#pre-fall aziraphale spec

[thesherrinfordfacility]

what does aziraphale know?

i wanted to have another look through the pre-fall scene because there was something that wasn't feeling Quite Right to me about it, and honestly the below is just a stream of consciousness rather than any coherent theory, analysis or otherwise - so read at your own peril.

so the school of thought for many reasons has been that the Angel Who Crowley Was (AWCW) was a powerful angel, and i don't think that can be argued sufficiently given what we have seen so far from s1 and s2. but after rewatching the pre-fall scene i do wonder if crowley's importance in the Grand Scheme of Things has been overestimated, possibly by noone more than AWCW/crowley himself, and if aziraphale was actually the one with status, however quiet and modest.

when we open with the pre-fall scene, we see crowley alone, and he calls at a passing angel for some help with the map/plan. now this angel seems to rocketing past at the literal speed of light, and i cant help but feel that they were actually intending on going somewhere. and at the below specific angle, that angel looks like they were heading in a downward trajectory.

given that AWCW points up when referencing "Upstairs", we can infer that whilst heaven may not be bound by concepts like upstairs or downstairs, it does seem to have a concept of a higher placement for a higher being (ie god). this is also going on the assumption that in this scene, AWCW and the angel are even in heaven-space (which arguably, they're not), but regardless the angel seems to be heading down, indicating that they've just come down from the Up.

in any case, when aziraphale arrives, has helped AWCW with the cranking, he then says, "was that it?". and the way he says it, his body language, indicates to me that he is being polite, but in a perfunctory way. to me, it almost feels like he has things he needs to get on with - not in any frustrated or impatient manner, but just simply, 'is there anything else you need from me?', because he has things To Do.

(gif quality does not display this lmao but it's the impression i got anyway)

but AWCW puts out there that that was just the starting the ignition, and gleefully says that the next bit is where the true magic happens. which, i think is obvious, is where aziraphale actually reacts in any of the same manner - he begins to really smile, and offers up his name, even going so far as to say hi for the first time in the conversation. and i do think this is because he's just gotten a slam dunk of 'oh shit this angel is cute', but that's almost immaterial.

the part of the dialogue that struck me however is that AWCW says, "ive been waiting for this since... well, always!". it's not particularly revelatory, but to me basically says that AWCW has literally been working on this since he was formed from the firmament, having concept and design meetings with god, but this has been his entire "life"'s work, and he has never known anything else. he could just be being hyperbolic and i could be reading into it, but it would make sense for this starmaker to have only ever been a starmaker.

and heaven is certainly portrayed as being the most desolate place ever conceived, whether its in the dreaded High Rise Penthouse office building or in this vast, empty, dark space (presuming of course that the latter is in fact part of heaven, which it may well not be - and instead be in the space between planes before the universe was actually created)

regardless it gives the distinct impression of being very Lonely. so can we surmise from this that AWCW is not only a starmaker, but The Starmaker? working entirely in a team of one (thinking about the ep6 line of a "team... of the two of us") to create this nebula, possibly even most of the universe? crowley is described as being the only demon with an imagination, and his weapon of choice is literally the same instrument with which he cranked up this nebula... was his imagination in heaven also that revered and that's why he was entrusted with this project? and other similar ones? possibly.

but that spells for loneliness - single genius can be lonely. so it stands to reason that AWCW would be eager to have someone around to get dizzy with him about the wonder that is this new nebula and appreciate him for his creation. but it's not out of it being aziraphale being the one to appreciate it - we can surmise that in the way AWCW brushes him off. is this a case of self-importance? feeling he has status and should be recognised for this achievement? i feel like this is potentially a likely scenario.

in any case, AWCW seems pretty set on creating not only for himself, which he evidently finds fun and self-rewarding - going so far as to preen at the heartfelt but small praise that aziraphale gives him, but because its part of gods plan, and he's doing it for her.

he's even given perhaps one of the most famous lines from the bible, "let there be light". do we even trust that in GO it was god that originally said it - was it in fact AWCW? well either way, he completely believes in her vision, as far as he understands her vision to be.

so imagine how it must have felt then, in this instance, to have this stranger angel tell him that hes fairly certain that god is planning to destroy it in the next few millennia. AWCW, who is entrusted with creating parts if not all of her universe, isn't even clued in on the full facts, but aziraphale seems to be.

aziraphale is even seemingly part of the team (or is the whole team?) that seems to be entrusted with the plan of god's ultimate creation - earth and people built in her own image... but in kind doesn't seem to quite understand the true purpose of the nebula AWCW has built, at least according to him.

do we take this as an indication that god doesn't readily share her plans between angels, or that the nebula doesn't actually have as much importance as AWCW believed it to have? in any case, aziraphale seems to have been entrusted with god's plan, and AWCW - a creator whose creation the plan directly threatens - isn't.

aziraphale then goes on to describe the people they are currently designing; if we went with the notion (ie not sure how true this is in GO!verse) that humanity is god's ultimate creation, aziraphale has been trusted to help with that. i can't imagine just any angel would be, so there must be something in aziraphale that god sees as being fundamental in helping her with building them. from what we know of aziraphale's characteristics even this early on in his arc, he seems to be a kind and selfless person, and these may be the qualities that in building humanity god considers instrumental.

when we further consider that aziraphale then ends up being guardian of the eastern gate, and seems to have gone unpunished in giving away his sword (spelling its own implications for humanity as concerns war, cruelty, and death) and lying to her about it, this really does indicate to me that aziraphale is literally one of - if not the - favourite. given his qualities that it seems the other angels seem to lack (yes, even AWCW to a certain extent), it might just be that aziraphale was god's perfect angel. that would make sense.

the other thing that struck me is that aziraphale warns crowley against questioning god. the fall hasn't happened yet, so what gives aziraphale the foreboding sense of doom if crowley were to directly question her and her motives? "if i was the one running it all, id like it if..." strikes me as being the foreshadowing that it's this exact phraseology that AWCW puts before god and spells for disaster; that crowley intimates that if he were in charge, he would do things better. which is eerie when you again take into consideration the bookend that is aziraphale, "if im in charge, i could make a difference".

i would take the context of this being set pre-fall to indicate that there isn't any concept of actual punishment in heaven just yet (other than what a supervisory angel might order another angel to do, or a general reprimand). so what exactly is aziraphale afraid of? why is he scared for AWCW? doesn't he trust god to be understanding and kind if AWCW were to ask questions? what is it that aziraphale knows that AWCW doesn't?

so this is where i come to wondering if crowley was indeed prince of hell (okay yeah, fuck it, this is now a theory). what if it was actually aziraphale? god's perfect angel, entrusted with creating and guarding her ultimate creation? would it really be implausible that aziraphale went back to god and mused on what AWCW had said to him?

that it would perhaps be beneficial to have further input on how things were being created, especially when all the hard work, the creativity and genius, that was going into making her plans a reality, was just going to be wiped out in a snap? AWCW had 'friends' that fanned the flames of questioning god, doubled down on his resolve, and aziraphale tried to forestall the punishment that would inevitably come for him... but in doing so was punished himself?

but because aziraphale is her Favourite, instead of making him fall, she wiped his memory of it? he evidently remembers crowley as an angel, but beyond that? especially his remark that he's never killed anything (when, even if indirectly, aziraphale actually has? s1 with the french guard and the airfield soldier (perhaps not taking book canon into account here re: soldier) and the demons in s2) - does aziraphale not remember being a soldier? had a hard factory reset and is back to the unblemished, untainted angel he was before?

what if crowley did indeed bargain for aziraphale to be spared? that it was his fault that god was going to make him fall, it was his questions not aziraphale's? i think narratively it could make sense in the way that aziraphale and crowley are put as two halves of the same whole; that crowley did a selfless thing and was damned for it, whereas aziraphale wanted something selfish for crowley but was spared from the consequences. it would also go some way to explaining why crowley always has to protect aziraphale - its literally been his way since the beginning, in recompense for what happened to aziraphale?

i realise that this is completely batshit, but i do like the idea (im a huge fan of a bait and switch), and poetically speaking i think it could work - that instead of crowley being the original fallen angel, it was actually aziraphale? borne out of kindness and fondness for his new friend, the friend that actively seemed to welcome his company and wanted to show him the stars, and wanting to make heaven and the world a better place?✨

[thesherrinfordfacility]

idk how to feel about aziraphale seemingly being unsurprised about the existence of the book of life. you know, that thing that was only a rumour used to frighten the cherubs. stoic in the face of the threat, sure - but not surprised

[thesherrinfordfacility]

god i hope you guys are ready for another crackpot theory, but this is now living rent-free in my head and it's time to pay up:

i'm now fairly convinced that crowley - and possibly aziraphale too - doesn't fully remember the fall.

because im rewatching s1 right? and this is what crowley said about adam and eve being exiled from eden because they ate from the tree of knowledge:

im sorry, but it's an 'overreaction'? that god would oust them from the garden - yes, for doing something she told them not to do - but for doing something, as crowley intimates shortly after, can't be that bad? and suggests deserved leniency, or mercy?

of course it's an overreaction! its completely bonkers! as bonkers as 'asking questions', or '[hanging] around the wrong people'! ie. presumably, if we assume crowley was telling the truth about why he fell*, this would have been his first offence. so why does he clarify that it's an overreaction because it was a first offence? and the offence itself (see next gif), as he suggests, wasn't even that big of an issue anyway?

if crowley truly did fall* for either or both of those above reasons, why on earth would he word it as an 'overreaction', and say it as if he's not sure? surely he'd sound way more bitter about it, as he tends to get later on in s1 and s2...?

if anything, to him, after the fall, it would make complete sense that god would react that way, that it was an overreaction. now, he could just be saying this to gauge aziraphale's reaction, true, but a) the body language and tone doesn't feel like he's testing aziraphale, he genuinely looks a bit clueless, and b) the way he goes on afterwards makes me think he doesn't yet remember the whole of his own experience in the fall.

isn't the whole act of falling meant to mean you are on the opposite side? the opposite of heaven - of Good? it literally posits the idea of there being a Good side and an Evil side, full-stop. crowley knows that there is a difference, and aziraphale too; they literally acknowledge this within their respective lines and being, by definition, a demon and an angel respectively.

so, given they've been through the fall, they'd surely understand the reason why knowledge of that difference is bad, right? they'd know why that knowledge is dangerous - it leads to conflict of literal, psychological, and spiritual proportions... so why don't they seem to acknowledge that understanding in this dialogue? why are they spitballing as to why humans knowing the difference is an issue? they'd surely know that it would - and it does, somewhat - spell for disaster.

it's almost like they've just become into being, an Evil Demon and a Good Angel, as if this is literally their very beginning. without much, if any, backstory to give them both context in this conversation. ie. why is aziraphale only guessing that "it must be bad...", when he's gone through the exact thing that makes him know why it's bad? because in his case, it led to the fall? to conflict? or, does he actually remember, but suspects in this scene that crawly doesn't?

now, im going to parse out some evidence, as i see it, in potential support, and countering, this theory.

they definitely seem to remember being angels, that is beyond dispute (allowing for hazy memory on both their and my parts):

crowley remembers building alpha centauri

crowley remembers (somewhat) discussing creating the concept of gravity

crowley remembers going into battle/war

crowley says "the angel i was is not me"

aziraphale remembers chucking his halo in the war

aziraphale says "you were an angel, once" (which is a little shaky but let's go with it) in s1

aziraphale says "i remember the angel you were"

aziraphale says "like the old times"

other things ive forgotten, no doubt, but you get the point - they must remember being angels at the very least, and also remember the war itself.

but, on crowley's part, we know he's a questionable narrator. to my mind (so this is biased as hell), i genuinely think this is part of his character and narrative makeup.

*im also going to plug an old meta from the pre-s2 golden era (and btw - humble brag - was liked by neil so im taking this to mean it's somewhat approved); his given reason for why he fell and how he fell conflict with each other. i originally sat on the side of crowley lying about why/how he fell, but now im more in the camp of him not fully knowing at all, and without god to give him answers, he's just guessed.

so was the judgement, his last judgement, if we go by this... was erased? well, if you go by my theory on the book of life (which obviously i do)... it kinda adds up. the only thing it contradicts is whether crowley fully remembers being an angel at all which has already been discussed by others, i.e. he does not. ill leave that up for debate.

but that crowley might remember his interaction with lucifer and co., and he had a propensity for asking questions, and assumed it was because of that... that he might remember diving into the sulphur pool (im not accepting "sauntered vaguely downwards", bc he said this in front of aziraphale), and crawling out into hell...

but. the bit in between? his actual judgement and sentence? the gavel on the block? god (literally) only knows.

(and aziraphale? his memory? im not entirely sure... but his perspective on the fall has been largely silent; mainly, i imagine, because he literally didn't go through it, and so has not really had occasion to talk about it. that doesn't support that he doesn't remember... but it doesn't negate it either. the only thing i would say is that, going by the BOL theory, he doesn't appear to have fallen... so if he does or doesn't remember, to my mind, is also still largely up for debate).

[thesherrinfordfacility]

LWA: Some more idle thoughts about narrative construction and both seasons, prompted by your reflections about AWCW's inability to see consequences and Aziraphale's already-vivid awareness of them.

Crowley's and Aziraphale's pre-Fall selves are already set into their post-Fall approaches to consequences. Aziraphale, given adequate data, is very good at predicting the most plausible consequences of any given action; unfortunately, he's also very good at predicting consequences when he only thinks he has adequate data, which leads to repeated disasters (both the 1862 fight and the end of s2ep6 being the most obvious examples). It's not an accident that he's good at interpreting prophecy. It may also explain the weird Jane Austen misreading, which has nothing to do with how Aziraphale fell in love (past) but everything to do with constructing an iron-clad narrative in which there's a definite, logical romantic outcome (future). AWCW is politically naive, but fallen Crowley /still/ can't predict what ought to be the completely logical consequences of his actions. (Hence perhaps his own misreading of Richard Curtis, which mistakes the climax of a romcom for its inception.) S1ep1 keeps coming back to the fallout of Crowley pitching his stories too well to his demonic audience. He takes down the cell tower and does himself in, turns the M25 into a sigil and both gets trapped on it and temporarily murders an awful lot of people, and...then there's my favorite bugbear. Fans tend to overlook the likely outcome of Aziraphale giving in to Crowley's manipulation and killing the Antichrist, thanks to Madame Tracy stepping in, but beyond the cruelty /this is not something that Aziraphale could have survived/ (figuratively or literally). I was thrown straight out of the S2 episode in which Crowley gives away the entire bodyswap to Gabriel/Jim during his "protective" outburst, because as script-writing goes that there was a decision, but I have to grouchily concede that if Gaiman were to show up and remind me about the child murder business, he would have a point about narrative plausibility.

Crowley genuinely doesn't appear to believe that his relationship with Aziraphale has a developmental narrative. There's no story to be told about it. As I've said here before, his accounts of their relationship do not square either with what's on the screen or with what the actors have said they're playing. For Crowley, they've always been friends, they've always been a couple, they've always had the same kinds of conversations, whereas what's dramatized onscreen is a more heavily-romanticized take on the /book/ narrative, in which they gradually become friends over the course of centuries. There's no sign that /Aziraphale/ believes they've always been friends or a couple, which may be one of the reasons that Crowley's confession doesn't land.* In fact, one of the things that is now starting to bug me is the problem of Aziraphale's relation to Crowley-as-angel, because Aziraphale's problematic assumptions about fallen Crowley's continuity with AWCW (he's not trying to reverse-engineer Crowley, he really believes demon!Crowley effectively still /is/ angel!Crowley, just grumpier) mirror Crowley's refusal to acknowledge that his relationship with Aziraphale has an actual plot.

My take is that Aziraphale could obviously have done a much better job, Crowley-wise, of accepting the Metatron's proposal, but there's nothing to indicate that he could have done anything /else/. It's not just a mirror of Beelzebub's ep1 proposal to Crowley, but a warped mirror, in which the whole point of the "coffee or death" dialogue is that the Metatron is not really offering Aziraphale a choice in the matter.

afternoon LWA, hope you're well!!!✨

i didn't think to look laterally (not to this extent, anyway) at aziraphale and crowley when comparing their pre-fall selves with them later on in the narrative, but that's really fun to consider!!!

i absolutely love this interpretation of aziraphale's inner thought process, because whilst i had never really thought to see aziraphale as having an analytical personality type, he absolutely does; his approach to pretty much anything appears to be very systematic. in fact, im struggling somewhat to think of an instance where im confident that aziraphale reacts completely intuitively... maybe when he squares off against satan (crowley comes up with the time-stop, but where aziraphale chooses to face the devil down feels like he does so without any idea of how it could end)? any other action aziraphale takes, or words he says, feels like they've been very carefully deliberated over before delivery, even if he knows the outcome is going to be... well, shit.

you mention 1862 and ep6 as two examples, but, to me, aziraphale's way of thinking vs crowley's (which i'll come back to) is just encapsulated neatly in the entirety of s1; there are so many examples of where aziraphale consistently reacts to incoming data (when he discovers it or - when he deigns to - when crowley tells him stuff), and acts accordingly, and then immediately cycles back to analysing the result when it doesn't work.

my day-job (GO is practically The Other Job at this point) is largely based around analysis and research, and i regularly use a few thought models (maybe not consciously, but it's second nature at this point) in approach to a problem/question. so looking at the overall context of s1, aziraphale appears to follow a similar process:

scanning (identify the problem: the apocalypse)

analysis (gathering information/data, and identifying mitigating factors or outlying data: e.g. the hellhound conundrum, agnes' prophecy, adam is in tadfield, heaven actively wants the apocalypse)

response (how can the problem/question be addressed, and take into account any extraneous data that may affect the result: e.g. stop the dog, return to tadfield, engage shadwell and the WA, consult a higher authority through the portal, finds a human to 'possess' and get to tadfield)

assessment (the impact of the response, and any splinter effects or conclusions that the response initiated: e.g. realising that they had the wrong boy, identifying the right boy, where the apocalypse would happen, and that he and crowley were alone in stopping it themselves).

the last bit is especially indicative to me of aziraphale being analytical; he hears crowley say that god would not speak to him, but he still tries because it's a viable solution to scrutinise, and when it fails he immediately re-evaluates and then contacts crowley to try out an alternative, and share the information he has, because ultimately crowley ended up - on this count - being correct in his own initial, instinctive assessment.

obviously those phases of problem-solving throughout s1 are non-linear, and instead completely cyclical; aziraphale takes into account different factors and data at individual points in the story, and repeatedly comes up with various options in which to respond to problems as more data materialises - he continuously reassesses. initially, his approach to the problem of armageddon was to Not Act, and allow it to happen, because it was the great plan, and as an angel it was logical to him that whatever god had planned was for the best, was what was always intended, and would only ever be Good because... well, it came from god, right? had he perhaps thought a touch more intuitively, followed his instinct (which is arguably to thwart armageddon, the same conclusion crowley arrived at), he would have probably leapt on the chance to follow crowley's proposal... or possibly even proposed it himself.

but as it stands, he doesn't, and crowley gives him reason after reason to do so. all of this builds as significantly compelling data to aziraphale - to the point that when he's fully analysed (at this point) the potential outcome of Not Acting vs. Acting, he chooses to Act - a conviction that he sticks to. even at the bandstand, he doesnt sway on wanting to stop armageddon, but that the way that crowley proposes they do so not only directly conflicts with aziraphale's moral boundaries (killing a mf child), but also conflicts with aziraphale's sense of logic and reason (running away). and then as a last thought for aziraphale; he goes to instinctively shoot adam when crowley pushes for the last time, and is immediately thwarted by madame tracy - she does it as an emotional, knee-jerk, moral-based, human reaction, "you can't just shoot children!" - but given that that reaction is what aziraphale actually agrees with, it only reinforces that his way of thinking, logically and analytically, is the correct one, just because they happened to arrive at the same conclusion.

but this is where crowley comes in. crowley on the other hand acts very intuitively, instinctively, and i daresay emotionally - his immediate reaction to delivering the antichrist is panic, and to immediately call aziraphale (the narrative at the very least doesn't show any kind of analysis of the issue on crowley's part - would he have arrived at a different response if he had? and plus, as you say, him taking down the phone network was a class A monkey-paw job, well done crowley). but then he goes on to convince aziraphale into stopping armageddon with him (which, admittedly, does work, but only once crowley changes tack, stops invoking the emotional, and instead lays out the logical, does aziraphale agree).

when the issue arises of the hellhound (which, let's reiterate, crowley did not think to tell aziraphale before this point...), and the prospect of their upbringing plan not working because of this, crowley's reflex is to destroy the antichrist completely - but tempt aziraphale into doing it. when aziraphale pushes back on this more resolutely at the bandstand, crowley's immediate instinct is to just run. fair enough, given that crowley ends up being correct that aziraphale's resolution to beseech to heaven will just go ignored, but he similarly doesn't consider that aziraphale needs to test the hypothesis first, engage a more methodical and strategic approach, before resorting to more scorched-earth measures.

but as you say, this definitely harks back to the pre-fall scene. narratively, we still don't have any confirmation on what leads to aziraphale having any concept of punishment, or a sense of consequence; there is no iron-clad context (that I can see anyway!) as to why aziraphale would start to formulate this rationale - that asking questions might lead to a larger, damning (ha) consequence - when we can only surmise up until this point that angels would consider their creator as benevolent and omniscient.

AWCW presumably doesn't mean anything nefarious behind his questions (i think that can be reliably interpreted from his behaviour and delivery), so why would god ever punish him? this is beside the point, however; in any case, crowley tends to rush to a response, to act, without stopping to consider other factors, other data, and the potential consequences. in the pre-fall scene, if he had acknowledged the warning, the 'data', as it were, that aziraphale was giving to him (that something could go wrong if he continue the path he's walking), he might have arrived at the same action but with considerably more caution, and potentially prevented what happened to him (which, in contextual hindsight, is not necessarily a good thing). we don't have the full narrative yet to tell us what exactly happened during AWCW's fall, but it does seem like crowley is a chronic case of "fuck around - find out."

in this respect i personally find it entirely in character - and rather in-keeping with crowley's overall narrative in both s1 and s2 - that crowley reveals the ruse of the bodyswap in s2; he's not thinking about the consequences that it could have, but thinking entirely based on instinct. he's not thinking about whether gabriel/jim might remember the information, whether gabriel (regardless of his presumed reformation of character in ep6) might exploit that information, but entirely acting on the emotional wave that gabriel is posing a direct risk to aziraphale's safety and wellbeing. plus, we don't know how long he was sat in justine's restaurant for; it's entirely possible that he was three sheets to the wind by the point aziraphale happens upon him.

once again! not sure i arrived at a point! but i think in hindsight this is a really interesting way to read the final fifteen; it's fairly obvious that crowley is acting and reacting emotionally during the feral domestic, and aziraphale is - as metatron-aziraphale theories are indicating at the moment - acting and reacting based on a conclusion he's arrived at from data we've potentially only partially seen/data hidden in plain sight. but then we switch to aziraphale saying "i need you!", which is a hitherto uncommon emotional outburst from him, and crowley... saying nothing. is that crowley's way of thinking logically, analytically? because anything he says is not going to change the outcome - aziraphale will ascend, he will not, and they will still be apart?

on the note of their relationship, it's a really interesting dynamic - how crowley and aziraphale both see it from their perspectives. on one hand, you have aziraphale that goes from crush, to acquaintance, to confidant, to friend, to best friend and person he's in love with. crowley's perspective is... well, it is the same, right? so why does he retrospectively suggest that it's something that it, by all accounts, wasn't? look, maybe crowley was in love from the wall, immediately fell for aziraphale when he told him about the sword - but that's not what's actually shown in the narrative, to the audience. so... if he did, did he even realise it? is that why he looks back on their history as being something that, as far as shown to the audience, it isn't?

the s1 flashbacks are all shown from aziraphale's perspective (why am i only realising this now) - mesopotamia, golgotha, rome, arthurian england, 1601, 1793, 1827, and 1941 all show aziraphale first. the scenes are all set up with aziraphale opening them. it's only eden, uz, 1862, and 1967 that show crowley first... and all of them are pivotal moments for crowley's character development, as well as the development of their relationship specifically. that they learn to confide in each other, then they learn to trust in each other, then they learn the extent of what they mean to each other, and then they learn (or acknowledge) the danger of them being together.

so actually - does crowley think that there's no plot to their relationship? or is it that by 2023, he counts on the fact that the plot has already happened? that the biggest problem they confronted in his view - the holy water and the breaking away from heaven and hell - has been resolved (see: it hasn't), and that they've now reached the happily ever after? rather than the fact that we are actually only just getting to the climax of their personal story? which is also likely the stage that aziraphale was at by ep5, and is considering that crowley, by the time of the confession, is still a chapter ahead? "you go too fast for me, crowley."

(christ i don't even want to know the word count of this answer)

and this is similar potentially to how aziraphale sees crowley own angel-to-demon-to-just-crowley development; that he thinks that crowley as a person would want to be an angel again, "just like the old times, only even nicer", because why wouldn't he? he's a good and kind person, why wouldn't he want to be restored to the station and to the place that - in aziraphale's view - inherently embodies that? heaven has been corrupted, and he could make a difference, but heaven was always meant to be the place of good... right?

well, once again, aziraphale is without data - he doesn't, presumably, fully understand why crowley couldn't ever become an angel again, couldn't set foot in heaven again (not in that capacity, at least). so the conclusion he draws absolutely misses the mark; thinks this is the long-awaited happily-ever-after for crowley, when actually crowley is perhaps a chapter or two behind. s2 has shown more that crowley is able to somewhat accept that he is a good person, but he still has a way to go before he fully acknowledges it, and reconciles that with the, we can only guess, full circumstances of his fall.

last point - so glad that someone else spotted the mirror of the beelzebub proposal in ep1 to the metatron proposal in ep6; i think i gasped when i realised the implication of that conversation between beelzebub and crowley!!!✨

[thesherrinfordfacility]

(1/5?)

so. the fall. both in general and crowley's specifically. i speculated about this quite a bit when i watched season 1 already and since, by and large, these speculations are still the basis for my thoughts now, that's also how i'll be structuring this. i'm going to go through the opinions/theories i formed based solely on the data available for season 1 first and then address new information from season 2 and how that's affected my conclusions.

a quick preface! i'm working off the assumption that go's god basically doesn't get involved in anything ever and the fall was consequently not her doing. nor do i think the metatron's heard anything more from her than anyone else has nor that he had even back then.

so the most frequent allegories of heaven i see are cult and abusive family and while i don't think that's wrong, my instinctive reaction was and still is dictatorship/surveillance state. heaven is literally the ultimate form of the divine right of kings. the metatron and the archangels cannot be removed from power because they were instated by god and their orders must be followed unfailingly because they are merely carrying out god's will. so angels starting to question god/the plan is threatening. immensely so, because the logical next leap is questioning the authority of the voice of the god and of the archangels. and sure enough that's exactly what happens! there's an uprising which turns into a war and the losing side are permanently exiled and branded as unforgivable traitors, pure evil, and any hint of something that could become dissent is cracked down on harder than ever because the archangels/the metatron can't risk anything like this emerging again. after all god isn't talking to them either and their power is very much not as divinely-ordained and unshakable as they would like.

now if there's one thing that season 2 did that was confirm my impression of heaven the dictatorship. the way gabriel is dealt with is deeply unsettling and looking at how isolated muriel is kept i'd wager there are no risks being taken that any angels could start sharing ideas again. before i thought there was an off-chance that the archangels assumed the fall was god's plan and that's why they did it but now i'm convinced it was purely political. (obviously they'd still think god intended it but i'm certain that was not the motive, that the motive was solely about staying in power. unsure what the metatron's view on god is. thoughts?) what's new from season 2 is the power dynamics at the top of the hierarchy. instead of the metatron and the archangels being a unified force on approximately equal footing, the metatron's more nefarious and more powerful than i assumed and is clearly the sole person at the very top, pulling all the strings and asserting himself as lone unassailable ruler and the archangels are infighting. gabriel's abusing his power michael's trying to usurp him and uriel's barely tolerating either of them. but while that makes for some interesting dynamics to play with i don't see how that changes anything about the fall.

wow 🦭 anon!!! firstly, please accept my humble apologies for the late-late answer to this!!! i got into a hyperfocus with an amv and then needed to make soooo many notes on what you've said so that i had a coherent response!!! 💃<- apology dance✨

anyway!!! by god im so excited to answer this; plot speculation is my favourite kind of analysis!!!

further asks and response under the cut!!!

okay so im basically just going to write up a train of thought without much coherency, incorporating both s1 and s2, so please do pop back if ive ignored something, or am missing something!!!

i completely agree with your assessment of god's involvement in the fall; following job, where i recently parsed out some thoughts on the conflicting interpretations of god's will where job, his family, and their suffering was concerned, im firmly of the opinion that god in GO is omniscient, but strictly amoral. whilst she might pull strings threaded through the universe (e.g. the knocking over of the candle in the bookshop fire is, to me, an example of this), she created and abides by free will. in her angels, in the fallen, and in humanity. I've gone over incarnations of this train of thought in #god is dead theory, if anyone fancies some extra reading.

but essentially, i can kinda see god's involvement in the fall being very similar to that of pontius pilate (depending on which account you read, to be fair) in the crucifixion of jesus, and leaving the fate of the angels that were 'rebelling' up to the 'people' - i'll come back to this. but i feel this could be a very fitting allegory insomuch of jesus being the scapegoat for humanity's sins, and dying for them to be absolved. the reconceptualisation of this in the context of the fallen is chilling, but apt (especially if anyone subscribes to some variant of the scapegoat theory - that being crowley, aziraphale, lucifer, or any combination of them. more in. #omelas/scapegoat theory tag).

bottom line for me on speculating about the fall, for me at the moment, is that god created angels. she created them to have free will, and free thought. this birthed angels starting to speak up about things they think could be different. some just wanted to make the stars live longer, some perhaps thought humanity were given too much importance, or god had too much power, altogether. i don't think god necessarily had an issue with any of this, because this was all according to how she wanted her creations to exist. but if she were to interfere in anything as an omniscient being, it would corrupt that very tenet - would influence free will, and render it obsolete.

so if god were to excuse herself, with very little - if anything - to say, it would stand to reason that her voice, the metatron, would take the metaphorical stage. now, i can see metatron's rationale going in two different directions (so far, and might be both or neither):

machiavellian (or dark triad) approach, in that he covets god's power and voice absolute for himself, to rule over heaven and its angels and wilfully disguise his own wants and desires as the word of god. and rebellious angels would threaten to upend his own authority in this regard

some kind of take on the divine command theory; specifically in ethics that morality is dictated by the command of god... ie. that something is good specifically because god commands it. DCT and voluntarism in general can be considered very flawed, (or so any ethics theory rooting in religion), for obvious reasons, but i could see this being what metatron genuinely believes. the absence of god renders him only with the great plan, and if the fall - because it's borne of free will - goes outside the scope of the plan, what other choice does he have but to eradicate evil from eden?

i find the second the most compelling of the two, but they're not mutually exclusive - metatron can still emulate machiavellian psychology and still think he's genuinely following the command of god, in good (?) conscience, in order to preserve a perfect heaven, without perhaps realising that his own free will could inform him otherwise. it would also, imo, bring back the conflict between the great and ineffable plans nicely - what is laid out by god, and what is entirely unknowable because it's literally dictated by every individual set apart from god?

moving onto heaven specifically... ive collected a lot of thoughts over the last 48h or so. first, mainly, that i agree with you in how to view heaven analogically; maybe it's because my experience in life has been very different to lots of others in the fandom, but my take on heaven is principally that of a police state, and what we're looking at is the institution itself. imo, there's a lot of shared characteristics between heaven and most kind of policing agencies, right down to the things that inherently open them up to corruption and resistance.

i hadn't thought to look at heaven in the view of divine right of kings, but this is very interesting. in at least one sense, yep - could view the metatron as being the defacto heavenly sovereign, and decreeing with power absolute. and given the reference to 1650 in s2 (and im personally hoping this might be a flashback in s3), this could potentially be a very powerful mirror (ie. charles I and cromwell during the english civil wars). for some reason however, this dynamic doesn't ring completely true for me - not quite sure why yet, but i'll probably come back to it.

the manner in which gabriel, and potentially muriel, have been dealt with in heaven is also unsettling. but i think personally for me, regardless of the political structure of heaven, what unnerves me is that it is potentially a facsimile of falling, but not in the way the narrative has so far posed it. hell are short-staffed - irrespective of why, we know this is an issue. but heaven seems to have a consistency in their numbers, inferred by the same problem never being mentioned in relation to angels. and then consider that gabriel at the very least is a powerful archangel; whyever would heaven allow gabriel to fall into hell, and work for them? no, it is safer to wipe his memory, and reduce him to what we can surmise is a very, very low rank of angel occupation/choir. is this the new falling? is this what happened to the fallen? i think there's something there.

now the thing is, thinking more on the fall has made me confront something. as much as their actions as thus shown to the audience so far are deplorable, the archangels are eminently empathetic in the context of the fall, and how they act afterwards. if we look at them considering that, what we consider to be, free will is in fact radical thought, is dangerous, and that acting on that will bring heaven down... well, it's actually somewhat understandable how they regard aziraphale.

let's take gabriel and how he speaks to crowley-as-aziraphale in s1: this is, to gabriel, an angel that has upset the great plan. literally stopped it in its tracks. is, to his mind, working directly against the word and will of god. a radical, gone native, and turned to rebellion. wouldn't gabriel be frightened out of his little head? of course he would! presumably he had to go through the fall too, watch as (we could hypothesise) his brothers (gn) fell to hell, and have to turn against them as traitors and dissidents. so, to watch as aziraphale presumably treads the same path must be terrifying, because of what it could precipitate. beelzebub in s1 even said it at aziraphale-as-crowley's execution, "it'll cause a riot!". and that's in hell - now imagine heaven.

we know that archangels are capable of change. we saw in job them have - if not a camaraderie - a cordial (albeit still quite condescending) relationship with aziraphale. this appears to deteriorate the longer that aziraphale is on earth, and his path diverges away from theirs. but we also see gabriel, fully as gabriel, fall in love with beelzebub. they are capable of it - and capable of free will.

all of this to say that i don't think it's conclusive at this time to implicate the archangels in what, as the hypothesis above indicates, is entirely metatron's doing. bear in mind that despite the recent trial, uriel and michael don't even recognise metatron. this could be memory wipe, or could be that despite how it's physically shown to us metatron in heaven as a floating head and metatron in human form are not recognisable... that being said, a) aziraphale doesn't recognise him either, despite seeing his head in s1, and b) metatron says, "you don't know me?!", which could either be a test, or as genuine incredulity that they don't remember the mf metatron. the whole thing, as LWA has pointed out on a couple of occasions now, reeks of the nuremberg defense ('just following orders'), and whilst it's unjustifiable, it's certainly understandable.

in any case, i think it has the potential to inform very heavily on the current inter-archangel dynamic in heaven - who trusts whom? who next will challenge god? who is hungry for power, and to bring down heaven? when you specifically consider uriel's disdain of michael assuming the post of supreme archangel, it could be jealousy or just out of pettiness, but michael doing so must suggest a degree of instability and concern too. it might not necessarily change anything about the fall retrospectively, but it does inform on how they punish angels, that step out of line, in a post-fall era.

re: the specifics of crowley's fall (and me bearing in mind the length of this answer!), i agree on pretty much every point you raised, each conclusion - ive covered similar thoughts in various tags: #AWCW spec, #the fall/the great war spec, and #scapegoat/omelas theory. one thing on whether AWCW fought in the great war; i agree, i don't think he fought. but i definitely think he was present. being fanciful, i think he might have hid, or someone 👀 attempted to help him hide, and get him out of heaven without bloodshed, or without violence ("sauntered vaguely downwards"). i don't think it succeeded, and i think potentially both were brought as traitors before heaven... and here is where i cycle back to the scapegoat/omelas theory.

and in any case - im not convinced that either of them, or indeed anyone(?) fully remembers the fall. it would make sense, from metatron's perspective, to wipe all seeds of rebellious thought (without accounting for the fact that they're born of free will, which cannot be erased) from all involved parties in heaven with a targeted memory wipe. as for the fallen - i think that's literally part of their having fallen; they can't remember specifics about their time as angels, or at least the specifics of why they fell. this would potentially be explanatory for crowley's tendency as an unreliable narrator as concerns his fall in particular. the one thing i do trust in particular as to his potential part in the fall is AWCW's line: "if i were in charge..." - take into account what ive said above, plus this kind of thinking being a very innocent but parallel to what we can assume lucifer's personal beef was, i think the origins of crowley's fall - and what his questions threatened - is relatively clear.

i know you've brought up other things too, 🦭 anon, but i wonder if this is something we can explore in further depth in another post? i feel this essay is enough to be getting on with for now, and would love to know your thoughts!!! again, really sorry for the delay, but hope this makes up for it!!!✨💕

note to self - topics left to look at! AWCW rank, and gabriel's first order archangel line, and his line as jim re: "all the morning stars..."

update: fuck it 🦭 anon, i was turning these topics over in my brain like a rotisserie chicken for most of the evening, so let's dig in anyway!!!✨

okay look, i'll admit (and as is clearly evident in my old posts), i was an advocate of the crowley is lucifer theory. obviously neil debunked this, no worries, glad to have nipped that in the bud. but i am still fairly convinced that crowley is going to own a lucifer-ish narrative as concerns his fall. if we go by hell hierarchy in GO and correlate this against influential material (scripture, and yes okay Milton), we can be fairly certain that lucifer led on the fall, fell first and became satan, beelzebub was a key part (to warrant being prince of hell), and that crowley got himself caught up with them at some point before falling himself. this is a part of crowley's recount of his fall that i do believe, but i think he massively downplays his part.

i think AWCW comes across a group of angels that do not rebuke him for having questions, and even talk to him about them, encouraging him. i think he feels safe with them, and becomes pals with them, and they end up sweeping him along in more 'dangerous', 'rebellious' thought... and right up until the moment they get caught/lucifer starts speaking out, i don't think AWCW realises the shit he's gotten himself into (or maybe he does, but it's easier to sink down rather than swim up). in any case, he's surely going to be implicated in instigated rebellion among the angels, and be punished accordingly.

now im not entirely sure on the specifics of a potential scapegoat allegory would come in here, but i do think it does (and history will potentially repeat itself in s3, given the promo images). i think perhaps lucifer and the gang start to panic, panic at the concept of falling (regardless of who is dolling out the sentence, god or metatron), and they pin the blame on AWCW. he started asking questions first, he caused all of this. i think that's potentially why metatron has such beef, and specifically refers to crowley "always asking damn-fool questions", plus throws him the Dirty Look - all of this mess, and everyone believes crowley started it, even if he didn't pull the trigger. obviously lucifer and all the fallen get similarly punished, so crowley doesn't carry the full weight of the fall, but that would potentially be a big chunk of his character core that once realised could make a lot of things about him suddenly make sense.

(as an aside, i do perhaps think that aziraphale is also implicated in here somewhere - ive explored it in the #scapegoat theory tag more - but do also equally wonder if crowley is posed as the scapegoat for the fall, and aziraphale will be posed as the scapegoat for the last judgement? interesting mirroring to hypothesise).

in terms of crowley's rank... sigh. i get the narrative and character potential of it, but... i don't think he was a Very Important Angel, however that might look. at the very least, i hope not. i got a few reasons for this, first of them being that i think it could be quite cliché, to the point of being a bit reductive. he is very obviously, in a rather on-the-nose fashion, painted as being an archangel in s2; for this reason alone, i get the feeling that this will in fact not be the case. (and im not an expert on pratchett, far from it, but my understanding is that a lot of his themes work with the concept of being "ordinary" which... this theory would arguably shoot out of the park).

we know that crowley is at least in the throne or dominion choir. the way that muriel says these ranks 'or above' suggests that they are on the same rank, not throne-above-dominion as strict christian angelology suggests. neil and terry turned this structure on its head anyway with the specific archangel structure, but i think it's far that the basic blueprint of GO!angelology follows the same outline. which suggests that crowley can only have been these ranks, or a cherub, seraph, or archangel.

i dont think he was a high archangel on the same plane as michael and uriel, let alone gabriel. i did suggest (in #AWCW spec, i think) that he might have been a lesser archangel like sandalphon or saraqael, and this still rings true for me if you cross-reference heaven hierarchy against hell hierarchy (there's obviously a lot to contradict this copy-and-paste, but im just talking in the vague sense). the other thought i have, is that i don't necessarily think that crowley's power is borne out of having been an archangel; i think it's literally borne out of having an imagination, as was intimated in s1, and i don't necessarily trust his "how did you know i didn't do it?" line to shax; we know that shax is not the sharpest of demons in this respect. as for the miracle he and aziraphale performed - i don't think the reason why it was so powerful has anything to do with either of them, and all to do with jim (#25 lazarii theory).

moving onto "first order archangel", im still not quite sure what to make of it, but... i dont think it was intimating anything beyond reasserting gabriel's rank as the top archangel. the supreme archangel position seems to be just that - a position, a role - but one that elevates already existing power (and i think that's what's indicated by the purple eyes, personally - having, to a degree, some of the power of literal god), and thus raising you to the tier (?) of first order. fundamentally, without the SA position and therefore without the FO rank, i dont think gabriel is actually any different to michael or uriel; they're all archangels, and it's just a question of promotion. in which case, i personally think gabriel was just being sarcastic and childish, and simply reinstating "hey, im the top dog here, im the only one at my level, so what i say goes'. it feels like a very gabriel thing to do and say, imo.

i'll be honest; im coming up empty on the elevator scene, but if we're talking about missing furniture - the scene before is crowley walking out of muriel's 'office' with muriel and saraqael, and then bang we're in the elevator with them all as well as michael and uriel. there's a whole, obviously interesting, conversation missing there, and i dont think that's inconsequential... potentially.

okay last bit and then i'll definitely be done!!!✨ "morning stars" - so i obviously can't say all of the above and then based on this be like 'okay yeah there were multiple lucifer-type characters' because, honestly, i think that might be a bit far-fetched. there are a lot of astronomical, mythological, and biblic references to 'morning star', and 'light/dawn-bringer' but none that, at the moment, seem to fit for me. so instead, i return to jim.

as i say in my #25 lazarii theory posts, i think when we look at jim, we're somehow looking at the shell of gabriel, but also a fragment of god. not sure how she got in there, but to me the whole fly/huge miracle/jim makes that ring true for me. so, when referencing the morning stars, i think god (who let's face it, appears to be talking at that point in ep2) is literally talking about the beginning, where on the first day, god created 'day', and specifically 'morning' and 'evening', and in wider context the heavens and the earth (genesis 1:5, KJV) - so morning stars... might just be morning stars?✨

[thesherrinfordfacility]

Absolute crack notes from the Book of Enoch (Metatron) but the 'Aziraphale was meant to fall' theory and how AWCW might tie into that invokes it for me. With all the discussions about scapegoats and how Aziraphale is responsible for introducing War to humans. Christianity normally holds that the Fall happened long before humans were created, but Enoch presents a different origin for fallen angels and the sins of man: the "fallen angel" Azazel (a name you might recognize from the two goats story in Leviticus) is said to be blamed for all evil in the world, because he teaches mankind how to make weapons and instructs them in the arts of warfare and magic. Man wasn't capable of sinning before Azazel and his cohorts taught them wickedness. As punishment for this, God sends the Archangel Raphael to bind Azazel and imprison him until the Day of Judgement, upon which he'll be cast into a "lake of fire". This definitely means nothing but also it's really funny to me.

on the contrary i think it means a heck of a lot, anon!!!✨ the scapegoat story is literally like a chicken on a spinning rotisserie in my brain 24/7, im so sure that it is going to play some kind of part in explaining aziraphale and crowley's background.

i have read leviticus 16 so many times and still no clearer on azazel, because i think (?) it has been interpreted in so many ways, but the main ones ive gleaned are either:

meaning the literal place where the scapegoat was sent to wander, which is more in-keeping with the original passage from leviticus itself, or

meaning it was for the fallen angel azazel, as seen in book of enoch?

so if we look to the second option in apochrypha, book of daniel makes reference to the watchers as a particular type of angel. enoch goes on to describe that there were good and bad watchers. azazel as a fallen angel taught warfare to the humans, and enoch includes them as one of the 20 bad watcher leaders (along with kokabiel and baraqiel, interestingly), and also according to enoch, as you say, bound azazel and cast him into the desert:

10:4: And again the Lord said to Raphael: 'Bind Azâzêl hand and foot, and cast him into the darkness: and make an opening in the desert, which is in Dûdâêl, and cast him therein.

5: And place upon him rough and jagged rocks, and cover him with darkness, and let him abide there for ever, and cover his face that he may not see light.

6: And on the day of the great judgement he shall be cast into the fire.

7: And heal the earth which the angels have corrupted, and proclaim the healing of the earth, that they may heal the plague, and that all the children of men may not perish through all the secret things that the Watchers have disclosed and have taught their sons.

8: And the whole earth has been corrupted through the works that were taught by Azâzêl: to him ascribe all sin.

and here we cycle back round to the scapegoat again. now, whether or not this literally happens in GO is up for speculation, but i personally think it's unlikely. that being said, i think something similar could happen. let's somewhat hc this:

aziraphale tells AWCW about the plans for the stars, makes crowley start asking questions

aziraphale cautions against it, but AWCW plows on anyway the moron (affectionate) - but symbolically protects aziraphale from repercussions as shown by him shielding him from the shooting stars (thanks again to 🌙anon for this!!!)

AWCW is spurred on by lucifer et al., and is implicated in the more nefarious rhetoric being spouted by satan

aziraphale is similarly brought into this, insomuch that perhaps AWCW refuses to say who started to make him ask questions and thus protects aziraphale OR aziraphale is in fact implicated for his own part but not as harshly - instead, AWCW is punished heavily and can't quite protect aziraphale despite best efforts

(this would also echo two things - the potential "aziraphale was/is/will be raphael" theory, and the verse in enoch 10:4 that he was the one to 'cast AWCW out')

the fall, and potential memory wipe of it?

aziraphale is 'punished' for his own part by being assigned to eden, cast out somewhat from heaven, but not made to suffer the fall (harking back, for me, to aziraphale being the goat that is cast into the wilderness as described in leviticus - not AWCW who was offered up as the goat for god; both goats forming the complete sacrificial offering although only one is killed)

aziraphale inadvertently introduces the concept of war and destruction to humanity in giving away the sword, which crowley seems to applaud/be impressed by

yada yada GO narrative, right up until aziraphale returning to heaven (which then would echo the islamic call that azazel in fact repented, and was returned to heaven - 🌙anon may correct me?)

and when the day of judgement finally happens presumably in s3... aziraphale is given the ultimatum to cast crowley "into fire", in order to rid humanity of all the sin on earth (looking to enoch 10:7-8 here)?

lastly, going back to the whole aziraphale-and-crowley-were-meant-to-be-the-same-person-originally thing... what if they symbolically were in fact just that? both azazel and raphael, and neither of them also, maybe not literally the same angel split in two, but literally mirrors of each other in their narrative?

there are so many loopholes and missing detail in this, i know - and it probably doesn't make a lick of sense, to boot - but this possibility is so exciting for me!!!✨

[thesherrinfordfacility]

thoughts on the fall

i had a really awesome debate with someone in the replies of one of my posts (here, with @mayapapaya33✨) and they raised a hugely valid argument on god's own morality as concerns the fall. it was awesome, and i wanted to ruminate on it more, because i think it could potentially really recontextualise how i saw the fall before now. in summary, I think points they raised were essentially the following:

if the reason why Angel Who Crowley Was - AWCW - fell (possible unreliable narration notwithstanding) was minor, does that say more about the person that committed the infraction or more about the rules that deems it to be worth the fall?

was what he did morally wrong? and if so, does this call into the assessment of "corruption of initial intent" vs "the initial intent was flawed from the start"

ie. the argument of god being wrong, and leading on to everything she did and created being flawed as a result, ie. heaven being fundamentally wrong

given the above, is crowley responsible for his fall? was he aware of the consequences, and would this have changed anything? did the demons deserve what they got? why didn't AWCW and the rest get mercy if She truly is omniscient, and potentially knew in some cases that their intention was not malicious?

so my first building block in the following is the definition of omniscient; from Merriam-Webster:

so to be all-knowing, it would be fair to extrapolate this as omniscience meaning you can see and know everything - past, present, and future. which has serious implications for god's culpability in the fallen angels' suffering when they were cast down. she, who presumably loves her creations, condemned them to be torn away from her love and grace, and did so in response to what - if we take crowley's narrative at face value - is a minor infraction (and questionable even at that). that is cruel, and wrong, by any standard of being a cognizant human being with any conceptual understanding of morality.

it would be very easy to see this as god in fact not being omniscient (and whilst iirc god is not explicitly described as such in GO, but we can surmise it by the fact that all of the events of the book appear to be told in her voice - 'all-knowing'), and that she didn't know what would happen and the suffering it would lead to, this plainly has to be false. she had to know what would happen. i'll revisit this later*.

now in terms of whether morality exists in heaven; i do not necessarily think, at the point of s1, we can be reliably sure that it does. Lucifer and the guys are painted by crowley as being Up To Something, but it's not necessarily indicated that they knew at the time that what they were doing was wrong. if it was even arguably wrong to begin with - the full circumstances of Lucifer's part in the GO!fall is not described, nor their inner thoughts on whether they knew it would be Bad.

but we do know from the pre-fall scene in s2 that there is the potential concept of punishment. aziraphale would, presumably, not deter AWCW from questioning god if he felt that god would be welcoming to it, and love him and cherish him all the same for asking questions. i talk about it more here, but aziraphale must - by this account - know something that crowley and by extension the other angels do not. that god would in fact not welcome it, or indeed it would be disrespectful to do so... so here's where i contradict myself: why is this even a thought process in aziraphale's head, if the concept of morality does not exist? if the concept of punishment, "i don't want to see you get into any trouble!", does not exist? this dialogue of aziraphale's shifts the picture entirely.

he may not understand what that punishment would look like, but aziraphale seems to know something. and the thing is - despite the warning being pretty clear, AWCW does not take it for what it is... a suggestion to proceed with caution. so if AWCW then presumably goes ahead and asks questions to god, what does that say about AWCW? naive and innocently minded - yes, potentially. but we don't know what questions he asked and how far he toed the line to the point of crossing it. it may have been benign questions, it might have a suggestion that he could do a better job ("if i was the one running it all..."), and in either case if meant with good intention it is clear to us that morally it did not warrant his fall.

but the fact that he did it anyway, and then proceeds to downplay his error in s1 post-fall is where i think his characterisation as an unreliable narrator begins. he was not wrong to ask the question and to ask the question he did, but he was wrong in asking it despite the clear warning, and to not accept his own actions being reflective of his culpability in his fall. god presumably did not just wake up one day and decide to cull half the angel population; whether she was right or wrong to consider asking questions as an infraction is immaterial - AWCW did it anyway.

*but this is where i come back to the concept of god being omniscient. because the thing is - to my mind, action borne of omniscience is a direct contradiction of free will. free will exists in heaven; there are many narrative/plot indicators that say support this. so imagine this - AWCW comes to god, asking questions and toeing the line in suggesting he could do a better job. he starts to question the purpose of his creations made in her name. he laments that it's for nothing, it'll be destroyed, 'what is the point?', and starts to intimate that he doesn't want to continue his purpose if this is how she's going to treat it.

now god, being omniscient, knows that AWCW is upset, and hurt, and indignant. but she knows it's borne out of love and pride in his work, and the work he is doing for her. but if she were to show him mercy, and forestall his emerging reckoning to break away from her if this is How It's Going To Be, is she contradicting his free will? well yes, arguably she is. if she told him the consequences of him breaking away, a consequence that by all accounts may not have been conceived as a notion until it actually was, would that derail his decision?

well that is arguable, because that's not necessarily contradicting free will; that's giving him a choice. but let's go back to the aziraphale-angel dialogue in s1:

a: "what i think is that there obviously has to be two sides; that's the whole point, so people can make choices, that's what being human means... choices. but, that's for them. our job as angels should be to keep all this working, so they can make choices-"

this is where the true paradox lies, i think. morality is an emerging concept, punishment seems to potentially exist, and free will definitely does. but what about choice? this is where we need s3 narrative to fully explain this; was crowley given a choice to inform on his free will? was it his free will to fall, and would he have done if he was fully aware that there was a choice involved? would he have doubled down, or would he have retracted all his thoughts on questioning god - a fundamental characteristic he embodies?

choice basically is free will, but with the added ingredient of knowing the consequences, the cause and effect, of exercising that free will. but would crowley have chosen any different, betrayed his nature, if he were to choose to stay in heaven knowing the alternative is falling? would that actually hinder his free will? that, i think, is still very much up for debate.

[thesherrinfordfacility]

okay so... we do agree that the most sense for the first scene of season 3 is to show in some way the fall, right? we saw the before, we saw the after (as in eden), we now need to know why there was this schism in the first place

and so, my question is, since i've just finished rewatching the job episode - what do you think, in gomens' universe, is the point of that schism? why did the fall happen? why was there a Great War? who started the war, was the war just between the different angels? who actually cast the losing side away?

the whole bit with "an angel/demon who goes along with Heaven/Hell as far as he can" really made me think about this all. plus, i personally would find it very satisfying to finally find out at least a little bit of context of why this separation happened in the first place for the moment (i hope) when the whole system is finally broken down and dismantled

hey lovely!!!✨ i do think it will open with some reference to the fall (as you said, imo it makes the most narrative, poetic, and thematic sense!!!), but i also feel like a lot of the show's answers are going to be within the fall, so idk if we'll see all of it in the beginning cold open, or if some will be continued towards the end of the series?

as for the fall questions, wowzers, i'll do my best to answer what i potentially think could factor in here, although they may not answer your qs outright!!!✨ and probably link to some other specs/metas that ive had jumbling around!!!

i think aziraphale knew or suspected something about why it would be risky to question god; maybe not that the fall was already bandied about as a concept, but maybe that there were Things Afoot that made him think that going against her will and plan could be bad news

i think that god is ultimately a very neutral, very amoral party. i don't think she is good or bad, right or wrong, well-meaning or malicious; she just is. i even possibly think that the ineffable plan, if there is even such a thing like she says in s1, is that she has no plan at all. everything is up to everyone else. (don't really have a singular meta on this, but perhaps a bit of this and that)

metatron is the Big Bad. dunno why, necessarily (ie what are his motivations other than Power?), but i think when god goes AWOL somewhere between job (or maybe actually after golgotha?) and present day, he fills the void and acts like he is still the voice of god, that he is still receiving orders. (again, no singular meta on this, and ive kinda got it sprinkled across many posts tbh!!!)

so with those kind of things in mind, here are my possible thoughts (not committing to any singular one) on the fall and the schism you've mentioned.

the fall was not necessarily meant to be what it turned out to be. i think ultimately angels came to god asking questions, or questioning her and her Ineffability, or the plan, whatever.

god wanted all of her creation to have free will. if that free will was to break away from heaven and from her, and act in their own interest, under their own orders, by their own conscience, i don't think she ever had an issue with this. even if - in the presumed case of lucifer - the intention was to break away as a direct challenge to god, to have the same power as god, i similarly don't think she wanted to stop this. that is literally free will. so she does nothing to stop whatever happens when they choose to break away.

metatron however has other ideas; heaven is good, and is correct, and is right. anyone who even questions it, even if out of love and devotion to god, those who just want to understand, were forfeit. god has removed herself from the picture, not even there at the (literal? figurative?) trial, so metatron acts as judge, jury, and executioner. in some cases, i think there were angels who were pushed, not fallen.

we know there was a war, but i think it was out of the angels that remained 'on heaven's side' being told lies about their fellow angels - told that these defectors were actively working against god to jeopardise her creations and her plans. that heaven will fall if they are not cast out. conflict ensues - from their perspective - to protect the sanctity of heaven.

then, possibly, i think a memory wipe kinda thing did happen, but specifically on the events of the fall. i do also wonder if this is where the book of life comes into play, but not overly confident (on any of this, really)

and ultimately i think the whole concept of true free will might have been god's plan - if you can call Nothing a plan - all along? that she completely steps back, and let's heaven and humanity kinda work it out for themselves.

like, this is the kinda stuff that i hope they reveal later on s3; crowley falling with lucifer, and possibly meeting aziraphale again etc. would, imo, be great for the ep1 cold open, but the actual events of the fall i think needs to be the belter that comes out in maybe ep5 or 6. obviously i haven't gone into where i think crowley and aziraphale may slot within all of this, but most things can be found in my masterpost anyway, or indeed happy to summarise for anyone who wants it!!!✨

[thesherrinfordfacility]

Now that I think about it, does Aziraphale actually KNOW how Crowley fell. He didn't know his angel name so there was no way to check up on him, and in S1 Crowley just tells him that he "sauntered vaguely downwards"- all of his confessions about asking questions and hanging around the wrong people happen when Crowley is alone. Do you think Aziraphale even realizes that him telling angel Crowley about the end of creation was likely a direct catalyst for Crowley falling.

that's just it nonnie, idk!!!✨

this is bordering into hc/theory territory so please forgive me, but i don't think aziraphale wouldn't have been keeping tabs on him after the pre-fall scene we saw; he's shown as being caring and conscientious even at that early stage, so i think AWCW's (angel who crowley was) comments might have worried aziraphale slightly, and if aziraphale was as close to god as i now suspect he might have been, it would stand to reason that he'd know that AWCW at least fell for the very thing that he warned him against... because aziraphale told him about the death of his creation as you said. it does also make me wonder therefore if aziraphale stood up for crowley immediately before the fall, that it was his fault that AWCW was asking these questions? idk...

but the dialogue so far, as you said, would indicate that aziraphale doesn't know. aziraphale clearly remembers at least parts of the war (he said he hadn't thrown his frisbee halo since the war), he remembers AWCW (job comment and the comment in the bandstand in s1)... so maybe no, he doesn't know why crowley fell? and that's part of the reckoning that's coming for him in s3? that crowley will reveal that him? there's a huge focus on memory in s2 that im still trying to fully parse out - could bits of it concerning aziraphale's part in the fall/war have been wiped? idkkkkk!!!✨

[thesherrinfordfacility]

Good morning/afternoon/evening! Three things:

If Crowley is crucified Jesus does that make Aziraphale Judas? You sort of touched on the option in your Fall spec but what about if it's referring to something in s3's modern scenes?

I don't really want the time travel/Book of Life/unreliable narrator theory to be true - I love unreliable narrators, so that could work depending on how it's done, I suppose... but in general I feel like that'd retcon too much of this season? - but I'm beginning to think there could be something to it. It's not just the okay-human-hair-does-grow sideburns and the well-there-could-have-been availability-issues-maybe-Crowley-just-changed-his-style sunglasses which you could handwave away. The shape of his Resurrectionist sideburns and the length of his Job hair seem to change as well - you know, the fricken fake hair that someone needed to deliberately change? There's *something* strange going on...

I forgot to save a link to a - I think Google Docs - meta picking apart the opening sequence and now I've lost it. I was wondering/hoping maybe you or one of your followers knew where it was or even just where I could look? Thank you!

Oh wait, four things. Thanks for all your amazing speculation, it's really enjoyable to read. And I'm glad you said you think season 3 will happen because I have no doubt it'll good but I'd feel much better if it was confirmed, so it's nice to see people being optimistic about it!

good afternoon anon!!!☀️ (afternoon for me, anyway!!!) and thank you so much, it's honestly always so nice to hear that my screams into what feels like a void sometimes do actually land somewhere!!!

re: google doc, the only one im aware of is the Magic Trick You Didn't See analysis, but not sure if this is what you're after... can anyone else help?

as for the rest of your ask: couple of tasty things to talk about here, so let's goooo!!!

i think it could be an interesting concept, aziraphale choosing to betray AWCW pre-fall in the interest of protecting - in his mind - the sanctity of heaven. it certainly would be a fitting bridge, imo, in tone and atmosphere between the pre-fall scene and the wall of eden scene. that being said, i think the analogy would have to be handled quite delicately given the general belief that judas was motivated by greed, or political gain*, and im not entirely convinced that GO would be influenced so literally by scripture, even if allegorically - aziraphale = judas / crowley = jesus could feel a bit... on the nose.

*though, if you consider psalms and john, there is the understanding that jesus chose judas as one of his disciples in order to fulfil prophecy which given that i anticipate there will be a further exploration of free will in GO, this could have fascinating Implications✨

but the thing is: the above only really works narratively, in my opinion, if there is an element of unreliable narratorship and memory modification. if crowley remembered that aziraphale hypothetically dobbed him in, i can't quite believe he would be so cordial, or seem as innocent, as he was on the wall. that, to me, screams that he doesn't remember all of the fall specifically (and his conflicting/piecemeal recollections of why and how he fell in s1 would make sense), at which point there would need to be an element of memory erasure.

as for the source of the memory erasure (and anon, im writing this on the assumption that you haven't read all of my musings, so forgive me if im repeating shit youve already read!), this is where i think i think the BOL comes in. i think the whole wording around 'cease to exist' - upon being erased from the BOL - potentially refers to angels losing memories of their angelic self.

however, the issue with this is that we have crowley and beelzebub both remember snippets of their time as angels (funnily enough, when talking about 'extreme sanctions' to frighten the younger angels). so, whether the BOL in fact erases memory, or if instead it erases angelic grace, i think regardless it has to have something to do with the sentence of falling.

im not a huge fan of memory-wipe plot devices for the same reason you've said - i think it removes too much character accountability - but the allusions to it in respect of crowley in s2 are too much to ignore, so there must be a grain of truth to it. and we know heaven has the power to do it - they outright plan to erase gabriel's memories in ep6.

all of that being said, however - i personally don't subscribe to the 'metatron has been fucking about with reality and memory and has been rewriting it using the BOL' theory. personally (and this doesn't mean i wouldnt be 100% on board with it if it turns out to be the case), i think it's a little too convoluted, even if it does explain the sideburn/hair length/sunglasses shenanigans.

i hasten to add here that even i am not fully behind my own time-travel batshit theory, because it doesn't really make a whole lot of sense and is similarly ridiculously convoluted, but i do think there has to be an in-story explanation for these discrepancies (ie. it's nothing to do with wardrobe choices or dt's filming schedule).

the fact that only (iirc) crowley is affected by this weirdness however is compelling, because lbr; who would care enough about crowley himself for there to be any fuckery where his specific narrative is concerned? well, that only leaves aziraphale and crowley himself*.

i have to admit that i need to examine the job and resurrectionist minisodes closer to see which specific scenes show the discrepancies (and possibly look at the 1941 minisode to boot), but the thing is - we know that crowley has the power to affect time. messing about with his own timeline, possibly in a bid to protect aziraphale (?) or prevent him going back to heaven, would account for a lot of his lines and his decisions in s2, and to my mind would account also for the very suspicious colour grading in s2: what is posed as a non-diegetic might in fact be the opposite, and the reason why we're seeing so much yellow and red grading is because it is all literally influenced by crowley's power himself... essentially, we could be seeing a colour signature of his power.

*i know metatron could be in this list; he obviously remembers him and bears a grudge, but im not convinced at this point that he is that threatened by him. he is able to separate crowley and aziraphale rather easily by social engineering - i think timeline/reality manipulation would be a bit overkill...

alternatively (and i can't take credit for this, this was my bf*), could it be that aziraphale in his new status as supreme archangel goes back to try and prevent AWCW falling? crowley rejects his offer of restoration (quite rightly), but aziraphale wants to prevent the pain that follows his fall, fully believing that he didn't deserve it, and goes back to the pre-fall scene to prevent AWCW asking questions?

that would explain in some sense why aziraphale seems to have a concept of punishment during this scene (when, to my mind, there's not currently any firm narrative explanation as to why he should). obviously it doesn't work, aziraphale fucking about with time - and trying to influence/retcon past free will - and AWCW is made to fall as punishment on aziraphale (hence scapegoating AWCW). this in turn would explain why crowley doesn't seem to know why he fell; he 'only asked questions'.

*both bf and i understand that there are a lot of loopholes in this (we were just spitballing about your ask, anon!) and im personally not sold on it because of what it could implicate for the wider narrative, plus it doesn't quite make sense re: the colour grading, the changes in crowley's appearance etc, but it is a valid speculation and could hold some weight... would probably need to think on it more to see if it is more plausible than im currently giving it credit for!!!

just a couple of ideas, and nothing that i firmly believe!!! i think one of these days, because all of my speculations link in together, i might need to write it all up into one long essay - but until that day, i love answering asks like this that make me think more on themes and allegory, and speculate on s3 - frankly, still in the wake of s2, it's what's keeping me going!✨

[thesherrinfordfacility]

:D hi again!! oh goodness im so excited about this whole shooting stars/rain symbolism im delighted you feel the same!!! and i absolutely agree with you about crowley taking the blame so to speak? thinking about the difference between aziraphale having doubts and crowley having questions - i should rewatch that scene but i think there's something interesting to examine there. i feel like we've attributed aziraphale's 'bad boy' streak and crowley's kind heart to just inherently being Them, but your idea that aziraphale was the one who was supposed to fall is SO intriguing to me in that aspect heheh >:]

about metatron: i think the main associations are, at least islamically the link between the prophet ezra/uzair (the different names are the anglicised and arabic spellings :)) like you mentioned and metatron being the angel of the veil. there's definitely a lot more discussion in jewish literature but i am not even a little bit qualified to talk about that :( further reading for the both of us i think! in terms of GO i doubt the prophet links will be explored - potentially the idea that the prophet ezra and therefore metatron? has been historically viewed as the son of God? however from what i know of islam and can tell from judaism that theory is pretty universally denied because of the absolute divinity of God (has no partners, no children etc etc)

the book of life! yes so we have uh a version of the angel/devil on your shoulder except we believe they're two angels who don't influence you but just write down all your good and bad deeds - these are compiled on the day of judgement and given to you in the right/left hand depending on your final judgement. not sure about any scratching out though! once you're judged, its heaven or hell and your earthly deeds are no longer needed. oh, and as far as i know, only humans have a book of deeds.

oh and also i am incredibly intrigued by your theories about the Fall and what aziraphale & crowley do or don't remember - i am sort of hedging my bets on the idea that early demon crowley didn't remember much about being an angel, and slowly got his memories back, potentially on purpose rather than a gradual return ("it hurts to remember" "i know. do it anyway.") - 🌙

hey 🌙anon!!!✨ ahhhh glad that it interested you!!!

metatron: noted, i definitely need to do some further reading, to see where things align!!! but thank you for clarifying ezra/uzair, that was confusing me slightly, but that makes sense✨

book of deeds: mhmm cool, that matches up from what i understood from research, that's good! interesting to know though that only humans have them... because that might (?) support my thoughts on what the BoL means for angels (ie i don't think it means what michael, beelzebub, and crowley think it to mean in s2... and instead for angels writes out angels' angelicness/causes them to fall).

im still somewhat in two minds about crowley's memory; i do think that there may be missing parts about the fall specifically (whether instigated by heaven or bc of the trauma, not sure!), but i do think some of crowley's 'missing memories' like re: furfur might just be down to AWCW being a bit of a knob, and didnt bother to remember anyone... crowley (well, both of them are tbh) is a unreliable narrator in my eyes, so it may well be a mix of everything!!!

thank you again for this, i really do appreciate it!!!✨💕

[thesherrinfordfacility]

In most religious texts, ALL of the angels are informed about the coming of humanity and of their place as God's greatest creation. Crowley not knowing about them likely means he was too much of a workaholic and wasn't paying attention when they made the announcement, like the way he's too focused on the nebula to listen to what Aziraphale is saying unless it has to do with the stars. And its mentioned that Crowley worked directly with Archangels, whereas cherubim like Aziraphale still would have been subordinate to them.

fair point about the plan!!!✨ of course, this is assuming that s3/GO would follow this closely the religious texts that inspire it (ie neil may well play around with this), and like you said - it could well just be a note in AWCW's characterisation that he wasn't listening, hence why he had no idea what their fate was when aziraphale brought it up... but given that it directly threatened his creation/s, you'd think that would perk his ears up? im not sure on anything, but personally to me its somewhat indicative that, yes, he was intensively focused on the stars, but may also have been that he is not as hugely high-up as i originally thought.

that's not to say that he's low-ranking, not at all - dominions are shown in some interpretations, as far as i understand it, to be the exacting of god's justice and mercy in unjust situations which, to me, seems very in line with crowley's moral philosophy on doing 'the right thing'. thrones are similarly shown to preside over divine justice, and also the cosmic balance of god's universe. (im sure someone will correct me on this but i am literally going by the research findings, so - mea culpa)

ultimately at the moment, it's all unknowable, but my assumptions are largely just made off of the narrative given to us in the pre-fall scene (and others), and those are the conclusions i arrived at!!! as for the working directly with archangels, could you remind me on this quote/scene? i can't recall anything like that off the top of my head, and im happy to recontextualise my thoughts based on stuff ive missed/forgotten!!!✨

[thesherrinfordfacility]

heh im happy to answer questions!! :D im actually not out to anyone online as muslim and so this is incredibly fun for me to talk about sgjkgh

metatron! now i have to be honest, i had never really heard of metatron till.. couple weeks ago when i watched s2! and it seems that this isn't an uncommon thing too, there's much more description of metatron in jewish literature than islamic, his name isn't mentioned in the quran at all iirc, but given the other similarities in religion i thought to look it up and found that! he exists! but i don't know what the whole.. beyond the veil thing entails, really. 😔 not even sure what this "veil" is. regarding metatron i have basically no knowledge at all. we're all learning here!

but! the free will discussion... oof. honestly this is a big topic. as it should be, but a lot of young muslim kids ask this question of.. if everything is predetermined, how can God judge us for our mistakes? we're told we have autonomy and choice to do what we want (which is what makes us human.) but Allah has also predetermined everything. uh. so [shrug] the analogy that stuck with me most was that if a child is given two options for food by their parent, the parent will know what they are going to pick, but they still have the choice. its flawed like all analogies but it is a good framework i think. there's also the thing about Allah knowing everything that will happen but not actively enforcing it? its definitely confusing. i hope i made any sense at all ;-; again happy to answer any questions if that has raised any but i can't.. promise i'll give good answers sjkfhgh [gestures at these paragraphs]

israfil! well, judgement and resurrection are very closely linked. iirc, israfil is the only being (along with god) to know when the day of judgement will happen. he'll blow the famous trumpet once to end all life on earth except himself, and blow it again to resurrect everyone that has ever lived. nods. the second coming doesn't trigger this, but it does signify the end of days.

i hope that answered everything? sorry this was so long 😭 in my defence . uh. i have no defence. my apologies. but thank you for asking all this!! its rare that ppl show interest in my little special interest <3 - 🌙

hello again 🌙 anon!!!✨ well in that case im very honoured you are sharing this with me, anonymously or not, thank you!! thank you for your follow-up ask too; hope you don't mind that i answer both on this post? keeps everything neat and tidy, especially if i need to refer back to it at any point!!!

i was going to put the rest of this ask under a cut but fuck it the below 2nd ask is SO IMPORTANT.

re: metatron, i did do a little bit of reading on their mention in the quran and it reads that uzair (who is possibly ezra?) is also the metatron...? not a question necessarily, just a mark of slight confusion that i need to look into further, haha!!!

free will: that's such a beautiful analogy... i guess it may not necessarily be a predetermination of only one path, but multiple different ones, and it's our choice which one we choose, even if god knows which one will be chosen. but that god doesn't tell us what will happen when we make that choice, because that would influence our decision, and as you said - either way doesn't enforce it. that i believe crosses over into some catholic thoughts on predestination, im not sure, but either way would strike the balance between god being omniscient, and her creations having free will - making the two compatible.

israfil: brilliant, thank you for clarifying, especially where the second coming might link to the day of judgement!!! follow-up q, i read a bit more about the day, and where (if ive read this right), each person had their book of deeds that supports whether they go to heaven or to hell. sort of related: where does the book of life fit into this in Islam? is each person's deeds reviewed, handed back to them in whichever appropriate hand, and they are then scratched from the BOL?

stars: that's... that's not brainrot talking, that's bloody ✨illumination!!!✨ wow!!! even if the star shower scene was before demons existed, the suggestion that the shower started after the angel who crowley was (AWCW) began to ask questions - something that firmly foreshadowed the fall - and given that aziraphale was the one to make him start questioning/then hurriedly cautioned him against asking them... the symbology of AWCW not necessarily protecting him from things that chase away demons, but protecting him from being implicated in whatever punishment was to come??? protecting him from the fall??? my GOD, im ASCENDING. oh my god oh my god oh my god

(wait --- going by the above from 🌙 anon, was i potentially somewhat right in this and this??? like obviously not exactly right, but that aziraphale was himself implicated in the fall, and AWCW protected him/defended him? FUCK)

[thesherrinfordfacility]

Motif of Aziraphale mourning the 'death' of angel Crowley? Maybe? Referring to angel Crowley (or perhaps demons in general) as the scapegoat here? But Crowley kind of already IS a scapegoat- the serpent of Eden is usually blamed for showing mankind how to use their free will, ultimately leading them to sin, and is cursed by God to "crawl" and "eat dust" and be viewed as evil. An act that caused a schism between God and Man, which is specifically what Jesus dies to atone for. To finally "redeem" us from allowing the serpent to lead us astray. The Second Coming leads to Jesus bringing us back to paradise, after the serpent got us cast out. It comes full circle.

And it also makes me think about how Mary's role Mediatrix of All Graces is in the sense that the Grace of God/Jesus is bestowed on others through Mary. Like. There's a lot going on here.

hi anon!!!✨ this is so beautifully summarised, thank you!!! really interesting reference to crowley's role in original sin, because whilst on one hand you could argue that he was somewhat complicit in original sin, and even said, "they just said 'get up there and make some trouble..'" (suggesting that he knew there would be some kind of fallout), on the other, does that 'crime' befit the blame placed on him for it?

and consider the same about crowley's fall; i do think crowley, in some measure, did something wrong, and i think this is highlighted by his presumed questioning despite aziraphale cautioning against it - in his musing that if he himself were running things, he'd like it if people pitched in. certainly, we as the audience do not see this as condemnable, but aziraphale definitely seems to think there is danger in going down that path - and it would appear that crowley may defy god in doing this... but then again:

was it truly god that passed the sentence?

was crowley again condemned for a crime far greater than this own?

full circle indeed. and as for aziraphale; well, yeah.

[thesherrinfordfacility]

I was debating whether or not the Omelas theory and Crowley knowing Jesus would be relevant to S3. And then they released that set of pictures with not just Aziraphale as Mary, but Crowley as crucified Jesus: Arguably the ULTIMATE scapegoat. Thus tying my two questions together. Hmmm...

yours is the second ask ive gotten about those photos, anon (and other anon, i promise i will answer you!!!) and frankly i still don't fully know what to make of this!!!✨

i do think omelas is at the very least has or is going to have some general narrative influence or inspiration on GO, even if it's not even directly related to metatron's coffee order... in any case, im glad that it may feature because i remember loving it when i read it years ago! couple of favourite (and potentially relevant?) quotes, because why not:

"Their tears at the bitter injustice dry when they begin to perceive the terrible justice of reality, and to accept it."

"But to praise despair is to condemn delight, to embrace violence is to lose hold of everything else."

"Happiness is based on just discrimination of what is necessary, what is neither necessary nor destructive, and what is destructive."

as for crowley's part in it; well, im not sure. we know that in GO!canon that crowley essentially replaced the devil (as described in matthew, mark, luke etc.) as the tempter of jesus, in that he showed jesus the kingdoms of the world (ie. the third temptation and representative of tempting jesus into the dereliction of god). so, we could possibly surmise that crowley also tempted him into eating and into essentially killing himself to test god's love (by preventing it).

well, we know crowley has done those first two temptations before, right? even if the context isn't the same, it is aptly mirrored in s2:

but tbh, it could be that crowley never actually tempted jesus in GO!canon with the first two temptations (ie biblical texts misreport it), or that the interactions were not temptations and instead was misconstrued niceness ("his travel opportunities were limited"), or it could be that crowley is just that indeed a knob sometimes and his recount of the third temptation is not strictly accurate in sentiment as he himself reports it (ie. unreliable narrator). personally, id like to think the second option, given the potential link* between crowley and jesus as scapegoats in different but mirroring scenarios.

either way, his depiction as jesus being crucified is intriguing. if we take the imagery that crowley narratively mirrors jesus, we could arrive at the conclusion that crowley himself was a scapegoat. ive discussed the scapegoat thing more in some other posts, and more specifically along the lines of the old testament depiction of the scapegoat origin, but fuck it, let's chat about it again.

however, i have kinda gotten stuck re: that crowley image - if we take the new testament allegory of the scapegoat (ie the crucifixion), then that would suggest to me a couple of narrative points as concerns crowley's fall:

that crowley was blasphemous (potentially true given his comment pre-fall, "if i were in charge...")

that whoever passed his sentence was (if you consider the gospel of mark re: pontius pilate) originally merciful, but bent to the will of 'the people' (👀 at god and metatron)

but may also have refused to pass the sentence directly (if you consider the gospel of matthew) and instead turned crowley over to someone else to be condemned (double 👀 at god and metatron)

crowley may have fallen for a higher purpose - ie: used as the scapegoat (as jesus died to bring humanity back to righteousness/absolve humanity of sin - and would track with omelas), but we ought to consider that other angels fell too

crowley rose again after falling (which, yeah, he did - presumably into the garden of eden - but none of the fallen, as far as we are aware, died?).

none of the above is impossible, but im not entirely convinced. the above to me would strongly suggest that this scenario would better fit lucifer's narrative anyway? or maybe a bit of both? neil has wiped the possibility of crowley having been/being lucifer (rip), and so if lucifer was indeed the first prince of heaven (as neil has confirmed) and fell first to become satan... where would crowley fit in with the above? it almost seems like it's a bit too main-character-ish in that particular part of the hypothetical narrative for this allegory to fit crowley specifically.

this is where instead i feel like the scapegoat story in old testament texts might be a better parallel. leviticus says that god commanded the israelites to once a year perform a ceremony that would symbolise jesus' own later sacrifice. this was in the form of aaron sacrificing a bull as a burnt offering to atone for his own sins, and then to cast a lot on two other goats - one goat would be sacrificed as a sin offering on behalf of the temple (tabernacle), and the other would be spared but cast into the wilderness carrying the sins of the people, never to return. these two goats together represented the sacrifice and atonement for sin, even if only one was killed.

(@everyone, i think ive read the above right, but obviously it's very summarised and therefore may miss out or misinterpret the details; please come and kindly correct me if not!!!)

so we have three potential elements to this; the bull, and the two goats. if we take the bull out of the equation though, just for a minute, we could potentially interpret that the sin-offered goat and the scapegoat are potential lucifer and crowley respectively; that would fit.

the thing for me however is the - i believe - quite widely known point that crowley and aziraphale were originally meant to be the same character in initial drafts of GO. and we know from the pre-fall scene that aziraphale's information on the fate of the stars may have goaded crowley into challenging god, despite his warnings afterwards not to do so.

so - and hear me out - what if crowley was in fact offered up as the sacrificial goat, *the one which died and rose again, and aziraphale were the scapegoat? spared the fall, but cast out of heaven instead to bear the weight of sin, of the fall, on his shoulders? wouldn't that track with his being stationed on earth - cast into the wilderness - where he just so happens to end up meeting crowley again? and wouldn't it also match the symbolism behind aziraphale's own depiction as the virgin mary; being that of purity, faith, and virtue?

this could further cycle back around to omelas, and the condemnation of the child to be kept in squalor and darkness in order to preserve the paradise of the city. this could easily be parallel to crowley - someone who fell but didn't deserve to - and in doing so, staying fallen, maintains that equilibrium in heaven, and to aziraphale being one to walk away from omelas after learning of the child:

"They leave Omelas, they walk ahead into the darkness, and they do not come back. The place they go towards is a place even less imaginable to most of us than the city of happiness. I cannot describe it at all. It is possible it does not exist. But they seem to know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas."

certainly, it raises questions about metatron's suggestion to aziraphale that he could restore him to angelic status. did metatron make the offer knowing that crowley would reject it, and therefore keep them both separated? that aziraphale would return to heaven - to omelas - and continue in maintaining its illusion of paradise? bring home the scapegoat and instead wash it of the sins it had previously - and potentially unknowingly, re: memory-wipe theories - carried?

[thesherrinfordfacility]

Still stuck on angel Crowley especially with the knowledge that Aziraphale was a cherub. What level do you have to have in the hierarchy in order to have that much faith and security. Like you've never been reprimanded for anything in your life.

my brain is like a skipping record on the implications of pre-fall crowley and aziraphale, their ranks, their responsibilities, and the foreshadowing of their experience of the fall. ive talked about it in metas that ill link below if you - or anyone else - is interested!!!✨ but the thing (essentially, the tl;dr) that gets me is:

aziraphale as a cherub, if following christian angelology, would be to my mind essentially a guardian of god, and very close to her (which tracks re: eastern gate, and being somewhat comfortable lying to her about the sword)

aziraphale also is actively helping build earth and the humans which, if going by the belief that they are god's Ultimate creation, would also place him in esteem and prestige, can't believe just any angel would be entrusted with that and/or reading the plans for them

aziraphale appears to have a concept of punishment, and given this is pre-fall (and id therefore imagine that punishment that means anything to an angel doesn't yet exist) it makes me think aziraphale knew something that angel!crowley/AWCW didn't

AWCW appears to have been working on the stars 'since always' - could be a workaholic, high-ranking angel, or is in fact a lower rank (going by the same angelology matrix), liaising with god ("gravity"), but not close to her like the highest choirs are. for this reason, despite his bravado to shax, im hesitant to think he was an Archangel

AWCW seems way more innocent than aziraphale just in terms of manner and tone in that scene, aziraphale seems more wise and worldly even without taking into context his Warning. aziraphale is also rather condescending at points in his dialogue.

so i mean, take the above as you will - im not about to reawaken the lucifer theory (it needs to - sob - stay firmly in its grave), but i do wonder if crowley is actually more powerful as a demon than he was as an angel. he has the power of creation etc. in the pre-fall scene, but the ability to stop time etc. in the post-1793 scenes? i wonder if that was borne out of his imagination which - yk - other demons don't have. i love theorising about this part of their story and could go on for a fortnight, but i do wonder if we have the perceived importance of these characters, pre-fall, the right way around!!!✨

links:

what does aziraphale know?, omniscience/free will, and the fall (basically looking at free will in Calvinist doctrine), does crowley even remember the fall?, and book of life musings (but a bit on the fall towards the end)