Also yes, queer is more inclusive! Especially coming at it from an academic standpoint, people didn’t always use or identify with the terms we use now and you can’t always try to cram them into our modern perceptions of sexuality. We can argue for years about whether a famous historical figure was gay or bisexual or straight and trans or whatever, but if we can all agree that they were somehow queer then using that term allows us to move past the debate and into productive discussion. And not everybody everywhere shares the same terms for sexual and gender identity, or even the same concepts of those things, so queer really is a more inclusive term in a lot of cases.

Your words are slurs, too. Why do you get your words, but I don’t get mine? What makes you so special?

every single one of our labels has been used as a slur against us.

terfs and -phobes are always going to try and hurt us with what we identify as. but the fact remains these are OUR labels and always have been.

It just baffled me that people would think an identifier is automatically a slur just because someone uses it to mock someone. If we did that gay would be a slur. Stupid would be a slur. Autistic would be a slur.

❗️Gomens 3 spoilers!❗️

I've seen so many amazing fan versions of the ending that I absolutely love. But I started drawing this comic, that changes very little from the one we got and decided to finish it!

In my mind everything stays the same, except there is no hell and heaven. So there's no need for angels and demons and their influence on humanity. The angelic and demonic characters can remain immortal just like Aziracrow, If they want to. Or they can choose to become humans and live their new, free live just as they want :)

they scrapped all of [redacted]'s original script and started over

it was light and humorous all the way through

az was not treated as dumb or naïve for taking that place in heaven

az and crowley made up in the beginning of the film and were a team trying to stop the end times for the rest of the finale

the message would have been "we need to fix what is broken, not burn it to the ground"

Az and Crowley would show some form of affection towards each other, like a hug or maybe a kiss

Az and Crowley decided they didn't need god anymore, nor follow her rules

the metatron would have been dealt with properly

what would have been a PERFECT ending:

Az gave Crowley hope by explaining that they just need to fix what's broken, not start over, and Crowley admitted Az had a good reason for going to heaven in the first place

Az and Crowley say "I love you"

Az and Crowley being pretty much "useless", while jesus and the humans are doing the important bits by "being fundamentally people"

the plot was solved when heaven and hell teamed up against humanity (including Az and Crowley who's now explicitly on "their own side: humanity's side.") and Team Earth convinced Team Celestial how stupid this whole charade had always been

god had NOT been controlling everything this whole time and had always been more like a narrator of the universe, rather than one affecting the story

i keep saying it.

suicidal pessimist crowley x war criminal aziraphale is not my ship. this isn’t good omens.

and i read the book in the 90s. I’ve been sweeping up in this bar a loooong time.

He means he is a SOFT PERSON. As in, not hardened, not cynical, not violent or cruel. He wants to believe in the power of love and kindness. He doesn't want a fight.

Making him an important general in the Great War was such a confusing narrative choice to me. There is nothing in S1 or S2 to suggest he ever held that kind of role.

Yes, Aziraphale is a bit of a renegade, lying to God about the flaming sword, finding loopholes around every rule, all in the name of HELPING people. He wants peace when everyone else is screaming for war.

The most warrior-like thing we ever see him do prior to S3 is when he blows up his halo to protect Nina and Maggie in the bookshop. But A) he was defending the innocent, which is what Principalities and guardian angels DO, and B) it was both a last resort and a non-lethal solution.

I know they probably don’t have any stomach acids that would spoil the wine in the first place, but it’s still kinda disgusting.

Before anything else - I could have handled a similar ending, in which they die and then either they’re dead and gone and only humanity remains, or we see a vaguely Aziraphale and Crowley shaped pair of humans come together against the odds. I enjoy bittersweet tragedies, I almost would have preferred if Tennant and Sheen hadn’t played the new versions, and they’d found two actors who looked just close enough but not quite there to sell the idea. But it doesn’t pay off in my mind - because not only do Crowley and Aziraphale die. Everyone dies with them. The world ends, that isn’t fixed. They just blow it up and start a new one. That isn’t a good ending to the moral of the first season, or the book, or in general.

I’m going to point out some of the themes of the book and a few issues I think have been poking about in the background since season 1 (lost subtleties on the humanisation of characters, and how I believe this weakens the central theme), but this is not an anti-good-omens-TV-in-general post. I came to love season 1 as an adaption, it’s simply interesting to examine how small deviations may have affected the ending.

One huge theme of the book that people keep pointing out is how it emphasises Terry Prachett’s very humanist ideals, which I totally agree with. S1 follows these values (it was bound to, given how close of an adaption it was), but in a way that loses a few subtleties from the book. Not only is it a commentary on Cold War politics, it’s a commentary on how people do not have to be constrained by the position they’re born into and then beaten into shape against by the world. You do have free will, and it’s wonderful! And ultimately the good of humanity will prevail against the bad, if we can only be bothered to act. The book emphasises this through a few British classist stereotypes. The “accents” of the Them and Shadwell, Crowley’s young sleek corporate businessisms (reflected again in the four horsemen), Aziraphale’s old-money Eton boy aesthetic, the role of the “Postie,” after his “death.” All of these characters are humanised, and purposefully - it pokes fun at stereotypes surrounding class, and station, but each and every person no matter where they’re from fills a role. Aziraphale and Crowley, as part of these two different reflections of the upper-class, frequently indulge in the “exotic commonality”of humanity. The food, the love, the life. Yet they see still themselves, and their distance from humanity, as “better.”

In the show, everyone (bar a few demons, Shadwell, and Aziraphale) seems to have the same amorphously middle-ground British accent. There’s no statement being made against the back drop.

This might not seem majorly important - but bear with me.

Another important facet of the book, is the way in which Heaven and Hell are portrayed at once as a contrast against and a mirror to humanity. They’re different from us in that they’re stuck trying to be “good,” or “evil” - there’s no middle ground, no complexity. And in trying so hard to stick to their rigid and inflexible values of what constitutes “good” and “evil,” Heaven ends up doing more harm than good and neither side makes much progress against the other. But that’s also where they mirror us - not in the inability to be morally flexible (that’s the thing that gives humans the leg-up in the end), but in their stubborn inability to consider that what they’re doing might be “wrong.” Again, very Cold War appropriate. The book hammers home again and again that this is wrong, as does s1.

Crowley and Aziraphale directly contradict this portrayal of Heaven. They’re at a mid-way point, deep down a nice person, and just enough of a bastard. They’re still fairly representative of their respective sides, Crowley enjoys making mischief and Azirphale is kind to a fault (until he’s too righteous to be), but in many ways they’re just as human as the rest of the actually-human characters. They’re also… just two guys/creatures. EVERYONE in good omens (the book + s1), is at their core “just some person” even the important people! People with status - presidents, the antichrist, witches, high-ranking demons etc, they’re all very human. They groan and moan about paper work as much as Azirpahale and Crowley. The only difference is that they haven’t spent enough time around humans to realise it, so they don’t exhibit the same moral “greyness,” as A and C on top of their “regular-guynes.”

But even more than being regular people in their general disdain for work - they’re just regular people! They’re not nobodies, given their respective roles in Eden, but it’s been 6000 years since then and they’ve fallen considerably out of favour. They, like the average person reading the book, are totally beholden to the whims of the the two hegemonies puppeteering both them and their peers and more than anything are a window for us to peer through. They don’t actually *do* much of anything, that’s the beauty of it - and this is yet another example of angels and demons and Heaven and Hell not actually controlling fate. Nothing they do matters, and the only time it does is when humanity helps them along.

S1 of good omens has been pointed out, again by other people, as focusing more on a modern neo-capitalist perspective than a Cold War perspective, and I don’t dislike this. It’s extremely relevant, and still allows for a similar premise (it’s also why I’m mystified that everyone is a part of the same gentrified upper middle class background, again barring Shadwell and Madame Tracey). Crowley and Aziraphale fail spectacularly at trying to avoid the apocalypse, and it’s saved by a young boy who loves humanity as much as they do. But whereas in the book, chapters and chapters are devoted to developing the importance of Adam and the Them, the show focuses more on Aziraphale and Crowley, culminating in a finale that involves them much more than the original. Again, I get this decision, and I love seeing them together, but it takes away somewhat from the idea that humans have had all the agency all along, and it’s only by being more human than anyone else that Crowley and Aziraphale have any free will at all.

Being a demon, of course, was supposed to mean you had no free will. But you couldn't hang around humans for very long without learning a thing or two.

But the most disturbing thing to me at the end is that Aziraphale once again puts on a mask of bravery. This momentous decision isn’t what he wants or truly believes is the right thing to do.

He conceals his disappointment with Crowley’s answer to what he really wants and just goes along with Crowley’s decision - out of guilt (over what exactly l’m not sure, see the first sentence above), disappointment, or because Crowley has been right before? Who knows.

My point is, our canonically intelligent angel who has always found subtle and creative ways to defy the higher powers follows Crowley into oblivion on a moment’s whim and against his own will and beliefs.

This was such a mess.

Nina: "She's not embarrassing herself, she's- she's braver than anyone I know."

She stands up for her. She tries to protect her, refuses to let someone talk about Maggie like that. She doesn't just stand there and watch, she does whatever she can to defend her, even though she's a regular human being and these creatures threatening her, Maggie, and Mr. Fell are very clearly not.

And what does Crowley do when God starts dragging Aziraphale through the mud?

What. The. Hell. Is. That.

He just... shifts his gaze from God to Aziraphale with this cold... expectation and... indifference? This dark, detached look? Aziraphale is obviously hurt by what's being said, and Crowley just... stands there, leaning against that damned bookshop pillar, looking at him as if he deserves to hear it. Like, "Well? What do you have to say to that?"

It just gets under my skin. It's unbearable. It's revolting.

That is NOT Crowley.

Crowley would NOT stand by while someone said things like that about his angel right in front of him.

This is NOT the Crowley who, when he thought Aziraphale had died for good, lost every shred of hope and every desire to save the world, and instead went off to get drunk because, without Aziraphale, he saw no point in enjoying Earth or any of its little pleasures.

Aziraphale is the most important person in his life. The person closest to him. Crowley has risked his own life for him over and over again. He is his first, only, and best friend. His light, his hope, his love.

Just being around Aziraphale always lifts his spirits, even when he's irritated or upset.

Aziraphale means the world to him.

And when Crowley played Aziraphale at the end of Season 1, he portrayed him exactly the way he sees him: brave, courageous, smiling even in the face of danger and death, compassionate, forgiving, and full of faith.

Crowley sees the best parts of Aziraphale: his courage, his resilience, his unwavering commitment to his principles even when it threatens his own existence or well-being; his faith in something better; his ability to find light in the deepest darkness; his ability to smile at people who, for centuries, have treated him terribly.

And the fact that Crowley reacts to God's words about his angel with such coldness and indifference...

It destroys me.

I don't know who you are, or why the hell you look like our Crowley.

And let's not forget that throughout most of Season 2 he relentlessly bullied Gabriel and practically drove him toward a window just because Gabriel once told his only friend to shut up and die.

Crowley and Aziraphale becoming human: I don’t love, but you could argue that that was what he planned, and I would buy it. It does follow some of his themes.

But there is a knife’s edge that Pratchett balanced between fury and compassion. He absolutely loved humanity, but he also hated what humans did to each other out of malice, spite, or even laziness. Good Omens the novel was filled to bursting with that.

The end here lacked all of that somehow. God in S1 is unknowable, but God is S3 is just a capricious bitch who seems to have it out for Crowley specifically and through him Aziraphale. The viewer certainly gets angry at God, but the narrative seems to be that, while cold, she is doing the right thing and giving them their happy ending. And while Crowley expresses compassion for humanity, it falls on such deaf ears that the narrative doesn’t actually support that.

The closing sentiment seems to be that we can make their lives better by just erasing all their trauma and baggage. No. Sam Vimes did not pull himself out of the gutter and bodily hold himself out of it every day to be told that actually amnesia would be best. If you wanted to make them human: make them keep their memories. That would have been fine.

Terry would have Crowley and Aziraphale say “fuck you” to God and protect the earth as it was. The way they protected Job’s children. The way they did at Tadfield Airbase. Here they just throw in the towel and start a new universe. They accept their failure so quickly as to be farcical.

Bring back the old universe (in the book Lesley is revived and there are 3 fact finding missions about where Atlantis went)

Abolish Heaven and hell

God's no longer allowed to interfere -- so the old universe is now godless starting today

Turn everyone human with memories intact

Reincarnation

So there's like 50-70 years where everyone finishes out their existing life.

It'll be rough for former immortals -- traumatic actually -- but they have the right to finish out their original existences memories intact even if it's hard.

This is really a philosophical question. Is it better to end someone's life without consent versus having them go through a traumatic change without consent? I would say that ending a life is worse. People have the right to exist even if it's going to be traumatic for them.

To me it's all about consent. Aziracrow consented to end but everyone else did not consent to die in service of a better tomorrow. And some of them wouldn't have consented if asked

Abolishing heaven and hell was the ending I expected. Going into the finale I hoped they'd still get to be immortal -- but by the time we reached Crowley's choice I 100% expected them to tell God this.

I kept waiting for them to say it.

On the first watch through, I thought that's what they had decided under the apple tree until they said "starting with the big bang" and "you two will no longer exist ".

Can this universe function without divine or heavenly interference? Since it didn't start with a big bang? I think God in her final act of setting this up before not interfering again would be able to make it self running / self sustaining. If she can set up the big bang universe then she can fix any runtime errors in the old universe. I mean it's God.

I've heard the argument of course that Michael already destroyed the old world (so aziracrow have no moral obligation to the old souls since they currently technically don't exist) and that God's offer to bring it back was in bad faith

To me these are in-universe explanations though. At the end of the day the writers wanted the old universe to end. And so they wrote Michael with the book of life. If they wanted a different ending then that could have happened. For example they could have written God to be less of a bitch.

I saw someone say Michael is the trope "get your enemy to do the dirty work" -- the writers wanted the old universe gone with aziracrow left blameless.

The main argument I've heard against this ending is that it would not be as pure because there's this history of godly/heavenly/hellish interference -- and even if all divine interference ends effective today there's still that history.

But unlike Aziracrow we get to see how it turns out. And it turns out that Great Britain exists with London and the South Downs which means one way or another human history in the old universe and new universe were ultimately pretty damn similar.

So why is a full restart better then old universe (everyone turned mortal) if human history ends up being pretty damn similar?

The reason for a full restart is the possibility that without the flood or the plague or Moses etc etc that history would branch out significantly.

(This is a problem with this ending. Contemporary Fantasy. It might work better if the original universe was not set in the real world. Or if the new universe was clearly not the real world. The problem is both the original universe and the new universe are both set in the real world -- which means the old and new universes are weirdly similar. Like should not be possible because of the butterfly effect similar).

Cause one of the main arguments against abolishing heaven and hell in the old universe would be that there was still this history of influence -- except it kinda seems like WW2 happened in both universes so things don't actually turn out super differently if you remove god/heaven/hell.

And would it be messy to turn all immortals human ? Yes. Definitely messier then starting from scratch. Because real life is messy.

Even turned human the former angels / demons might want to cause trouble on earth (although their ability to accomplish much in 50 years or so would be limited by how they aren't used to needing petrol or groceries or to shower)

But people deserve to exist even if it's not in the most ideal scenario. People have the right to live out their lives even if they were born in poverty or a war zone. And you can't take the choice to exist from people.

And so you can't just nuke everything and start over (but better this time) because people live here and they have a right to exist in this life even if you're trying to pave the way for something better.

so even if you could erase everything and build a more perfect reality from scratch -- and maybe in the long run perhaps that new setup would be happier and better for more people. You still took away peoples agency and right to exist. What choice is more sacrid then the one to be alive in your current life?

And in real life you can't just start from scratch. You can't decide countries and societies don't exist. (Well you can it's called waging war but it's ethically frowned upon) You can't just build the perfect society from scratch like an academic exercise because real shit already exists and you gotta build and find the best solutions you can in a world that already existed before you were born. Find ways to make things better without hurting others or impeding on their personal agency.

“Use your gifts and your talents to greatest possible effect while you can. Spread joy wherever possible. Laugh at jokes. Tell jokes. Make puns and bugger the embuggerances. Read books. Read my books. You might like them. You might find something else you like even more than them. Look for these things in life.

Question authority. Champion good causes. Speak out against injustice. Do not tolerate bullies or bigots or racists or anti-intellectuals or the narrow-minded. Use your education to challenge them. Broaden their perspectives. Make the world you interface with a happier place.

These are your choices. Choices you have been fortunate to have been given, so don’t waste them while you have them. Don’t look back in years to come and wish you had grasped a fleeting opportunity. Grasp it now with both hands, Live. Strive. Love.”

From A Little Advice for Life taken from ‘Terry Pratchett: from birth to death, a writer.’

Me reading every single analysis on how Gaiman The One Who Ruined Good Omens is the exact person responsible for this entire mess

Some excellent posts delivering Important Facts

Gaiman’s ’Good Omens’ finale revels in heartbreak

Authored in malice: how NG failed the fans

How we got the end of Good Omens

No one died so Adam could live

Basically: Terry didn’t want this, confirmed

Yea Terry would not have chosen that ending

Aziraphale as a side character

The Shuttered Garden: How the Good Omens Finale Betrayed its Humanistic Roots

Terry Pratchett facts

Bonus: This one’s a real mystery *sarcasm*