just affect the demons though. It affected the angels as well. Look at how tightly wound the angels are. They're always trying to do the good thing, but they have no idea what that actually means, and you realize this when Uriel asks The Metatron if they had done something wrong. They are scared of making mistakes, but none of them know what they are supposed to be doing since Gabriel disrupted the status quo. You can see they are unsure of themselves and of each other. The concept of free will is so foreign to them, but Aziraphale showed all of them that it was in their grasp when he allowed Gabriel and Beelzebub to decide where to go so they could be together.

It takes a lot of audacity (and sheer ignorance) to dismiss Aziraphale as power-hungry and abusive.

Aziraphale did nothing to punish Gabriel and Beelzebub. He allowed them to leave because they were in love with each other, and he knows what that feels like. He thought he was about to get the same fate with Crowley until The Metatron showed up and refused to take no for an answer.

He doesn't want to fix Heaven because he thinks it's perfect. If he thought it was perfect he wouldn't want to fix it.

Aziraphale is going back into the Lion's Den. He knows what he's going up against. He's been humiliated and belittled and abused by Heaven for thousands of years.

His scars are there even though you can't see them, and he hides his pain with humor and silliness.

When I see people advocating for Aziraphale to suffer even more because they don't think he has suffered enough, I find myself sitting back in one of those classrooms in Catholic school being told that I deserve the bad things that happen to me because I somehow failed to measure up to some impossible metric. The cruelty of that mindset aimed at Aziraphale is kinda the reason Crowley hates Heaven in the first place because he's been there too.

And as someone who is processing religious trauma, it's disheartening to see people say that because Aziraphale has yet to fully let go of Heaven that he deserves harsher treatment. Crowley would definitely not agree with that sentiment.

[weirdly-specific-but-ok]

Pt XIII good omens: The Adventures of Crowley and Aziraquail (Ages 3+)

@innefableidiot Shout out to you for my Good Omens villain arc origin story. I saw your Duck Omens, I reblogged it thinking I had too small of an attention span to watch a whole show, but the Duck Crowley and Aziraphale looked so adorable anyway. But I had flirted with the devil, Good Omens took over my dash, I made a summary, and here we are. This is in honour of you.

Good Omens, as a toddler's book. Yes I wrote an entire toddler's story for this post. If you do like this ridiculous thing, it would be nice if you could reblog it :") That's the only way it can get to more people. And god knows the children of divorce need a good bedtime story. So here you are, to heal the pain.

Crowley the Crow had always been a naughty little bird. Look at him go, flapping over the street... He wanted to steal something! Oh, no, Crowley. Stealing isn't very nice of you.

"I'm not nice," cawed Crowley. "Not nice at all."

Aziraquail the Quail sat near, on a telephone line. He was eating a piece of grain. Munch, munch, much, went Aziraquail. He saw Crowley and waved his wing.

"Crowley!" trilled Aziraquail. "What are you up to?"

"I'm going to steal something," said Crowley. He waved back. Aziraquail was his friend, and it is polite to greet your friends. That's how they know you care! "Look, Aziraquail, that human has a very shiny ring!"

"It is a very shiny ring," Aziraquail said, looking down. Aziraquail wanted to tell the truth. He didn't always succeed, but that's okay! It's very, very important to try. "But Crowley, you can't steal the very shiny ring! It doesn't belong to you."

Crowley was very confused. He landed on the telephone line beside Aziraquail. "But if the very shiny ring belonged to me, how would I steal it?"

Aziraquail sighed. But he decided to explain it to Crowley anyway. Sometimes, people aren't trying to be bad! They just don't know any better. "You shouldn't steal it at all, Crowley. Stealing will make the human sad."

"Oh goodie," said Crowley. "That sounds fun."

"No!" cried Aziraquail. Aziraquail didn't like the sound of that, not one bit. "Crowley, don't make the human sad. Or I shan't be your friend."

Crowley thought over that. He didn't like that. Aziraquail was his very best friend. Friends are very important, and Crowley knew that. But oh! He did so want that very shiny ring.

Crowley looked down at the human again. No, Crowley! Don't do it!

With a flap of his wings, and a flip of his wings, down Crowley flew, to snatch the human's very shiny ring! Oh, dear, Crowley. How very naughty of you.

But what was this? Crowley bumped straight into the human's head! He bounced off and away he went, landing with a huff on the pavement. That's the part next to the street.

The human was very cross. "Come back here, you bad bird!" she shouted. That wasn't polite of her, was it? When you're upset with someone, you shouldn't shout right away. What if it had been an accident?

"It wasn't an accident," said Crowley. He was grumpy. "I wanted to steal her very shiny ring."

Naughty Crowley.

The human ran towards Crowley to scold him. Poor Crowley! But just as the human stepped off the street, along came a very fast bike, and whoosh! Away it went, just missing the human.

Oh my. You mustn't speed on streets like that, very fast bike! You could have hit somebody. Look at that sign over there. This street is for pedestrians, too! Pedestrians is a grown-up way of saying people who aren't on a vehicle. Grown-ups like fancy words.

"Wait a moment," said the human. She stopped and looked at Crowley. "Oh, little crow, you saved me! I could have been hit!"

Crowley blinked. He was very confused. But he'd been trying to be naughty!

"Thank you!" said the human. "Oh, thank you, little bird. What can I do for you?" She looked down at her hand. "Crows like shiny things, don't they? Here, take this very shiny ring. I got it for free with sweets, and I don't even like it."

She gave Crowley the very shiny ring.

"Thank you," said Crowley, because he might be a naughty little crow, but he was a very polite little crow.

The human waved goodbye, and went on her way. Aziraquail landed on the pavement next to Crowley.

"Oh, Crowley," said Aziraquail. "You aren't very good at being naughty, are you?"

"Yes I am!" said Crowley.

Aziraquail smiled. "But you saved the human! And you didn't steal the ring. She gave it to you all by herself, as a reward. Isn't that much nicer?"

"I'm not nice," said Crowley. Oh, Crowley, you silly, silly, crow. "Well, if I'd done it your way, she wouldn't have been saved! So you aren't very good at being nice."

Aziraquail looked sad. Crowley didn't like that. Aziraquail was his friend, and friends don't make each other sad.

"I'm sorry," said Crowley. "But don't you want to know why I wanted the very shiny ring?"

Oh my, Crowley. Why did you want the very shiny ring?

"To be naughty," said Aziraquail. He was still hurt. Sometimes, even when you say sorry, it isn't enough. And that's okay.

"No," said Crowley. He held it out with his little crow beak, and put it on Aziraquail's foot! "It was for you! Because you're my very best friend."

"We're not friends," said Aziraquail. Sometimes, when we're hurt, we say things we don't mean.

Crowley looked sad. "We're not?"

Aziraquail thought and thought. And decided that he had been rather silly. "I'm sorry," he said too. "Of course we're friends. Thank you for the very shiny ring, Crowley!"

Crowley smiled his naughty little smile.

And then, oh my! How cute. Aziraquail leaned over and gave Crowley a kiss on his feathery little cheek. "It's very pretty. I love you, Crowley!"

It is very important to tell your friends that you love them. You don't have to say it with words. Crowley said it with a little kiss back, because he was too shy to speak.

What a very nice crow you are, Crowley.

"I'm not nice!"

"Crowley!"

"Okay, fine, just a little bit."

The End.

[wesalvarezart]



New Illustrations:

Oldest of Friends by WesAlvarez.Art

After the characters by Neil Gaiman

#Illustration #cutie #GoodOmens #Crowley #Aziraphale #Eden #illustration #NewArt

[grey-and-green]

Ineffable (pre-2000's) Timeline

Before the Beginning 

We don’t know how long before The Beginning this was, or how long they may have known each other in ‘heaven’ before Eden. We don’t know if one (or both) of them had their memory of the other erased (I think there's quite a lot of speculation about this, so I can't link just one example).  

Angel!Crowley is the most adorable thing in all creation, but he asks some very innocent and appropriate questions and Aziraphale is scared for him (and maybe scared of him?) 

Crowley shelters Aziraphale with their wing. Adorable. Love it. 

4004 BC: Eden 

Aziraphale gives away his flaming sword in his first official act of doing-good-against-God’s-wishes and Crowley immediately fucking eats it up.

"You're an angel, I don't think you can do the wrong thing" is well-intentioned but probably sets up a less-than-helpful anchoring point for Aziraphale's morality (see various points below about Aziraphale's moral evolution trajectory and rationalising Heaven's actions).

Aziraphale shelters Crowley from the rain (and the best part is that Crowley moves in, closer to Aziraphale, BEFORE Aziraphale puts his wing up. Fucking lovebirds. Ridiculous) 

3004 BC: The Flood 

Crowley seeks out Aziraphale at the flood. Essentially just shows up to flirt.

Aziraphale clearly doesn’t like the flood-and-death plan but he also isn’t ready to speak negatively about God. He defends the flood as “not that bad” and goes all “no comment” about killing kids (because he can’t actually defend that bit). Not a huge fan of heaven already by this point, but either too brainwashed or too scared (or both) to actively say anything non-conforming out loud.

Crowley is appalled by the idea of killing children, has always been a rebellious little cinnamon roll.

“You still have one [unicorn]” implies that Crowley either doesn’t know the point of the Ark (unlikely, he didn’t show up here by chance) or he doesn’t know about the birds and the bees. (Is it at all possible that Bildad The Professional Cobbler/Midwife still didn’t know what sex and childbirth were? No solid evidence that he had any plan other than pulling the ribs out. He’s so stupid)

(Theory: Others have considered that this meeting was more involved than what we’ve been shown so far because 1- by the Job incident Aziraphale is real damn convinced that Crowley won’t hurt the kids and 2- “sudden rainstorm forces them together under a canopy” doesn’t actually fit with either of the times our lovebirds sheltered the other under their respective wings, because neither time was sheltering “together”. So maybe this sudden rainstorm is what Crowley is actually referencing and there’s more here we haven’t seen). (Theory 2.0 is this wildly long meta that basically is a dissertation on why the kissed during the Flood and I’m here for it).

2500 BC: The Job Incident 

Ugh, I love this episode. Nothing but endless love for our baby Bildad.  

Appears to be a chance meeting between them.

They BOTH DEFY ORDERS to save the children.  

When the bird-goats make a noise, Crowley turns around before Aziraphale says anything. He was HOPING that Aziraphale would catch on, he was baiting his Angel to see that he was going to save the kids. Which, I mean, we all already know Crowley is a softie and he’s not really tried that hard to hide it from Aziraphale in the history we’ve seen so far, so…tone down the evil demon cosplay, babe. We’re past that.

Crowley saving the kids isn’t surprising. But we actually have a big jump for Aziraphale here. When we originally only had the Flood and the Crucifixion in S1, the evolution of Aziraphale’s “defence” of Heaven seems subtle and slow between those two short scenes. But throwing this epic story in the middle? Genuinely a MASSIVE shift from rationalising Heaven’s plans for the flood to assuming he knows what God is thinking + actively collaborating with a demon and trusting a demon more than his fellow angels + willing to be literally damned to save three random kids. (Could easily argue that this seeming anachronism in Aziraphale’s arc [along with Bildad’s stupid hair] makes it all the more plausible that there is a magic trick happening here).

Aziraphale says that Crowley is “technically” a demon. (I see what you’re getting at there. I see you, Aziraphale) 

Aziraphale tries human food for the first time. Odd sexual tension. I won’t elaborate.

When Aziraphale is sitting by the ocean, he’s waiting to be punished and thinks that’s why Crowley came over. But Crowley doesn’t know this. He was just coming over to spend more time with Aziraphale for totally platonic reasons.

Crowley has the chance to take Aziraphale to hell as a demon, and declines (hmmm, foreshadowing us all getting our hearts ripped out a few short episodes later???) 

Crowley’s appearance: people have speculated on why they look so different here compared to the Flood and the Crucifixion. My theory is that the other to flashbacks (seen in S1) are Crowley going about her life and just popping in to flirt with Aziraphale, whereas with Job, Crowley is showing up to work. The Bildad getup is a work outfit, demon cosplay. Long hair and no sunglasses is Crowley being himself, and silly hair silly glasses is creating a character to play while hiding his eyes because humans are around AND he’s vulnerable when hell is watching.

Bonus happy thought: when they get the kids in the cellar they start bickering like an old married couple/BLATANTLY flirting and the kids are just...so confused. Fucking delightful.  

33 AD: Crucifixion 

Crowley seeks out Aziraphale.  

Crowley has changed their name.  

By this time, when Crowley says “Heaven’s being a bit shitty” Aziraphale doesn’t actually defend Heaven? “I’m not consulted on policy decisions” is much closer to “I know they’re awful but I can’t change anything” as opposed to trying to rationalise that heaven must, by default, be good. (See note above about Aziraphale’s non-linear moral evolution).

Not much else here except Crowley looking their absolute most gorgeous in all of history.  

41 AD: Rome 

Crowley having a bad day. A lot of people have written about how after the Crucifixion and everything else that has happened so far, baby bean is fucking disillusioned as all hell.  

Crowley makes obvious ploy to get Aziraphale to ask him on a date, and it works. Delightful.  

Bonus happy thought: the little pins each of them is wearing on their togas? The fucking angel wings and the snake? Nothing but love for the Good Omens costume department.

537 AD: Wessex knights

No idea if they’ve met between Rome and now, but I’m pretty sure they have? Aziraphale recognizes Crowley’s voice immediately, I feel like they’ve talked sometime (oodles of times?) in the previous 500 years.  

Proposed Arrangement. Aziraphale very dramatically declines for corporate reasons. Not so much “working together is wrong” but that “working together is against the rules”.  

Could possibly argue that this feels like a step backwards for Aziraphale since the Job incident. But I think, no? With Job, the stakes were high and they were literally saving innocent lives. Here, The Arrangement is presented more like cheating on homework. Like, this is just a report for work, I’m not going to risk being reprimanded for something trivial like faking a sick day. Because Aziraphale still wants Heaven’s (God’s) approval quite badly: he’ll risk his life to save human lives, but not to save himself a trek to a castle.

1601: Globe Theatre 

By the now The Arrangement is well established. Aziraphale puts up a very lazy fight against it, but caves almost immediately.  

We can see already that Aziraphale is concerned that Crowley could get in trouble over their relationship, but I don’t think he has really realized how much danger Crowley is in? Like, if he genuinely thought destruction was on the line, he might have protested more. But it’s still important here that Aziraphale is concerned with Crowley’s safety above his own.  

I believe Aziraphale asked Crowley to meet up at the theatre from what Crowley says about “you said we would blend in with the crowds”.  

Bonus happy thought: I’ve seen people speculate about whether the coin toss was rigged. I choose to believe they BOTH rigged it so that Aziraphale would go to Scotland bc Crowley didn’t want to go, and Aziraphale knows that Crowley can’t ride a horse so was totally keen to save him from that ordeal.  

1650: not shown

Something happens and Aziraphale does the “I was wrong” dance 

I wrote elsewhere that this could be a promise of something we will be shown in Season 3 -OR- it could be a Clue that memories are missing (see The Magic Trick You Didn’t See)

Also, despite all the wonderful suggestions people have from actual history about what these two might have gotten mixed up in in 1650, my personal prediction is that if we see this in Season 3, the actual Thing that led to the dance will be extremely trivial, like Aziraphale knocks over Crowley's drink or something.

1793: The Bastille 

Aziraphale gets himself in a damsel-in-distress situation and Crowley “has to” save him. Obvious ploy to go on a date. Flawless.

Crowley is clearly following Aziraphale around, since he showed up at exactly the right time. Zero coincidence detected.

Aziraphale has absolutely no issue with the executioner being beheaded in his place. Bit ruthless to sacrifice a random stranger for the cause of taking your crush out to lunch.

At some point, Aziraphale does the “I was wrong” dance here. Hopefully over crepes.  

1827: Scotland 

Crowley essentially just takes Aziraphale on a date to a graveyard. Such a mood.  

Some obvious moral struggles for Aziraphale starting to realize that good and bad are not black and white and that extenuating circumstances exist.  

Whether or not you believe that this memory was tampered with, when Morag is dying, Aziraphale essentially asks for Crowley’s moral guidance. He could have just healed Morag, but he defers to Crowley for ?permission...I don’t know for sure, but it feels significant that he wants Crowley’s approval here before doing ‘good’. That has to mean something.  

“Last I saw of him for some time” is, at most, 35 years between here and St James Park, which means they are meeting up a lot more frequently now. We’re not regularly going decades/centuries between dates anymore. 

Edit: As others have noted, the wording in this diary entry is actually odd because when Aziraphale is writing this, he MUST have already seen Crowley again for that last bit to make sense. Which means we actually probably have quite a lot of “us time” between the Elsbeth flashback and St James park.

1862: St James Park 

Likely Definitely not the first time they have met up since the Scotland flashback (see edit above).

I THINK this is the first time we see Aziraphale’s personal tartan show up? He’s now officially created his own clan on Earth and is NOT wearing the official tartan of heaven. He later gives this tartan to Crowley which is Significant. 

Since our last meeting, Crowley has been dragged back to Hell and, presumably, punished, for what he did with Elsbeth/Morag. (The time spent in Hell was likely not necessarily a LONG time but still seems like it was a sobering event for Crowley where he seems to catch up with Aziraphale about how much danger they might be in).

Crowley asks for the holy water because he now realizes that he may need to protect himself (and Aziraphale?) from Hell if and when they figure out the scope of his ‘breach of the infernal code’ and retaliate.

1941: London Blitz 

Accepted by fans as likely the first time they have met up since the breakup in St James Park. As with the Bastille scene, it’s very clear that Crowley has been keeping track of Aziraphale (if not actively just following him around).

Obviously, canonically, the moment when Aziraphale realizes he is in love with Crowley.

Immediately after this realization, Aziraphale also realises how much Crowley is at risk from Hell by continuing to associate with him. This does not stop them from having a romantic glass of wine back at the bookshop.

Photograph of Crowley and Aziraphale exists, no clues as to what happens to it/who keeps it after the events of this night. I hope it’s in the photo album that I assume Aziraphale keeps with his diaries and little drawings of Crowley he’s made over the millennia.

At some point, presumably on this same night, Aziraphale does the “I was wrong” dance, but we don’t get to see that. Yet.

(Side note: I feel like by this point in their relationship, it’s really got to sting when Aziraphale assumes Crowley is the cause of whatever horrific thing humans are doing. I mean, what in the past 6,000 years would point to Crowley wanting to actually help nazis? It’s not funny anymore, Aziraphale, stop re-traumatising your boyfriend with baseless accusations.)

1967: Soho Heist 

Crowley plans the heist in the pub that is literally across the road from Aziraphale’s book shop 

Aziraphale finally gives Crowley holy water – whether this is because he’s actually worried about the danger of the heist, or if he has just come to his senses about the fact that Crowley is in mortal danger from Hell and may actually need a way to escape them if things go pear-shaped, or whether he’s just acts-of-love reaching out....could speculate for days on that.

He gives Crowley the holy water in a thermos with his personal tartan on it. 100% on their own side. Adorable.

Aziraphale isn’t wearing his bow tie in this scene. He still has his tartan, but he’s wearing it as a cravat instead, with his shirt unbuttoned at the top. I genuinely don’t know what this is supposed to mean, but the costume department is too good for it to be random. (It supposed to be flirty? Like, ooh, top button undone, basically naked? And that just necessitated losing the bow tie? Is there sartorial symbolism here about a cravat vs bow tie that I’m missing? Tell me what’s going on!?!)

“You go too fast for me” (ugh, gutted every time) 

Additional event: year unknown

In their earlier flashbacks, we see them travelling the world for their jobs.

At some point they both end up permanently stationed in London.

My assumption is - that originally it was just the two of them on earth, possibly for thousands of years. Then their territory was limited to the British Isles, and eventually, when there were too many “oodles” of humans, they both ended up just looking after London.

So, who was assigned to London first? Because it’s not a blind coincidence they’re both specifically in London - one got assigned to the London first and the other one deliberately FOLLOWED.

I am still updating this as I re-watch and read other folks’ posts.

These are mostly my observations with a few additional things thrown in that I’ve seen people discuss already here on Tumblr. I will try to link to them best I can, but my Good Omens saved posts are massive and I’m not sure I can find all the original posts who's theories I’ve mentioned here

[captainfantasticalright]

Can you believe that the first ever depictions of Aziraphale and Crowley and the rest of the Good Omens ensamble where not for the TV series nor even for the cover in the U.K. or USA, but the first ever depictions were done by David Frampton inside the US edition published by Workman in 1990?

Yes, these guys right here were the original Aziraphale and Crowley.

David Frampton has been an illustrator for nearly 30 years and has been especially attracted to doing illustrations for children's books. He has also been the author and illustrator of a collection of children's stories and author/illustrator of a book based on a poem by Lawrence Ferlinghetti.

His method of illustration is always color woodcut - simple, in his self imposed limit of four colors, but complex in the planning and execution of the narrative images. Even so, his work often demonstrates the beautiful drama of light and shadow without the need of colors.

In an interview he said:

Often when I describe the process to someone and they come to realize just how involved and time consuming the process is, they inevitably ask,"Couldn't you get the job done faster and easier with paint or crayons?" The answer is "yes," but it's not as much fun. I just like doing woodcuts. When you look at the finished print it has a certain look, a look that says, "This picture was done by hand.'" You can see the process in the picture itself. You can see that someone took a flat piece of wood and carved a picture on it. You can see that paint was applied to that surface and then that surface was pressed against a piece of paper.

Frampton has illustrated a number of various books on folk tales, mythology, legends, and such. He illustrated an album cover for the British rock group Jethro Tull ("Stand Up").

Frampton studied art at the Rhode Island School of Design.

So whenever you see those little illustrations, think about the work that went into each of them because they’re more than that, they’re woodcuts specially designed for Good Omens.

[fuckyeahgoodomens]

The Radio Times magazine from the 29 July-04 August 2023 :)

THE SECOND COMING

How did Terry Pratchett and Neil gaiman overcome the small matter of Pratchett's death to make another series of their acclaimed divine comedy?

For all the dead authors in the world,” legendary comedy producer John Lloyd once said, “Terry Pratchett is the most alive.” And he’s right. Sir Terry is having an extremely busy 2023… for someone who died in 2015.

This week sees the release of Good Omens 2, the second series of Amazon’s fantasy comedy drama based on the cult novel Pratchett co-wrote with Neil Gaiman in the late 1980s. This will be followed in the autumn by a new spin-off book from Pratchett’s Discworld series, Tiffany Aching’s Guide to Being a Witch, co-written by Pratchett’s daughter Rhianna and children’s author Gabrielle Kent. The same month, we’ll also get A Stroke of the Pen, a collection of “lost” short stories written by Sir Terry for local newspapers in the 70s and 80s and recently rediscovered. Clearly, while there are no more books coming from Pratchett – a hard drive containing all drafts and unpublished work was crushed by a vintage steamroller shortly after the author’s death, as per his specific wishes – people still want to visit his vivid and addictive worlds in new ways.

Good Omens 2 will be the first test of how this can work. The original book started life as a 5,000-word short story by Gaiman, titled William the Antichrist and envisioned as a bit of a mashup of Richmal Crompton’s Just William books and the 70s horror classic The Omen. What would happen, Gaiman had mused, if the spawn of Satan had been raised, not by a powerful American diplomat, but by an extremely normal couple in an idyllic English village, far from the influence of hellish forces? He’d sent the first draft to bestselling fantasy author Pratchett, a friend of many years, and then forgotten about it as he busied himself with continuing to write his massively popular comic books, including Violent Cases, Black Orchid and The Sandman, which became a Netflix series last year.

Pratchett loved the idea, offering to either buy the concept from Gaiman or co-write it. It was, as Gaiman later said, “like Michelangelo phoning and asking if you want to paint a ceiling” The pair worked on the book together from that point on, rewriting each other as they went and communicating via long phone calls and mailed floppy discs. “The actual mechanics worked like this: I would do a bit, then Neil would take it away and do a bit more and give it back to me,” Pratchett told Locus magazine in 1991. “We’d mess about with each other’s bits and pieces.”

Good Omens: The Nice and Accurate Prophecies of Agnes Nutter, Witch – to give it its full title –was published in 1990 to huge acclaim. It was one of, astonishingly, five Terry Pratchett novels to be published that year (he averaged two a year, including 41 Discworld novels and many other standalone works and collaborations).

It was also, clearly, extremely filmable, and studios came knocking — though getting it made took a while. rnvo decades on from its writing, four years after Pratchett's death from Alzheimer's disease aged 66, and after several doomed attempts to get a movie version off the ground, Good Omens finally made it to TV screens in 2019, scripted and show-run by Gaiman himself. "Terry was egging me on to make it into television. He knew he was dying, and he knew that I wouldn't start it without him," Gaiman revealed in a 2019 Radio Times interview. Amazon and the BBC co-produced with Pratchett's company Narrativia and Gaiman's Blank Corporation production studios, with Michael Sheen and David Tennant cast in the central roles of Aziraphale the angel and Crowley the demon. The show was a hit, not just with fans of its two creators, but with a whole new young audience, many of whom had no interest in Discworld or Sandman. Social media networks like Tumblr and TikTok were soon awash with cosplay, artwork and fan fiction. The original novel became, for the first time, a New York Times bestseller.

A follow up was, on one level, a no-brainer. The world Pratchett and Gaiman had created was vivid, funny and accessible, and Tennant and Sheen had found an intriguing romantic spark in their chemistry not present in the novel.

There was, however, a huge problem. There wasn't a second Good Omens book to base it on. But there was the ghost of an idea.

In 1989, after the book had been sold but before it had come out, the two authors had laid on fivin beds in a hotel room at a convention in Seattle and, jet-lagged and unable to sleep, plotted out, in some detail, what would happen in a sequel, provisionally titled 668, The II Neighbour of the Beast.

"It was a good one, too" Gaiman wrote in a 2021 blog. "We fully intended to write it, whenever we next had three or four months free. Only I went to live in America and Terry stayed in the UK, and after Good Omens was published, Sandman became SANDMAN and Discworld became DISCWORLD(TM) and there wasn't a good time."

Back in 1991, Pratchett elaborated, "We even know some of the main characters in it. But there's a huge difference between sitting there chatting away, saying, 'Hey, we could do this, we could do that,' and actually physically getting down and doing it all again." In 2019, Gaiman pillaged some of those ideas for Good Omens series one (for example, its final episode wasn't in the book at all), and had left enough threads dangling to give him an opening for a sequel. This is the well he's returned to for Good Omens 2, co-writing with comic John Finnemore - drafted in, presumably, to plug the gap left Pratchett's unparalleled comedic mind. No small task.

Projects like Good Omens 2 are an important proving ground for Pratchett's legacy: can the universes he conjured endure without their creator? And can they stay true to his spirit? Sir Terry was famously protective of his creations, and there have been remarkably few adaptations of his work considering how prolific he was. "What would be in it for me?" he asked in 2003. "Money? I've got money."

He wanted his work treated reverently and not butchered for the screen. It's why Good Omens and projects like Tiffany Aching's Guide to Being a Witch are made with trusted members of the inner circle like Neil Gaiman and Rhianna Pratchett at the helm. It's also why the author's estate, run by Pratchett's former assistant and business manager Rob Wilkins, keeps a tight rein on any licensed Pratchett material — it's a multi-million dollar media empire still run like a cottage industry.

And that's heartening. Anyone who saw BBC America's panned 2021 Pratchett adaptation The Watch will know how badly these things can go when a studio is allowed to run amok with the material without oversight. These stories deserve to be told, and these worlds deserve to be explored — properly. And there are, apparently, many plans afoot for more Pratchett on the screen. You can only hope that, somewhere, he'll be proud of the results.

After all, as he wrote himself, "No one is finally dead until the ripples they cause in the world die away, until the clock wound up winds down, until the wine she made has finished its ferment, until the crop they planted is harvested. The span of someone's life is only the core of their actual existence."

While those ripples continue to spread, Sir Terry Pratchett remains very much alive. MARC BURROWS

DIVINE DUO

An angel and a demon walk into a pub... Michael Sheen and David Tennant on family, friendship and Morecambe & Wise

Outside it's cold winter's day and we're in a Scottish studio, somewhere between Edinburgh and Glasgow. But inside it's lunchtime in The Dirty Donkey pub in the heart of London, with both Michael Sheen and David Tennant surveying the scene appreciatively. "This is a great pub," says Sheen eagerly, while Tennant calls it "the best Soho there can be. A slightly heightened, immaculate, perfect, dreamy Soho."

Here, a painting of the absent landlord — the late Terry Pratchett, co-creator, with Neil Gaiman, of the series' source novel — looms over punters. Around the corner is AZ Fell and Co Antiquarian and Unusual Books. It's the bookshop owned by Sheen's character, the angel Aziraphale, and the place to where Tennant's demon Crowley is inevitably drawn.

It's day 74 of an 80-day shoot for a series that no one, least of all the leading actors, ever thought would happen, due to the fact that Pratchett and Gaiman hadn't ever published any sequel to their 1990 fantasy satire. Tennant explains, "What we didn't know was that Neil and Terry had had plots and plans..."

Still, lots of good things are in Good Omens 2, which expands on the millennia-spanning multiverse of the first series. These include a surprisingly naked side of John Hamm, and roles for both Tennant's father-in-law (Peter Davison) and 21-year-old son Ty. At its heart, though, remains the brilliant banter between the two leading men — as Sheen puts it, "very Eric and Ernie !" — whose chemistry on the first series led to one of the more surprising saviours of lockdown telly.

Good Omens is back — but you've worked together a lot in the meantime. Was there a connective tissue between series one of Good Omens and Staged, your lockdown sitcom?

David: Only in as much as the first series went out, then a few months later, we were all locked in our houses. And because of the work we'd done on Good Omens, it occurred that we might do something else. I mean, Neil Gaiman takes full responsibility for Staged. Which, to some extent, he's probably right to do!

Michael: We've got to know each other through doing this. Our lives have gotten more entwined in all kinds of ways — we have children who've now become friends, and our families know each other.

There have been hints of a romantic storyline between the two characters. How much of an undercurrent is that in this series.

David: Nothing's explicit.

Michael: I felt from the very beginning that part of what would be interesting to explore is that Aziraphale is a character, a being, who just loves. How does that manifest itself in a very specific relationship with another being? Inevitably, as there is with everything in this story, there's a grey area. The fact that people see potentially a "romantic relationship", I thought that was interesting and something to explore.

There was a petition to have the first series banned because of its irreverent take on Christian tropes. Series two digs even more deeply into the Bible with the story of Job. How much of a badge of honour is it that the show riles the people who like to ban things?

David: It's not an irreligious show at all. It's actually very respectful of the structure of that sort of religious belief. The idea that it promotes Satanism [is nonsense]. None of the characters from hell are to be aspired to at all! They're a dreadful bunch of non-entities. People are very keen to be offended, aren't they? They're often looking for something to glom on to without possibly really examining what they think they're complaining about.

Michael, you're known as an activist, and you're in the middle of Making BBC drama The Way, which "taps into the social and political chaos of today's world". Is it important for you to use your plaform to discuss causes you believe in?

Michael: The Way is not a political tract, it's just set in the area that I come from. But it has to matter to you, doesn't it? More and more as I get older, [I find] it can be a real slog doing this stuff. You've got to enjoy it. And if it doesn't matter to you, then it's just going to be depressing.

David, Michael has declared himself a "not-for-profit" actor. Has he tried to persuade you to give up all your money too?

David: What an extraordinary question! One is always aware that one has a certain responsibility if one is fortunate and gets to do a job that often doesn't feel like a job. You want to do your bit whenever you can. But at the same time, I'm an actor. I'm not about to give that up to go into politics or anything. But I'll do what I can from where I live.

Well, your son and your father-in-law are also starring in this series. How about that, jobs for the boys!

David: I know! It was a delight to get to be on set with them. And certainly an unexpected one for me. Neil, on two occasions, got to bowl up to me and say, "Guess who we've cast?!"

How do you feel about your US peers going on strike?

David: It's happening because there are issues that need to be addressed. Nobody's doing this lightly. These are important issues, and they've got to be sorted out for the future of our industry. There's this idea that writers and actors are all living high on the hog. For huge swathes of our industry, that's just not the case. These people have got to be protected.

Michael: We have to be really careful that things don't slide back to the way they were pre the 1950s, when the stories that we told were all coming from one point of view and the stories of certain people, or communities within our society, weren't represented. There's a sense that now that's changed for ever and it'll never go back. But you worry when people can't afford to have the opportunities that other people have. We don't want the story that we tell about ourselves to be myopic. You want it to be as inclusive as possible

Staged series 3 recently broadcast. It felt like the show's last hurrah — or is there more mileage? Sheen and Tennant go on holiday?

David: That's the Christmas special! One Foot in the Algarve! On the Buses Go to Spain!

Michael: I don't think we were thinking beyond three, were we?

So is it time for a conscious uncoupling for you two — Eric and Ernie say goodbye?

David: Oh, never say never, will we?

Michael: And it's more Hinge and Bracket.

David: Maybe that's what we do next — The Hinge and Bracket Story. CRAIG McLEAN

[ao3cassandraic]

Meta roundup

I can't even find all my own meta any more, so here's my attempt to fix that!

s2's Final Fifteen Minutes, and Related Posts

You can kind of see my thoughts evolving here. I'm not displeased at that!

When angels overplay

Kayfabe: A Good Omens meta

Prologue

Part 1

Part 2, The Chinwag

Part 3, The Fiasco

Part 4, The Aftermath

Heaven and Hell as surveillance states

Coffee as forced-teaming tactic

Crowley refusing complicity

The Metatron failing Aziraphale's tests

Aziraphale may justly feel abandoned by Crowley

Why does the Metatron even want Aziraphale?

Jimbriel the Holy Fool

Jimbriel the Holy Fool (cw: historical ableism around mental health and cognitive ability)

The almost-defenestration scene, what Crowley is up to

The almost-defenestration scene, ending

Aziraphale's memory, Jimbriel, the Metatron, and forgiveness

Muriel

"No one" and Odyssey intertextuality

Muriel as possible s3 mole

Muriel as bookshop proprietor

Good Omens God is a Horror

Good Omens God is a m-fing open-source techbro

Good Omens God as abusive parent to the Ineffables

Crowley the Maker, God the Wrecker: Part 1, Part 2

Costume Meta

Jimbriel's ball costume

Clothing and identity in Good Omens

Color on angels (from s2 preview)

Crowley's 1941 costume and the Blackshirts

Crowley's sleeve garter

Crowley's bee!demon getup

Bildad the Shuhite

s2 Dagon

s2 Uriel

Saraqael

s2 Michael

Muriel

s2 Beelzebub

Jimbriel

Shax, also Shax, original Shax (with some wrong guesses)

Random Intertextuality

With Gulliver's Travels

s2 as tragedic in structure

Dies Irae

Britten's War Requiem

With Nineteen Eighty-Four

Miscellaneous Other Meta

Angels, demons, language, and culture: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4

Saraqael, Heaven's Only Competent Angel

Heaven's so-called command team

The ineffable educators

"Funny old world" (Crowley in the elevator)

do be do be do

Job's children as Heaven microcosm

Crowley and the Bentley: partners in threat

a Bentley headcanon (n.b. this one's been Neiled, but I still think it's cute)

Crowley loves his Bentley

Is Heaven even literate? And sequel ("yes, but").

Aziraphale's deeply crappy work situation, compassion fatigue

The Ineffables' understanding of love: love as ritual

Schools of ethics in Good Omens

Can Heaven and Hell attribute miracles?

As far as they can: how Aziraphale and Crowley interact differently with their head offices

[thesherrinfordfacility]

the thing that is actually making me giddy with the possible angst is that i really think that we are about to see the most monumental shift in not only how we saw these characters but also how they previously saw each other.

the fact that we literally now have confirmation that a) they knew each other before the fall, b) aziraphale has had heart eyes since before time began, and c) crowley... possibly not so much, completely changes the context on not just the eden scene but also all the historic scenes that followed.

aziraphale knew crowley as an angel, and knew even then when crowley was meant to be 'perfect' that crowley was maybe a bit different, always asking questions and toeing the line. maybe out of a bit of bastardy himself, or out of begrudging awe of his ability but also his audacity, or just plain attraction, aziraphale immediate takes to him. but this has meant that aziraphale has placed crowley, perhaps unconsciously, upon a pedestal. and the pedestal that aziraphale puts crowley on from that moment may have wobbled throughout their history together, but it's stayed relatively intact.

this worries me, that aziraphale may not have quite let go of the fact that crowley just isn't that person any more, maybe never was to begin with, and continues in some measure to idolise him. my interpretation of this is that yes, crowley can be a bit of a dick (because, well, obviously) and aziraphale knows this, has done since the beginning, but aziraphale continues to hold crowley to an overall moral ideal that is so firmly ensconced in aziraphale's first perception of him as an angel that crowley will never be able to live up to it. not because he isn't a nice person, or because he can't live up to it, but maybe... he just simply doesn't want to.

but the issue is that throughout the ages (including the job minisode which ive had corrected for me, so Crowley Anger is now simply simmering), crowley's actions have only reinforced to aziraphale that despite being technically a demon, he has a huge heart and is not a horrible person. bit of a bastard, but not cruel. all of this just feeds and feeds into this image of crowley that aziraphale has built of him, and when crowley has his flashes of, in fact, not being honourable or kind, this threatens to upset the pedestal altogether.

these wobbly moments - when he thinks crowley is going to kill the children, when crowley snaps at him in rome, when crowley first proposes the arrangement, the prospect that he came up with the french revolt, the holy water request, the bandstand, "how can someone as clever as you be so stupid?"... moments where just for a second, in a small or huge measure, aziraphale's faith in crowley... flickers.

and of course aziraphale has been here before, right? he's had his faith, his devotion, his loyalty tested to the absolute limit of angelic endurance. so when his faith in heaven (never lost it in god) was obliterated, well - it had to cling to something. something that wouldnt mean that aziraphale has to lose the concept of faith altogether. so we're back to the old standby of idolatry, that aziraphale's heavenly faith is replaced by his faith in crowley, this angel that despite never originally giving aziraphale the time of day, aziraphale cannot see - for all of crowley's faults and bastardy and the frustration he poses - crowley as anything less than something to be worshipped.

this is exactly why i think that one of the main points of s2 is going to be a rift between them both. obviously i haven't talked about crowley's perspective of this and maybe i will in another post, but i do think that crowley is going to do something, a bad thing for the right reasons, but aziraphale isn't going to see it like that. that crowley will do something awful to protect aziraphale, but all aziraphale will be able to see is the betrayal or the cruelty or the despair, he can't see wood for the trees, and just lose that last vestige of faith he had altogether.

i feel like once all the disillusion and disenchantment has been swept away, and they're both laid bare at each other's feet... that they may not quite like what they find. from aziraphale's perspective, that whatever crowley does in s2 might be crossing aziraphale's line in the sand, and now aziraphale is starting to see crowley as someone that is truly grey, fluctuating between doing things that are Good, and things that are Good for Crowley.

and it's not as if aziraphale was blind to this before, but instead now... he kind of finally sees who crowley is? who he has been all along? the film has lifted from his eyes. realises that love and worship are not the same thing. what he loves, who he loves, doesn't equate to worshipping it/them, idolising them. there's a very big difference that echoes down to the very core tenet of who aziraphale is and his experiences with having and losing faith, but love having remained.

so stripped of the pedestal, crowley is now just simply... crowley. a person, not an angel, not a demon. and there is the distinct possibility that aziraphale might be completely blindsided by what he finds.

[createserenity]

What are the rainbows all about?

There’s more than one. We all know about the rainbow that fades in over Crowley after the failed awning kiss scene, but what about the other times they appear? This is just after he talks to Nina about how she feels about sudden rain so it might just be linked to that.

Why a rainbow here though? I don’t think it’s just the connotations of the rain being similar to the rain in The Flood. Crowley covers the sky with black clouds and then doesn’t miracle them away so for these to instantly disperse and a rainbow to appear (we see the sun is instantly back and everyone has put down their umbrellas through the bookshop window) seems like it would need some outside influence. Should we interpret as being a sign sent by somebody? And if so, who? The Almighty?

If you ask someone what the meaning and purpose of the rainbow is in the story of Noah’s Ark they will generally say it’s a sign to humans that God won’t flood the earth/destroy all life again, with the implication that the rainbow is for humans to remind us of this. That is partly the intention, and it’s established truth in the GO universe because Aziraphale tells Crowley that the Almighty is going to put up a rainbow “as a promise not to drown everyone again”. 

There is another purpose to the rainbow though in the “real world” Bible, one which is repeated several times during God’s speech to Noah in Genesis.

“Whenever I bring clouds over the earth and the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will remember my covenant between me and you and all living creatures of every kind. (…) Whenever the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and all living creatures of every kind on the earth.”

This is God speaking here, so the I is God. They’re saying that future rainbows will not be sent by them, but will appear naturally and will serve as a reminder to themself that they promised not to drown everyone again. What God is saying in this part of the Bible seems to be along the lines of, you humans are imperfect and this angers me, but also I know I am vengeful and that this is not good. Because I’m fallible and liable to forget my promise I’m making this thing that will appear of its own accord in certain conditions to remind me to check my vengeful nature.

It's interesting really because God is supposed to be infallible, that’s one of the main points, except this speech by God is suggesting quite literally that they know they are fallible. If they weren’t they wouldn’t need a reminder.

I guess how the rainbow over Crowley is interpreted depends on how much whoever decided to put it there from the GO production team really knows about the story of the rainbow. If they only know that it as a sign to humans then it could have an entirely different meaning than if the decision to put it there was made by someone who knows it was a reminder to God as well.

Why does the rainbow appear here?

Since the rainbow is to remind God not to end all life on earth again could this be something to do with season 3? A reminder of that promise and a suggestion that the Almighty herself doesn’t actually want life ended? I’m not so sure about this one because we are repeatedly shown that in GO the Almighty is fully capable of doing cruel things (like sentencing Job’s children to death – unless we see this as weird complicated test of Crowley because God is playing a game of her own devising), so to have it suddenly turned around and have her not be in control of the divine plan seems odd (but then she is odd, absolutely bonkers if her speech to Job is anything to go by – the Almighty of the GO universe doesn’t seem very sane or logical).

It’s also strange that the rainbow, a promise to humanity and reminder to the Almighty not to drown everyone again is followed by Gabriel saying, “There will come a tempest, and darkness, and great storms”. So what is that saying about the original promise? Or what is the rainbow telling us about the statement that follows?

Maybe it’s more literally related to the vavoom moment Crowley is trying to create here. We’ve just watched a deluge of water ruin his attempts to get Maggie and Nina to fall in love. Could the awning ripping be interpreted as an act of God? If so the rainbow could be some sort of comment on that act and the fact that it meant his attempt at creating that moment for Nina and Maggie didn’t go quite right. A sort of, I did say I wouldn’t drown everyone again, but I couldn’t let this vavoom moment work so I had to drown (soak) them. If so that begs the questions – why? Why did the Almighty not want this particular moment to work out? Simply thwarting a demon’s plans, or something more?

I don’t really have any answers here. These are all just random musings, maybe someone who is better at research and interpretation of scenes can take up these questions. It’s really not my forte!

Another idea, which is probably a bit out there, inspired by this meta by @vidavalor.

It’s a very long meta, but a really fun read. To summarise though it is all about her theory that Crowley and Aziraphale kissed for the first time way back after The Flood happened (there’s so much more to it, seriously do read it!) So what’s this got to do with the rainbow? Well, whilst I love the idea that they’ve been doing something all along I don’t think that’s what Neil is writing here and I don’t actually expect it to be the case. (I might be totally wrong of course and I do love playing with this theory for fun, as in this post and this one). I do kind of buy into the idea though that he might be writing a story where they have had an almost-kiss before – specifically that Crowley might have tried or wanted to kiss Aziraphale before and Aziraphale has either rejected it, not noticed or it’s been stopped by outside influences. There’s so much great meta out there about how 1941 might have been the time when Crowley tried for a kiss and Aziraphale rejected him either before or afterwards, which does seem the most likely time in their history for that to happen. What if the almost-kiss happened not in the bookshop but later whilst they were tracking down the zombies (I believe Neil has hinted they might return in season 3) and then it was prevented by a deluge of water in some way? (And afterwards Aziraphale decided it would have been a bad idea – hence, “you go to fast for me, Crowley” in 1967.)

Or what if there were previous times when Crowley wanted to kiss but Aziraphale was just oblivious? Could it have been at the flood? They did something together (maybe saved some people?), went and sheltered from the rain under a canopy of trees, looked into each other’s eyes and then Crowley had a moment of realisation, I want to kiss this angel, but before he could act on it they were stopped by a deluge of water. Not the rain (that was already falling and wouldn’t have stopped them by itself) but by the other form of flooding that happened during this story. Specifically, this from Genesis 7:11:

“on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened.”

So a deluge stopped a kiss during the flood or in 1941. Now another deluge has stopped Maggie and Nina’s potential kiss. Could the rainbow be a sign to Crowley? Next time I promise I won’t do that to you.

If it’s that and then the bookshop kiss is the one that isn’t stopped by water then the Almighty really is playing a pretty strange game with these two.

Are there anymore rainbows?

Yes, two other appearances of rainbows. The very first time we see a rainbow is when the angels come to check on Aziraphale after they spot the plume from the Jim miracle. It appears in front of him and then sweeps over the angels as the camera pans around. The only significance I can see here is that this is the start of the whole “love” thing with Maggie and Nina that later leads to the awning scene. It's also the only time I can find where they appear with Aziraphale on screen rather than Crowley.

The last time we see rainbows is in the final 15 minutes. Firstly one appears on the window of the Bentley when Crowley watches Aziraphale leave. This is not a great screenshot, it's across the window in line with his watch and a second after this the rainbow becomes clearer and actually doubles up so there’s two of them.

Finally when Crowley is driving away right at the end once again the rainbow plays over the Bentley. Another promise? Or just a sign of hope, which is the other meaning ascribed to a rainbow?

What do these rainbows mean?

I have no clue. Honestly, it could just be that the whole theme of this season seems to revolve a lot around colour and using light and rainbows might just be an extension of that with no other meaning. The world is super colourful a lot of the time, I mean it’s literally painted rainbow colours, with the shop fronts all being different colours and the extras all wearing super bright clothing – notably an awful lot of orange and orange-yellow tones.

Interestingly in this rainbow world that GO shows us the colour purple is missing a lot of the time. It appears in the tartan various characters wear (Aziraphale, Saraqael etc) but doesn’t seem to appear much elsewhere except in the rainbows (it’s difficult to see in the rainbows but it is there, indigo and violet are difficult to see in real life rainbows to due to the length of the light waves). Purple is the colour associated with royalty, authority and notably Jesus at Easter so it’s intriguing that it is missing from the rainbow of the world here.

Anyway the point is I find all this strange. Could be something, could be nothing. I’m just a bit obsessed with noticing details at this stage!