mouthporn.net
#good omens meta – @catsteinbooks on Tumblr
Avatar

Catherine Stein

@catsteinbooks

author Catherine Stein
Avatar

The Ineffable Detective Agency Presents: What do you mean there are TWO Edens??

Do you remember how we were shown those two different shots of the Eden walls in S1? One is the zoom in, the other a zoom out and they bookend the scene. Here they are back to back...

I've not seen anyone mention it before but these are DIFFERENT WALLS. Yes, you heard me correctly. We have been shown two totally different Edens. Let's talk about it shall we?

Mini-Fic Recommendation!

The wonderful @catsteinbooks has written a mini-fic based on this post! It's great - you should check it out! :)

"What if it took multiple tries before the Garden of Eden worked as intended?"

I just couldn't resist after learning about this!

Avatar
reblogged
Avatar
beebopboom

*Flashback to conversation with Metatron*

“..to restore your friend, Crowley, to full angelic status.”

Restore: return (someone or something) to a former condition, place, or position.

*What Aziraphale says to Crowley*

“He said I could appoint you to be an angel..”

Appoint: assign a job or role to (someone)

So which is it Aziraphale? Like I know you’re basically saying the same thing but those two words have some very different connotations.

Ooh, this is a really interesting point. It ties into the dual definitions of angel and demon that we've seen elsewhere.

Your "angel" is different from my "angel."

"Restore" gives the connotation of angel as an identity, while "appoint" has the connotation of angel as an occupation.

Crowley expresses this dichotomy at various points too. "Former demon" = demon as an occupation. "I'm a demon. I lied." = demon as an identity. In the bandstand scene, he even does both at once. "That's part of a demon's job description. Unforgivable. That's what I am."

This uncertainty runs throughout both seasons. Is angel/demon a thing you ARE or a thing you DO? Aziraphale and Crowley both struggle with separating the two. Heaven and Hell behave as if it's just one thing: what you do is who you are. But the show tells us again and again that those roles don't define us. Angels can be "bad" and demons "good." Crowley and Aziraphale can break from their assigned roles and even invent new identities for themselves. (Our side!) Even Michael calls Aziraphale a "former angel" in s2e1.

In the Final Fifteen in particular, Aziraphale is arguing for angel as a job. ("Work with me!") He's not trying to change Crowley or to imply that he's lesser as a demon. But Crowley is reacting to angel as an identity (highly understandable, since it's an instinctive trauma response). It's "your exactly is different from my exactly," adding confusion to an already fraught situation.

I think in season 3, in order to properly break from Heaven and Hell and dismantle the system, there will have to be a break from this occupation/identity confusion. Both angels and demons will need to understand that identity isn't what you're assigned by God or your family or your job. You define who and what you are, by your actions and choices.

Avatar
reblogged
Avatar
agoodflyting

Why Aziraphale's White Satin Pumps Are Ridiculous (And I love them)

So this is a continuation of the lengthy rant I posted here about Aziraphale's outfit in the Bastille scene of GO and all the ways it would have pissed people in Revolutionary Paris off. I got to the shoes and realized they needed their own post.

Aziraphale's Blessed Little White Satin Pumps

To recap: in 1793, Paris is in control of The People, who are making up for decades of oppression and poverty by beheading the fuck out of everyone remotely nobility-adjacent. And into this mess strolls one Angel in white satin heels.

Avatar
Avatar
noneorother

Hi, I’ve only read one meta by you yet, but you seem to be just the right person to ask this: did you notice how many people in the scenes outside the bookshop are wearing orange, in series 2?

Any idea what that’s all about? Is it just esthetics, an echo of the bookshop‘s columns, or does it have a filmographical significance? Everytime I watch the show there seem to be more orange clothes, once you start seeing that, it’s crazy how many there are!

Avatar

Hey thanks for the ask! I mean, you have until 2026 to read more of my drivel so; pace yourself! Orange clothing is definitely an *interesting* choice for extras in film. You almost never see it in background actors clothing because... it draws the eye! The fact that they included so much orange, yellow, and loud patterning in the extras in season 2 is a real decision to throw film tradition and S1 cannon out the window.

I would like to submit my own theory that the choice was made as a deliberate nod to time travel. But first, a little background.

Compare two crowd scenes on Whickeber street from each season: It's kind of nuts that even at microscopic resolution we get such a HUGE difference.

That's not to say orange is missing. Here are the only two extras wearing orange in S1, and they happen to be in the same scene in episode 2, when Newt and Shadwell meet for the first time, discussing occult beings "hiding in plain sight". (witches in this case)

Ooooohhh.

Avatar

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

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

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

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

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

Historical context: a new type of poverty

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

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

You know who doesn't know that? Aziraphale.

The rise of capitalism

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

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

Half a conclusion and other thoughts

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

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

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

~~~

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

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

This is a really great analysis! The historical context is really important here!

Avatar

Another Bentley Thing

I know we're supposed to be looking for not-Bentley clues, but I noticed another thing about the Bentley while poking around, so I thought I'd share it.

We see the speedometer of the Bentley just a few times during the season. First, when Crowley is racing through London while "Good Old-Fashioned Lover Boy" is playing. It's only on screen for a moment, but I managed to grab a pic. Even blurry, we can make out the odometer at the top, reading 66666.

Of course it's all 6s. Demon car, right?

Then Aziraphale drives to Edinburgh.

That's definitely not all 6s anymore. Looks to me like it says 63332. Has the number of miles gone backwards? Could also be 68332, but in that case, where did all those extra miles come from? Crowley's always only 2 minutes away from the bookshop, and it's only 400ish miles to Edinburgh. Either way, it's weird.

We see it one more time when the Bentley speeds up after Crowley threatens to sell books.

The final 2 has ticked over to a 3. The odometer is actually tracking miles here, which it probably doesn't do when Crowley drives.

What does all this mean? Well, there's weirdness going on, like we already knew. I can't wait to learn all the secrets behind all the details we keep finding. But for now, keep on digging. I love to see what you all come up with!

Avatar

The Thin Dark Duke of Hell

Haven't actually written a meta before, but I've been mulling this around in my head, so here's my take on why I think Crowley is likely to be a Duke of Hell in season 3.

Reason 1: it makes narrative sense

From a story-telling perspective, it's the logical starting place for season 3. Especially if we consider how the original idea was developed as a sequel to the book.

You are using an unsupported browser and things might not work as intended. Please make sure you're using the latest version of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, or Edge.
mouthporn.net