#everything is meant
Text
RIGHT, Good Omens folks, let’s talk blocking: the art of where you put your actors within the scene, in relation to others.
Season 1, Aziraphale is always on the right side, and Crowley is always on his left side. The only exceptions to this is in the Bentley, because of the steering wheel, and on the park bench during the switch.
Aziraphale expects Crowley to appear on his left too. At the Ark he still turns right when he feels an ethereal presence, only to turn left right away. Present day, when he’s eating sushi and Gabriel appears, he smiles, turns *left*, instantly realises it’s not that kind of ethereal visit, turns right with a bit of a panic.
Aziraphale right, Crowley left. Always. Right?
Season 2 switches this up. By a LOT.
[[MORE]]
It starts moment one in the coffee shop, blink and you’ll miss it: Aziraphale is sitting down, senses Crowley, *turns left*, only for Crowley to walk around the table *right*, and sit down. It’s a tiny moment, but it speaks so loudly on… well, Aziraphale’s assumptions. Which he has a lot of.
Everything is Meant. Douglas is too brilliant for this to be random. And it happens… so often?
I also find it very interesting that they added moments in history where Crowley is on the right side. Most particularly one where he definitely is *on* the moral right side. (‘Poverty is good actually’, really Aziraphale?)
Then there’s this scene, which, the Job flashback deserves a whole essay onto its own…
Then there’s the the fact that Crowley is always on Shax’s right, and she is always on his left.
And then there’s this!
Muriel is *always* on Crowley’s left.
It’s almost as if things aren’t as black and white as the system would want you to believe, ey, angel?
Bonus: Gabriel and Beelzebub start off their meetings on opposite sides of the table. They end sitting on the same side.
Anyhoo I love this show a VERY NORMAL AMOUNT please feel free, always, to scream at me about it.
#good omens#good omens season 2 meta#good omens season 2#good omens spoilers#good omens season 2 spoilers#gos2 spoilers#gos2#ineffable husbands#aziraphale#crowley#muriel#good omens meta#everything is meant#neil gaiman#douglas mackinnon
2K notes
·
View notes
Text
Everything Is Meant (long S2 analysis, part 2)
Part one here
Okay, so that's how I think the pre-creation scene and Gabriel's arc connect to Aziraphale's choice. I also think the ineffable bureaucracy speedrun exists to prove totally different things to Aziraphale and Crowley: Aziraphale loves that they can love each other but notes they have to run away to be together; Crowley sees this and immediately thinks "hey, we can do that too!", forgetting that running away is not a solution Aziraphale has ever been interested in. It's the mentality of an individualist vs a group-oriented mind, and neither of them is necessarily wrong, it's just that their priorities are different and they HAVE TO TALK ABOUT IT, which they don't.
Continued analysis under the cut:
3. Let's take the Job minisode. Why include it? We already mentioned that it proves Aziraphale remembers Crowley as an angel, since he mentions it. And he believes Crowley is the same person he always was, and that he doesn't want to harm Job's crops or animals or children. Crowley tries to convince him he's a Big Bad Demon who is all in on this assignment, but fails utterly to kill even a single goat, soooo... Aziraphale comes to the conclusion that he knows what Crowley wants. Alert! Alert! This is a big problem! Crowley says, "What do you know about what I want?" Aziraphale: "I know you." Crowley: "You do not know me." But because Aziraphale got it right this time, he goes ahead assuming he'll always get it right, which is a crucial failure when it comes to the final reckoning. He doesn't ever ASK Crowley what he wants, he just assumes. When you assume you know what someone wants, you usually assume their priorities align with yours... he couldn't be more wrong about that. The Job minisode sets up this dynamic for them, and they never really manage to change it.
The other thing happens at the end of the minisode. Crowley acknowledges two crucial points: 1) he's lonely ("But you said it wasn't!" "I'm a demon. I lied"), 2) he doesn't think Aziraphale would like Hell. Aziraphale DOESN'T like Hell. Aziraphale hates Hell for what they've done to Crowley. He doesn't see Heaven as innocent or benign, but importantly, Heaven has never tried to hurt Crowley directly. They never threatened his safety. They never tortured him (as it's heavily implied that Hell did). Fast forward to the last ten mins of season 2: Aziraphale excited to tell Crowley that he can be an angel again BECAUSE: he never has to go back to Hell. They can never hurt him again, not the way they did before. And he doesn't have to be lonely anymore.
Last point before I leave Job: Crowley has the chance to cause Aziraphale to Fall, here, probably. ("I lied to Heaven to thwart the will of God!" "You did, but I'm not going to tell anybody. Are you? ...good, then nothing has to change.") He doesn't take it. He doesn't want Aziraphale to be a demon. He loves Aziraphale as he is. "Angel" as an affectionate. Aziraphale certainly doesn't use "demon" as a pet name for Crowley. I think they set up this scene to contrast the final one, and show how deeply hurt Crowley is that Aziraphale suggest he change.
4. Moving on to Victorian Scotland. This one confused me at first. I was delighted that they brought back the "the lower you start the more opportunity you have to rise" dialogue from the book, but apart from that I didn't really see the point of it. It seems like the statue of Gabriel and the fact that he and Beelz ended up at that pub in the present were more or less coincidental.
The point, I think, is actually not the girl, but the doctor. He's a person who is trying to do good by working in a system that's deeply flawed, and engaging in questionable moral practices for the greater good. (Cadaver dissection is still an essential part of medical school. You need dead bodies to understand living ones.) He shows Aziraphale a tumor he removed from a child who died, and Aziraphale clutches it to his chest. The camera zooms in and lingers to tell us that this is a guardian through and through. He wants to protect people. He wants to do good with every fiber of his being.
To Crowley, it's enough to just "be an us" with Aziraphale. He doesn't really want anything more than that. That's an issue! For one thing, it fosters unhealthy codependency, and for another, Aziraphale would never be happy without the opportunity to help and protect people. It's an essential part of who he is. Metatron knows that, and he plays Aziraphale like a fiddle. The doctor showed Aziraphale that you can make a difference even in systems that are flawed, and even if you have to do things you'd rather not do. Aziraphale doesn't want to go back to Heaven, but he truly thinks he can change things; thinks he can be a guardian with some real power. In his mind, that's the right thing to do.
Last thing that happens in Scotland: Crowley saves a soul from Hell, arguably, by preventing a suicide. He gets in Big Trouble. Whatever happened to him downstairs resulted in him coming back up, leaning on a cane, and asking Aziraphale to give him holy water. Go back and watch that scene knowing what we know now about the Victorian minisode. Ask yourself how Aziraphale must have felt. He likely blamed himself for what happened, because if he hadn't meddled then they never would have been there in the first place. He knew where Crowley was, and why he was there, and he had to sit with that knowledge for years. He desperately wants Crowley to be safe; is perfectly willing to push him away to keep him safe-- which is what he does do, the minute Crowley gets back.
Now think again about what Metatron offered him. A chance to keep Crowley safe forever. He'd never be harmed again. Aziraphale is going to take that offer, no matter what else is asked of him. He's shown over and over again that he'll sacrifice his own happiness to make sure nothing happens to Crowley. And he'll do it without talking to Crowley about it first, because he is a moron who doesn't know how to use his words. Leading Crowley to assume that Aziraphale doesn't love him. The idiot angel is doing it all out of love, but because he doesn't make himself clear Crowley doesn't know that.
Part 3: Maggie and Nina, and their roles as mirror couple/ Greek chorus!
#good omens#good omens season 2#good omens s2#good omens s2 spoilers#good omens meta#aziraphale#crowley#everything is meant#good omens analysis#part 3 tomorrow
2K notes
·
View notes
Text
The circular bookshop rug CHANGES?!
(Edit: this is the rug that rests on top of the portal, under the chandelier. I think(?) there's only one of those!)
I saw someone mention this in a comment, but haven't seen any pics or discussion about it yet, so I checked. It's another inexplicable (ineffable?) "continuity" error:
S2e1, prepping to do the half miracles to hide Jim!Gabriel:
S2e5, as Nina enters the ball:
(More pics, including the season ONE rug, which was used for an s2 promo photo, and some discussion, below)
S2e5, prepping to defend the bookshop from the demons after Crowley walks most of the humans out:
S2e6, Crowley tidying the bookshop while Azi has a chinwag:
And sure, Aziraphale could have enchanted it to look more "Jane Austen-esque" for the ball, but then why did it change back in e6? It looks like Nina and Maggie's clothes for the ball stayed throughout e6, so it's not like the ball enchantments expired, Cinderella-style, or something...
Like the two different wigs for Crowley in Job, it seems superfluous to have two different rugs for the bookshop. And yet ...
It seems like it must be a Clue about something! Unreliable Narrator(s)? Another magic trick we didn't see? What do you think?
Edit 2: @rebeccasteventaylor had a good question about the rug in s1. I checked, and you'll perhaps be unsurprised to learn that the rug in s1e4, when Azi talks to Floating Head Metatron, is similar to s2e1 when they do the half miracle, but definitely not the same. The chairs also look similar but not exact:
And here's a wider view of s1e4:
And a wider view of s2e1:
I understand they Actually Burned the bookshop and everything inside during s1, and then had to recreate it for s2 (there's a really wild post about recreating a hand painted antique tiled sink that talks more about that), so I don't know if the similar-but-not-exact chairs, big red rug, and round rug are more casualties of that, or are meant to look different...
Edit 3: EXCEPT. They USED the season 1 rug in season 2 promo photos!
So... they didn't burn it? Or they did burn it and then they recreated it and didn't actually use it for s2??
I can't think or even breathe, this is SO WEIRD.
Interested in diving further into all the Good Omens mysteries? I have lots more of my own posts plus Clues and metas from all over the fandom, here.
#good omens analysis#good omens mystery#Aziraphale's rug#bookshop rug#good omens bookshop#clue with a capital C#good omens the ball#good omens magic trick#good omens#good omens meta#renew good omens#good omens 2#good omens continuity#unreliable narrators#Good omens conspiracy theory#Good omens truther#Good omens season 1#Good omens season 2#everything is meant
222 notes
·
View notes
Text
We‘ve talked about the sideburns. But what about the sunglasses?
Maybe I missed the memo and just haven’t read the right posts yet but – has anyone else noticed that apart from the wandering sideburns, Crowley‘s sunglasses keep changing as well?
There‘s the ones we know from present-day times in S1, with the black tinted glasses and silver frames, which he wears multiple times throughout S2:
And then there‘s the new ones with seemingly even bigger lenses and the black fabric-y sides:
He seems to switch between them almost randomly, at least from what I can tell by the pictures.
I haven’t yet taken the time to look at all Crowley scenes in S2 to figure out whether there’s a pattern or not. All I can tell is that it most certainly doesn’t correlate with the sideburn length (like I assumed at first). Because if you look at the pictures, you‘ll notice that the sideburns vary with both the silver AND the black glasses.
I guess this is yet another thing to add to the very big pile of „Is it a red herring or is it where the furniture isn’t?“ Mr. Gaiman, you‘re a full time job, seriously. Part of me is almost ready to believe that all of these little detailed discrepancies are just there to get us to stream S2 a thousand times more, so Amazon will make S3 happen. If so, Neil, that‘s a stroke of demonic genius, darling.
#good omens#crowley#good omens season 2#aziraphale#gos2#go2#good omens 2#good omens meta#good omens s2#crowleys sunglasses#crowleys sideburns#everything is meant#but what dOES IT MEAN???#neil you make me toss and turn in my sleep#how many more times am i supposed to watch S2#is this just a trick to get the streams in on amazon#if so then that‘s a stroke of demonic genius darling#my own meta
166 notes
·
View notes
Photo
1K notes
·
View notes
Text
The mystery of Muriel
I have a lot of questions about Muriel...
The first is: Why is it that we see Muriel and Aziraphale interacting with each other during the minisode "A Companion to Owls", but when Muriel turns up on the doorstep during the present time, neither of them appears to recognise each other?
There are several possibilities here:
It was a long time ago, neither of them recalls the other.
I don't like this theory much; it's the simplest explanation, but if A and M are supposed to be strangers in the present, it would have been a lot easier to cast another person as "unnamed scrivenor" in the Owls flashback, or use one of the other angels for the interaction in that scene.
2. Both of them do recognise each other, and both are going along with the charade.
I just don't think M is devious enough to carry this off! They can't even keep up the "I am a human being" act for more than a minute before slipping up.
3. Aziraphale does in fact remember Muriel but is pretending to go along with their "I am a human police officer" spiel. Muriel doesn't remember Aziraphale.
This explains A's behaviour but not M's. I would have thought that they are more likely to remember A than the other way round. A has met thousands of people in his time on Earth; M confesses to Crowley that they see almost nobody in their day-to-day job, so almost any interaction with others would probably be memorable.
Also: would the other Archangels send down somebody that they hope will be incognito if they thought that person might be recognised?
Unless...M has had their memory wiped at some point after the events in the flashback.
4. Another "unreliable narrator" moment. Aziraphale does not actually remember who checked the contract with him, just that it was a scrivenor. And the only scrivenor he has seen recently was Muriel so he sees that face in his memory.
This is possibly the most plausible explanation to me...I can't really think of why else the Archangels would send somebody that they thought A might recognise. (Although they don't seem to be that sharp in Heaven - maybe whoever made the decision to send M wasn't in possession of the brain cell at the time).
Next question: How many scrivenors are there, actually? We have only seen Muriel, and they are 37th class, implying 36 categories above them exist. If there are lots of "Muriels" there is even less reason for sending that angel specifically to Aziraphale.
Is there just one in each class, each representing an angel who has had a memory wipe, maybe?
Next question: Muriel GLOWS. They outshine every other character in every scene that they are in, including all the Archangels, Aziraphale and Jim in his innocent state. What's that all about?
The only other person who comes close to M in terms of brightness is Saraquael...
I'm certain that it is not only relevant but important...
Any ideas?
#good omens#everything is meant#but what does it mean#good omens meta#good omens 2#Muriel#terry pratchett#neil gaiman
117 notes
·
View notes
Text
Um I just noticed while rewatching my "ugh good omens" fanvid playlist -- Aziraphale's not wearing a bowtie in the "You go too fast for me" scene, in the Bentley in the 60s. He's wearing a looser tie, like maybe an ascot? Still tartan, of course. But it's the only time in the 20th century he deviates from the bowtie.
I've written about the significance of the coat changing in the Blitz scene, and I have to think that this tie is meaningful somehow too. Aziraphale's look changes so subtly, every detail matters.
Maybe the more open collar signifies his deep vulnerability in this scene where he hands the holy water over to Crowley.
#good omens#good omens costumes#aziraphale#aziraphale's bowtie#everything is meant#you go too fast for me
336 notes
·
View notes
Text
This is still bothering me. Where did the bullet hole decals on the Bentley go? They're there throughout season 2, even when Aziraphale's driving and turning it yellow...but at the end of episode 6, they're not there. Crowley's fingers are pointing to where they should be.
Good Omens does nothing by accident or omission. Where are they?
#good omens#good omens aziraphale#good omens crowley#@neil gaiman#ineffable husbands#good omens season 2#good omens 2 spoilers#good omens 2#good omens series two#gomens 2#good omens bentley#good omens s2 e6#what the heck#everything is meant
69 notes
·
View notes
Text
Ok so I was being emotional over yet another gif set of The Kiss and the framing of third gif grabbed me (pun not intended)...
The darker and lighter windows? Are absolutely 100% representing wings. Amazing. Perfection. Chef's kiss.
#i'm sure more observant people than me have pointed this out already#but oh man do i love it#ok back to our regularly scheduled sobbing#good omens s2#good omens#good omens spoilers#good omens 2#the kiss#ineffable husbands#everything is meant#go s2#good omens 2 spoilers#a duck talks
50 notes
·
View notes
Text
Good Omens: the kiss vs the Nightingale extract
I am dying. The kiss lasts exactly the same length as the extract from Nightingale plays in the Bentley.
Video comparison:
twitter.com/ollie_jollie_w/status/1699176410802262112
#good omens#good omens 2#good omens spoilers#everything is meant#nothing is accidental#dammit Neil and Douglas
25 notes
·
View notes
Text
Everything Is Meant (long S2 analysis, part 3)
Part one
Part two
There's SO MUCH excellent meta out there right now, and I'm going to try not to reinvent the wheel too much, but I want to keep going with tying the episodes/ elements up together because on first watch it wasn't entirely clear how everything fit. I also strongly recommend a rewatch, no matter what you felt about the ending... if you need to stop it 10 minutes early, do that, but you pick up so much more the second time around.
So: Maggie and Nina. I spent most of my first watch wondering why we were bothering with them, honestly. Later in the season Nina, and then Maggie and Nina, gave Crowley some insightful advice, but their actual relationship didn't progress despite all the meddling, and the amount of emotional investment BOTH Aziraphale and Crowley had in making them get together was frankly strange.
I started thinking in terms of mirror couples, since that was such a big deal in S1 and that's clearly what they were set up to be, but I made the mistake that all of us made on first watch: that Nina was Crowley and Maggie was Aziraphale. It still wasn't really coming together.
Then I put the psych hat back on and started to think about displacement. Displacement is a defense mechanism, and it consists of satisfying an impulse (usually an unconscious one) with a substitute object. At the beginning of the season, Aziraphale and Crowley aren't really in a good place, and I think on some level they know that. Aziraphale is trying to SHOW Crowley that he wants to take the next step through all the casual touches and phone calls and inviting him in, and feeling frustrated because Crowley doesn't seem to be taking the bait. (I absolutely think that Aziraphale tried to get Crowley to stay with him at the bookshop instead of living in his CAR, and Crowley said no. That's a whole other meta.) Meanwhile, Crowley, I think, is waiting for a Grand Gesture. Where did he go, as soon as Aziraphale brought up trying to get two humans to fall in love? Romantic tropes. Getting caught in the rain under an awning. A dramatic kiss that opens someone's eyes. That's the sort of thing he's always done, right? Big rescues, impassioned pleas on the street, fancy dinners, "give you a lift anywhere you want to go". He's defensive and guarded and unlikely to let someone in unless he's CERTAIN he won't be rejected, and Aziraphale's approaches are just too... quiet. No one's fault, they just don't speak the same language.
Then, they're handed the opportunity to make two humans fall in love, and they're both All In immediately. Look at Crowley's face when he summons the rainstorm. This is HUGE for him. Why? Because of displacement. Look at Aziraphale arranging the ball and being borderline deranged about it. They're both desperate to demonstrate what they think it takes for two people to move past their misunderstandings and fall in love. They can't do it for each other because the stakes are too high, and if either of them shows their cards unequivocally the vulnerability feels life-shattering. They're codependent and terrified of rejection and also, importantly, have no idea what they're doing when it comes to love. "Saw it in a film", Crowley says. Aziraphale's read about it in books. But they have zero practical experience.
Instead of learning to communicate, they try to say what they want to say through the medium of Maggie and Nina, up to and including the questionable moral decision to exert control over people's actions and thoughts during the ball. If I can just make this come out right, they both think, then things between us will be alright too. It HAS to come out right. They're attempting to gain some control over their own lives, over something that feels so overwhelming and shattering they can't look directly at it.
It doesn't come out right. Nina's relationship falls apart, but that doesn't mean she's in love with Maggie. While Crowley's stress-cleaning the bookshop to the music that played when Aziraphale got his books back in 1941 (just fuck me up David Arnold), they come in and tell him so. "I don't understand", says Crowley. Because it should have worked. Why didn't it work?
They tell him, of course. "You need to talk to each other. Say what you're really thinking." But here's the thing about communication: you have to learn it. You need to get the hang of expressing your feelings without blaming your partner, and separating intent from impact, and staying away from getting defensive and lashing out. No one has ever taught Aziraphale and Crowley how to do this. It's like Maggie and Nina put Crowley in front of a loom and asked him to recreate the Bayeux Tapestry. He doesn't have the skills; he's always going to get it wrong, even if he tries his hardest.
And he does try. But that's where Maggie and Nina the mirror couple, rather than Maggie and Nina the displacement relationship or Maggie and Nina the Greek chorus, come in. Aziraphale, as Nina, has just ended an incredibly toxic, invasive relationship with Heaven. A relationship that invaded every facet of his life, isolated him, and prevented him from being close to anyone else. "Rebound mess," Nina says. Aziraphale is a rebound mess. He's transferred the responsibility for his emotional wellness to Crowley. Crowley is the person he calls when he's in trouble, or (and this is key) when he wants to report a clever/ good thing he's done, or when he's bored. (At no point did Crowley reference Aziraphale calling him for a solicitous reason-- another problem.) Crowley is meant to take care of him. He forgets, I think, that Crowley is a person with his own wants and needs, just like Maggie and Nina are people with their own wants and needs who don't appreciate being messed with. (I think things would have been much different had Aziraphale BEEN THERE for Maggie and Nina's talk with Crowley, but he wasn't.)
And Maggie-as-Crowley? Lonely. Behind on rent, at risk of being evicted (it's important to note that Aziraphale saves Maggie from losing her record shop, as he couldn't save Crowley from losing his flat). Pining. Awkward. Revolving around Nina like a planet, to the extent that we don't get much of an impression of her otherwise. They realize, there at the end, that they both need to round themselves out before jumping into a relationship. Aziraphale and Crowley need that too. They need to take time apart and learn to be healthy on their own. Unfortunately they don't have the skills to get to that conclusion in a healthy way, so it all explodes in their faces and everything falls apart.
Aziraphale tries to teach Nina and Maggie to dance as a substitute for communication. Nina and Maggie try to teach Crowley communication as a substitute for the dance they've been doing around each other. That's the reason they're a part of the plot: they exist to demonstrate the way Aziraphale and Crowley might have succeeded in forging a better dynamic. Sadly, the boys' dance is too practiced and they got sucked right back into it.
It's okay, I think, that Nina and Maggie's storyline never really went anywhere. It wasn't supposed to. It's an allegory, not something that needs to stand alone.
#good omens#good omens meta#good omens analysis#good omens season 2#gos2#good omens season two#crowley#aziraphale#maggie#nina#defense mechanisms#the psychology of good omens#everything is meant#ineffable husbands
2K notes
·
View notes
Text
"I'm Going Slightly Mad" and Good Omens 2
YES!! This song is ABSOLUTELY in Good Omens Season 2. Just like the other coffee shop scenes, I didn't hear it until I saw it in the X-Rays! (So is The Show Must Go On, see my post about that). It's in Episode 5. Nina already called Crowley out on being an item ("bit on the side") with Aziraphale. This is about 13 minutes into the episode. (My apologies, if anyone knows how to do screenshots or GIFS, please message me or comment so I can figure out how to capture this visually). The scene I'm referencing is where Nina is all alone and has the chalkboard displayed on the counter and starts getting emotionally abusive texts from her partner. These texts are displayed on the chalkboard, and then Nina erases them away. The scene RIGHT BEFORE this is where Crowley calls Aziraphale over as he sits at the French restaurant drinking some wine and hiding from Jim/Gabriel, worried about being "smited? smote?"..."Smitten, I believe." He is WORRIED, he stayed up all night WORRYING about what could happen. The scene RIGHT AFTER Nina erases texts from the chalkboard is Crowley confronting Jim/Gabriel about trying to destroy Aziraphale and telling "my only friend to shut his stupid mouth and die...and I did not care for it." Crowley goes TO THE EDGE and tells Jim/Gabriel to jump out the window. This is UNHINGED Crowley...and yes, indeed he is "Going Slightly Mad."
Crowley isn't the only one, however, "Going Slightly Mad," and I'm curious why and how Nina is also "going slightly mad." I don't think it has anything to do with her abusive relationship, but rather all the weird stuff that is going on around her. Think about all the times that Crowley and Aziraphale are trying to influence them...they are FOCUSED on Nina and Maggie getting together. Think about their power TOGETHER when they made the miracle SO BIG it sent alarm bells off in Heaven. Do you think those miracles towards Nina and Maggie could have a...strange effect on them? Is that why they can't be "hypnotized" after the demons storm the bookshop? I still think something odd beyond what we can see is going on, but even if it's just the miracles pointed in their direction, at least Nina is sensing something weird. She even expresses this in Episode 5 to Aziraphale and to Maggie. She knows Something is going on, and she can't quite put her finger on it.
This song really is a great look at how both Nina and Crowley are feeling "slightly mad" about things going on around them. The other thing it COULD mean is that..."we, as the audience" are also going "slightly mad" since we know something is weird and we can't quite put our fingers on exactly WHAT is going on. FOR EXAMPLE...I just think it's interesting that the coffee shop is ALWAYS playing Queen songs (just in instrumental versions), just like the Bentley...
It's just all these small details that I freaking love! Here are the lyrics if you want to see what I mean!
I'm Going Slightly Mad, Queen
When the outside temperature rises
And the meaning is, oh, so clear
One thousand and one yellow daffodils
Begin to dance in front of you. Oh, dear
Are they trying to tell you something?
You're missing that one final screw
You're simply not in the pink, my dear
To be honest, you haven't got a clue
I'm going slightly mad
I'm going slightly mad
It finally happened, happened
It finally happened. Oh, oh
It finally happened
I'm slightly mad
Oh, dear!
I'm one card short of a full deck
I'm not quite the shilling
One wave short of a shipwreck
I'm not my usual top-billing
I'm coming down with a fever
I'm really out to sea
This kettle is boiling over
I think I'm a banana tree
Oh, dear
I'm going slightly mad
I'm going slightly mad
It finally happened, happened
Finally happened. Uh, huh
Finally happened
I'm slightly mad
Oh, dear!
Ooh-ooh-ah-ah, ooh-ooh-ah-ah
I'm knitting with only one needle
Unraveling fast. It's true
I'm driving only three wheels these days
But, my dear, how about you?
I'm going slightly mad
I'm going slightly mad
It finally happened
It finally happened
Oh, yes
It finally happened
I'm slightly mad!
Just very slightly mad!
And there you have it!
#good omens#good omens season 2 spoilers#good omens season 2#Queen is everywhere in Good Omens#What's really up with Nina?#unhinged Crowley#I need a season 3 of Good Omens!#Pay your writers#Pay your actors#Everything is Meant
7 notes
·
View notes
Text
today’s ludicrous over-read of something in pop culture
Martin’s surname is Crieff, which is technically a real name (town in Scotland) but instantly reminds Mr. Birling of the much more well-known surname Moncrieff. “Like Algernon? In ‘Earnest’?” Martin hasn’t read it, which sets up the whole dynamic between him and Mr. Birling, that’s why that line’s in there.
But recently I DID read ‘The Importance of Being Earnest’, and found out THIS detail, via TV Tropes:
The names of Algernon and Lady Bracknell allude to Wilde's lover Alfred Douglas and his mother .. Moncrieff was the name of an ancient Scottish family just like that of Douglas.
Martin is a Crieff because he’s not quite a Douglas. I have no idea if this was intentional but I’m just gonna say it is.
119 notes
·
View notes
Text
Everything is meant... Or is it?
First I would like to preface this by saying that I'm splitting this off because I've been kicking it around as its own thing, but was inspired to actually post it based on the meta @ineffablebookgirl did and the thoughts from @skeetlebeetle on the paintball scene.
So, is everything meant?
This is a question I've thought about a lot with all the meta I've consumed and posted. There are a lot of analyses that go on based on tiny details, micro expressions, so on and so forth. There are different interpretations one could make about different scenes and different characters. Throughout this I've asked myself: does it really count if the author/creator didn't intend for it to be this way?
It doesn't help that Neil Gaiman is a lot like the God he and Terry Pratchett wrote:
“Are you saying,” said Crowley, “that He planned it this way all along? From the very beginning?”
Aziraphale conscientiously wiped the top of the bottle and passed it back.
“Could have,” he said. “Could have. One could always ask Him, I suppose.”
“From what I remember,” replied Crowley, thoughtfully, “—and we were never actually on what you might call speaking terms—He wasn’t exactly one for a straight answer. In fact, in fact, He’d never answer at all. He’d just smile, as if He knew something that you didn’t.”
“And of course that’s true,” said the angel. “Otherwise, what’d be the point?”
There are times where Neil will clarify something, or confirm or deny something, but mostly I've seen him take the stance of, "Isn't that the beauty of art? Everyone can interpret things in different ways."
He doesn't clamor to correct people on their interpretation of his work, and that's something I've found very admirable and will certainly be taking with me as I put my work out in the world. It allows us, the fans of this media, to enjoy it to the fullest extent. It lets us take from it what we need, and that's truly a beautiful thing.
"Yes, but, how could it mean anything if that's not what was meant when it was written? How do we know we've gotten it right?" -- does that sound familiar? Because that reminds me of a certain angel who has spent the better part of six thousand years collecting Bibles and books of prophecy and everything else, seemingly in search of The Answer. In search of what it all means, in spite of its ineffability.
And as we can see throughout the story, the common thread seems to be: it doesn't matter what it means, it doesn't matter what it's meant to be. We can take from it what we wish, and our choices are our own, and our own choices are the ones that really matter. That's part of the beauty of being human.
Really, the conclusion I've come to, is that I suppose I don't mind if things were meant, or if they were beautiful moments of accidental serendipity.
It's truly admirable when an author can tie together all of these amazing details, on purpose. However, as I've discovered through my OWN writing, it's sometimes even more amazing when these details fall perfectly into place, all on their own. Those are the moments I sit back, look at what I've written, and go, "Holy shit, that is AWESOME!"
It's just like life, and it's just like Good Omens -- maybe it's written, maybe it's not. You don't need to see the story for it to happen, you don't need to be told what decision to make in order to be happy with it. That's why Anathema burned the second book at the end. To hell with the answers or what is meant, she can create her own answers and find her own meaning.
I feel like it can seem less impressive if something happens by accident rather than the author intending for it to happen. I would actually propose that it is MORE impressive.
What is the difference between intelligence and artificial intelligence? Sentient and non-sentient? The non-sentient AI does what we tell it to do. Sentience is when it takes on a life of its own. In that way, by facilitating these accidental moments of poetic meaning, I feel like the creator has imparted into their work a little bit of the magic that makes us who we are. They've harnessed the spirit of life well enough that it got away from them through their work, and created something utterly lifelike.
I've thought about this particularly when it comes to people speculating about neurodivergency. People recognize a lot of ADHD traits in Crowley, and a lot of autistic traits in Aziraphale. I'm actually not sure if Neil and Terry intended that (Neil has responded to the question in a similar way as sexuality, in that he acknowledged they behave like neurodivergent humans in some ways, but they're not human, so he wouldn't call them that -- but I haven't seen a yes/no on whether it was intended).
Regardless, even if it's not, I find that incredibly impressive. It means the creator has done a good enough job of creating a whole character that they can consistently embody this aspect of human psychology, without it being seen as pandering or like the author took a neurodivergent checklist and tried to cram it all in there. It's quite an impressive feat, considering the human brain is, well --
I suppose the point of all this is, life is utterly beautiful and so is art, especially when art mimicks life, and especially when it does so by accident. I love seeing all the meta going around, and I love when creators are able to let this sort of stuff just be. It's my favorite part of this fandom in particular, because I've been scared out of a lot of other ones because I enjoyed it the "wrong way", according to the fandom's interpretation or the creator's own rigidity.
I think the other point is that we all have the power of this kind of creation, especially if we take a page from Crowley's book. We can wall our characters and plotlines in the Garden of Eden where everything is meticulously perfect, but if we let them eat the apple and grant these things the freedom to take on a life of their own, even if it seems disastrous at first, our creations could go on to create things we never saw coming. If we let ourselves explore our stories freely, and we let our audience explore freely, we can see our own creations transform into wonderful things we never imagined.
And then, maybe, one day, you can reflect on this when someone asks you, "Did you mean for this to happen?"
Then, once you're done autographing their treasured copy of your book that they've dropped in the tub at least once and taped together with yellow tape, you can just sort of look at them and smile, as if you know something they don't.
#good omens meta#writing meta#the beauty of art#art imitates reality#and sometimes reality seems to imitate art#it's all a little bit ineffable#everything is meant#HEY#IS THAT WHAT DOUGLAS MACKINNON MEANT?#that every interpretation is valid?#that even accidental symbolism is still symbolism?
62 notes
·
View notes
Text
I find it really weird that there are so many repeated actors in S2 of GO. I mean, I know Britain only has about 25 actors total, but surely there are enough for 2 seasons.
allow me my own crackpot theory: none of those recurring actors are playing real characters. faces are picked from Crowley and Aziraphale's past to fill in rolls on their imaginary street. they're either distractions, or tools, or the fill-ins brains create when there are holes that just don't make sense.
case in point: Shax says (S2E1) that Hell won't accept her signature as Crowley's replacement. sure, maybe it's because Hell's bureaucracy is a finely oiled machine, but maybe it's because Shax is a figment of Crowley's imagination.
I'll be honest, I'm not sure who I think is running this charade, but repeating so many actors is just too weird. and nothing is accidental in this show.
#good omens 2#good omens meta#Everything Is Meant#good omens#maybe the true Shax is the friends we've made along the way
1 note
·
View note
Text
This is a story I've been trying to tell for a long time and every time I try, I find I don't yet have the words for what has happened inside me, because nothing has happened inside me, except that a door long locked has been opened.
The short version of the story is that 14 months ago, I rewatched Good Omens, and then watched it again another six times, and then read a lot of fanfiction, and then wrote a lot of meta. The short version is that six months ago, I watched Heartstopper, and then watched it another 24 times (I kept count), and then, after all that, I was bisexual.
The short version of the story is that for a long time, I believed so deeply that it wasn't meant for me, that it never occurred to me. Until stories asked, but what if it was allowed?
#everything is meant#the multiplicity of narrative#queer stories#queer#bisexual#good omens#heartstopper#queer rep
148 notes
·
View notes
Last Seen Blogs
madbaddic7ed
10Tips
postmodern-nostalgia
POSTMODERN NOSTALGIA
petermurphyinfo
Peter Murphy Official Site
coneyislandcrimes
Untitled
72hert
american horrorist