here’s something i’ve been thinking about.
i’ve seen a lot of posts over the years discussing whether crowley is, in essence, good or bad. but here’s the thing: no one is fundamentally good or bad. full stop. in fact, that’s one of the major themes of good omens, and it doesn’t just apply to humans.
we are the sum of our choices, a messy amalgamation of nuance. as a person you will do good things and bad things over the course of your life, but a lot of that comes down to circumstances (think of the edinburgh minisode). we do what we can to survive in the circumstances that we’re given. it’s all so much more complex than something like intrinsic morality.
crowley’s job is to inflict evil. does that make him a bad person? he does, after all, do a lot of bad things.
he also saved the world. that’s pretty good. exceptionally good, even.
i don’t think someone “fundamentally good” would try to hit a hedgehog with his car, and i also don’t think someone “fundamentally evil” would risk his life to save the world.
crowley and aziraphale spent millennia among humans and thus no longer fit into the mold, which goes to show that the mold has always been optional. free will can be learned. angels aren’t fundamentally good and demons aren’t fundamentally evil, they’re both just doing the jobs they’ve been assigned. we are often victims to our circumstances, but if we can manage agency, we can break out of those circumstances and make different choices.
crowley isn’t bad or good, he just is. the same goes for aziraphale. they are the sum of their choices, which, when you stir them all up, ends up looking pretty grey.
