Lights Out

Aziraphale and Crowley in Hades style! 😊

“If I have one message to give to the secular American people, it’s that the world is not divided into countries. The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don’t know each other, but we talk together and we understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.”

Then I thought, ‘Well, this is basically like a Newt and Anathema situation, isn’t it? They’re also a couple from ‘opposite sides’, a Witchfinder and a Witch, who get together but also they are explicitly Predestined thanks to Agnes Nutter’s prophecies….”

But the thing is:

Newt and Anathema’s ‘Hereditary Enemies Turned Lovers’ appeal was always pretty minimal. Newt is barely a Witchfinder, Anathema holds no ill will towards him or his ancestor, there is no real friction in their relationship around that part. The predestination part was by far the main focus.

GO1 and especially Book Omens's Newthema does give us a few nods to how Weird it is to know a relationship you are interested in has also been Determined by Unchangeable Fate.

While all the implications of Aziraphale and Crowley’s ‘Soulmates’ status in GO3 is pretty much always played as unironically straightforwardly Romantic. Even after they supposedly break away from God’s control…. “They will always be together in every lifetime and every universe” is supposed to the bittersweet but triumphant message their story ends on.

At least Newt and Anathema get to burn Agnes’ second book and actively choose to try and live together and freely. You could say Crowley and Aziraphale remaking the world and then reincarnating into Human versions who get married is the equivalent of that, but the fact that they have no conscious memory or awareness of their previous lives remove the aspect of Choice.

Also, GO1 and Book Omens are a bit more… ambivalent about the questions of the Predestination Paradoxes and how Free Will factors with Ineffability. “If God planned for everything and the Ineffable Plan cannot be changed, then this means They actually want Humans to disobey the plan and make their own destiny, so this is still part of the Plan” is the piece of Theological Bullshitting that makes up Aziraphale and Crowley’s main contribution to actually saving the world. It is a positive moment in the context of that storyline.

And in general, the tone of the ending of the Book/GO1 when it explores the idea that disobedience and Free Will are actually part of God’s Ineffable Plan is…. Maybe not in a 100% straightforwardly positive, but is definitely kinda sardonically jovial about the concept. Especially when you consider, like, the moment in the book where Agnes Nutter’s ghost chuckles with both foreknowledge and joy seeing her descendant reject her second book.

And the implication that God’s real plan might be to set the stage for a Humanist revolution against Heaven and Hell…

GO3, meanwhile, is of the opinion that this means that there is no REAL Free Will under these circumstances. This is just a hopeless rigged game that will always end with the destruction of the world one way or another, and this such a dire state and Real Free Will is so important that this is worth it for our two beloved Protagonists to kill themselves over it.

So, yeah, it does feel more discordant that the idea of these characters exploring how their Love might have been one of those things that always felt like disobedience and an expression of their own Free Will was also ‘Predictable’ to God and given by Them just…. never even comes up. Because Someone forbids these two actually get to talk about their relationship in any meaningful way in canon, am I right?

And even more discordant that the idea that their relationship is still controlled by some sort of Cosmic Force of Fate is their Happily Ever After???

David said No with an exclamation mark, he said 'he got evaporated and somebody who kind of looks like him got together with someone who kind of looks like Aziraphale but its not the same thing." he said with a hand wave like he was brushing it off.

It even sounds like a anti go3 textpost.

David said its not them, that they didn't get to be together, in his opinion, and the almost pitying smile he gave that fan at the end like 'yeah we both know its not the same thing.'

Like I'm sure he isn't crushed like we are, he's probably had more time to deal with it and like whatever. But he did not sound happy to me, he sounded like he thought the whole thing was stupid but what can be done now?

100 Years - High As Hope (2018)

like, not even great, not even good, but just okay, just safe, sad that it was over but happy that it happened, a closed book with a happy if mediocre ending.

and then it wasn't, and it knocked me entirely off kilter, and the worst part was it completely blindsided me, it wasn't just mediocre, or rushed, or boring, or disappointing.

It was all of those things and also tragic. It made me sad.

and the thing is...before that, I never could have imagined that Good Omens would make me sad, would have me break down in tears inconsolable days afterwards, it never even occurred to me as a possibility.

It was one of the few things I had that kept me safe inside my own mind, it was a talisman against sadness, it was where I walked when I needed sanctuary, and now it feels like there is a giant pit in the middle of my former haven that I have to worry about falling into and being trapped.

because Good Omens made me a promise, as a viewer and a reader 7 years ago, that the world is saved because it is worth saving, that everybody lives, everybody, even telemarketers.

That Anti-Christ's grow up with their best friends in their Kingdom of Tadfield because that's enough of the world for them, that Witches fall in love with Witchfinders, that Prophetesses make their own destiny, that Death and all his friends will ride motorbikes to the end, but not today, no not today. Due in very small part, really just moral support, of a Demon and an Angel who wanted to stay, just a little bit longer, maybe another 6000 years, go for a picnic, dine at the Ritz. That promise was broken, if this is the legacy that they want to give Sir Terry Pratchett I would say its as bad as spitting on his grave.

If he'd really put his mind to it, he might have even succeeded, even though Aziraphale has such a strong will.

It would have made Crowley's life so much easier! If he and Aziraphale were on the same side, if they didn't have to worry about their respective home offices disapproving of their relationship! It would have made life so much easier for Crowley.

But Crowley DOESN'T try. He tempts his angel in small ways, yes. To try food and drink. To enjoy the little pleasures that God's creation had to offer. To be his friend. To see nuance when his superiors are telling him everything is black or white.

But he doesn't try to turn Aziraphale from angel into demon. And the Job flashback tells us exactly why:

"I'm not bringing you to hell, Angel. I don't think you'd like it."

Crowley knows that Aziraphale wouldn't be happy as one of the Fallen. Just because rebellion was the right choice for HIM doesn't mean it's the right choice for everyone.

And not only does he respect that....he protects his angel's innocence as best he can, while still encouraging him to see the shades of gray. He wants them to find a middle ground together.

Mad respect for that renegade demon, who wants to let Aziraphale be *himself* while still learning and growing. It's one of my favorite things about their dynamic. He doesn't want to change him fundamentally, even though it might make his life easier.

Restaurants were not really a thing back then, not in the modern concept of fancy dining. The popular classes ate basic meals at noisy and crowded taverns, people rich enough to afford fine dining had it served by slaves at home. The neither the concept nor the word to name it wouldn't have existed in Latin.

Petronius is a) the signed name of the author of one of the first explicit gay eroticas of the western tradition b) through the Satyricon, openly mocking of the mores and values of his age's upper class and c) more than likely, a pseudonym, not a real person but a false name to protect the actual author from the rage of the system so brazenly criticised.

"[Petronius] does remarkable things to oysters" is, in no way, shape or form, something remotely normal to say about an eatery you are trying to persuade someone to dine at (and anybody daring to argue otherwise should try using it on a colleague or an in-law and report their results back). A sentence so preposterous should make jump every "secret code" alarm.

For one, Book Omens doesn't have a sequel. And it almost certainly was never really going to have one. I mean, it was published in 1990. Terry Pratchett died in 2015. That's 25 years in which they could have written a sequel but chose not to.

In fact, in an interview thing that's conveniently included with my copy of the book, they answer the question "Why is there no sequel?" like this:

Does this sound to you like they have an actual, fleshed out plan for a sequel? It sounds more like they were just throwing ideas around, not even in a drafting phase yet, for a story they didn't really expect to fully write. They also last did this at least 11 years ago, likely much longer.

At best, whatever parts of their ideas made it into the show are the result of one of the two people involved using pieces of something unfinished, likely barely even started, from years ago, without the input of the other author. It certainly can not be a fully accurate representation, simply because one of the people involved is no longer able to add his own insight.

But also, just looking at the book itself, it doesn't really strike me as being written with a sequel in mind. It literally ends with a vision of the future, which is fairly conclusive and also not particularly compatible with the show ending:

This ending does not exactly scream "needs continuation" or "there is further trouble ahead". More the opposite, really.

The scene right before this ending also serves as a very neat bookend and conclusion to the whole story, with Adam stealing an apple and deciding that life would be less fun if people didn't. That eating the apple was worth the trouble you got into for doing so.

The closest we get to foreshadowing a sequel is Crowley mentioning the possibility of the "Big One". But it's not exactly treated as something that is bound to happen. So while I guess it's possible it was actively meant to imply a sequel, the rest of the ending makes it somewhat unlikely imo. More likely it's either incidental or a more vague consideration without an actual, already existing plan attached.

Secondly, it would require a somewhat strange genre and tone shift. Good Omens is a comedy that parodies various things (The Omen, Revelations, The Cold War) to make it's point in a fairly light hearted way. It's universe is somewhat silly but also hopeful.

For it to end the way the show did, it would realistically have to change it's genre. It would have to be a Drama or even Tragedy with a story that seems to have somewhat lost it's parody elements as well as it's hope for the future. Which would be a very strange thing for the sequel to a fairly light hearted and hopeful comedy to do.

It would also be very odd in terms of how Terry Pratchett books usually end. Like, even the more bleak Discworld novels, like Night Watch, do end with the world in tact and at least marginally better than before. There is always hope for the world there. An ending in which the world can not be saved and every single character experiences identity death would be very much out of the norm. (I can't say if it would be for Gaiman, the only other book of his I ever read was Coraline).

Finally, related to this, it is not thematically consistent. Some of the major themes and points of Good Omens are, I would argue:

Both the best and worst of humanity is purely humanity's doing. They have a capacity for great good and evil and either way deserve to exist as they are. Free will and the knowledge of good and evil were worth the cost.

Just because it is written, does not mean it must be done. You can not and should not live your life doing only what someone else has decided you ought to be or do. Your choices, human choices, matter and they make a real difference.

The future may seem bleak, there may be a lot of things wrong, but it is not hopeless and it is worth fighting for. This world and its people are worth fighting for. The only real way to improve it is to get it into people's heads that their actions have consequences and that they should be kinder to each other and the environment.

The show ending is thematically opposed to this. Humanity's will and choices are not the deciding factor, do not make the ultimate difference. The humans of the old universe do not deserve to exist as they are. That imperfect world is not worth saving, can not and should not be saved.

As far as the show seems concerned, Adam, at his worst, was right. The world wasn't salvageable, it's best if we just destroy it and start all over again.