Foreshadowing, out of order?
In storytelling, is there a single word that means "the opposite of foreshadowing"?
WARNING: in trying to wrap my head around this, there will be wittering!!!
Wikipedia tells me that a flashback is a method of foreshadowing.
The Bullet Catch in the NZF minisode, being a flashback as well as told before the "present day" [speculated] event it sets up a clue for, well, that's what I've understood foreshadowing to mean until now, because isn't foreshadowing always presented before the event it foreshadows comes to pass?
The flashback/memory minisode, A Companion To Owls, is told after the "present day" event it foreshadows. Does that still count as foreshadowing, or is it instead considered "the big reveal" because it is told after?
And is this all that is meant by various things in Good Omens 2 being "out of order"?
The Hiding Miracle and the Memory That Both Foreshadows and Reveals It?
Indeed, it was a tiny miracle - as titled in the soundtrack - that worked as planned and "barely moved the dials" (but still a miracle in which "Noone will have noticed A Thing" however tiny it was, and that "Nobody notices he's here (...) Nobody can spot him, (...) especially if they're looking for him").
I believe it was the first of three events that happened that night, which, became the main focus of this "quiet, gentle, romantic" season, but paling in comparison to the other two events. Moving on!
Returning to how A Companion to Owls isn't told until after The Hiding Miracle and clues us in as to what was actually going on: this tiny miracle was made to appear far more powerful than it actually was, with the use of showmanship:
The ceremonious setup of being positioned on the circle in the middle of the room hidden under the carpet, between Aziraphale and Crowley; he could have been standing, but instead, "Jim... Sit in this chair." And it's a beautiful chair, like a throne, but Jim being taller wouldn't have worked for the image of the 'W' (similar to the 'W' shape made with Shadwell standing between Aziraphale and Crowley at the airbase, in the book Good Omens.)
ta-da!-look-at-this-very-complicated-and-powerful-miracle-that-we-are-doing
Why perform at all then, for an audience of none?
Ah, they're not alone, oooOoOoOOOoOoOooo, spooky. Go and see for yourself: check out the bottom left area of the screen when Crowley returns to the bookshop and says, "I'm BACK" (this is to do with the "framing opportunities" secret mentioned in the Gavin Finney BTS article https://britishcinematographer.co.uk/gavin-finney-bsc-good-omens-2/) Aziraphale calmly replies, "Yes, I can see that" and later gasps, reacting to something happening off-screen at 40m41s.
So this performance, not yet knowing who their audience might be, could be as a precaution, just in case.
Gabriel instinctively crosses his hands and is confused when Aziraphale and Crowley uncross them - or likely because Aziraphale was even standing there at all - because he remembers, or rather, in his mind's eye, sees the shape left behind by a missing piece of furniture.
The ceremonious setup of being positioned in the centre, between Sitis and Job, this time in the background to have Bildad appear a little shorter in height for the stylized 'W', then crossing his hands. The pot containing Sitis and Job's children being the circle, hidden by the circle of carpet (robes) made as Sitis and Job embrace.
ta-da!-look-at-this-very-complicated-and-powerful-miracle-that-we-are-doing
Had we seen Jim's and Crowley's conversation about memory before The Hiding Miracle instead of much later in episode 5, then it would have been foreshadowing, yes?
*temper rising* A "reveal," or "out-of-order foreshadowing"? (VBUAXNAUSX*keyboard smash*NYVIFGNOMAI) grrrrrr!
...
After the Job story is told, (save for the final scene) and Aziraphale calls for Crowley, my head-cannon used to be that Aziraphale wanted to talk about hair -
Aziraphale: Crowley, I gave you lovely long locks in my retelling of this story, how about you?
Crowley: Nah, "shoulder-length bouncy 'bob'" is what I put - a "Lob" I think is what they're calling it these days.
But now I think that, to book-end Crowley's beginning with, "Your boss said that to Job, do you remember?" (imo they are so good at blending in, they can act human better than any human can act human! So, while feigning the memory span&loss&retention of a human, of course they can remember most everything. Angel stock: constitution of an Ox, memory of an Elephant.) Aziraphale may have wanted to remark on Jim's crossed hands from the night before and how similar it was to Crowley's doing so; that it was evidence of Gabriel still somehow being able to connect with images from his memory. "Crowley? You also did that thing... does Gabriel remember?"
If each minisode contains something that foreshadows or reveals what magic tricks occurred during this season's present day events, I feel that the only thing left is from "The Resurrectionists" minisode, where Crowley Goes Large (woah, woah, woah, another case for The Song Is The Clue?!?) ... or makes himself, something or someone else tiny.
"Size and shape are simply options" after all, so I do wonder about Hell's Usher, where the only time we've seen him is when he is small enough to fit in a bathtub and yet he is HUGE in the opening title sequence of season one. Behind him, Noah's Ark stranded between two damaged buildings (or one damaged building and maybe the Pleasure Cruiser Morbillo?)
Something else that may be revealing of stories yet to be told of the past, while also foreshadowing a near-future event:
Based on what Crowley said, this is not the first time Crowley and Aziraphale have performed a half-miracle together! Whatever biiiig miracle they're about to do (speculated event #2) could still be completely balanced and undetected, but then a plume of miraculous activity emerging from the circle gateway (privately speculated event #3) is what poor Aziraphale will appear to take the blame for.
Things being out of order may have started with the question, are season two's present day events being told out of order? There are other things appearing out of order as well, for example a change in the order of colours in the Rainbow (for "present day" episode two only I think, beginning Violet then Red, etc.) Or, in this case, narrative devices being so intertwined, one flashback-event can contain images and phrases that both foreshadow something yet to happen as well as to reveal what happened in a part of the story already told.
As always, please no asking or tagging Mr Gaiman as this blog post contains theory and speculation, thank you.
105 notes
·
View notes
Lady Susan Readthrough Letters 33 & 34
Summary: Lady Susan is sure she can smooth everything over, but Reginald says he's finally clear on her character and he breaks off the engagement.
-+-
These short letters are still very good, Lady Susan, "depend on it, I can make my story good with Reginald. Lady Susan still thinks she can get Reginald back! This time I think her confidence is misplaced, after all many of Lady Susan's lies depended on Reginald thinking that Mrs. Mainwaring was Lady Susan's friend.
I do think Reginald is a bit of a drama queen:
the absolute necessity of an immediate and eternal separation from you... You know how I have loved you; you can intimately judge of my present feelings, but I am not so weak as to find indulgence in describing them to a woman who will glory in having excited their anguish, but whose affection they have never been able to gain.
Really interesting similarities between Reginald and Edmund Bertram:
Lady Susan: "the spell is removed; I see you as you are."
Mansfield Park: "But the charm is broken. My eyes are opened."
And yet there is a massive difference in the women being referred to. I hold that Mary is hardly a villain. After all, Edmund describes her thusly soon after, "She would not voluntarily give unnecessary pain to any one... Hers are faults of principle, Fanny; of blunted delicacy and a corrupted, vitiated mind." Mary is a far more complex character than Lady Susan. If she did deceive Edmund, it was not purposefully done. After all, she doesn't lie (except about the necklace) and Fanny always saw Mary clearly, but in many ways Edmund blinded himself.
Lady Susan gives us a clear villain, she's basically a psychopath without any morals or guilt. She is opening twisting the truth. Mansfield Park gives us a group of young people making bad decisions and falling in love with the wrong people. As much as I love Lady Susan because it's downright hilarious, the mature works just go so far beyond what Jane Austen did at 18. Which is kind of an obvious point, but like, Lady Susan is already SO GOOD. So I guess this is a very long way of saying Jane Austen is a genius and these parallel quotes show how much better she got over time.
Edmund I think is a more sympathetic character than Reginald. Reginald actually knew a lot about Lady Susan's real sins and then was talked out of them. Edmund basically didn't know anything about Mary before she came to the parsonage.
(I do know that people posit that both Lady Susan and Mary Crawford were based on Jane Austen's cousin, but I try not to indulge in those theories without concrete proof. I feel like Jane Austen could have made both of these women up.)
12 notes
·
View notes