Some thoughts on why Good Omens S3 felt so disappointing from a queer theory perspective; major spoilers below the cut:
I wanted to organize my many scattered thoughts after watching the new season today, and try to put my finger on just what made the finale so disappointing as a queer story.
I find Aziraphale and Crowley to be queer in four major ways:
1. Most obviously, they are both male-presenting beings in love with each other.
2. They are magical/incorporeal beings that canonically lack human gender.
3. They actively work to counter the dominant systems in control of their lives to forge their own way forward (especially Crowley).
4. Their story spans countless times and places, weaving through different eras of history and prehistory and defying linear time.
In order to explain points 3 and 4, I'm going to perform the classic trick of pulling out Jose Esteban Muñoz’s Cruising Utopia. Part of Cruising Utopia examines the concept of queer time, which Muñoz characterizes as a time that is never fully arrived at due to its constant diversion from the status quo (which, of course, changes throughout time, rendering the queer experience ever-striving). Queer time is a continual process with no possible end, but one that is nonetheless carried out with hope and care despite its impossibility. It dovetails neatly with the philosophy of positive absurdism where, despite the chaos and cruelty of a random universe, the best thing to do is live anyway with all the love and kindness you can. This is a theme that is incredibly prevalent in Terry Pratchett’s parts of the Good Omens book, specifically the storyline of Adam coming into his powers as the Antichrist.
Adam is constantly cajoled by a thrum of deep voices goading him to start the world afresh. The world is rotten and falling apart, they tell him. The only thing to do is destroy it all and rebuild it in your own image. It’s a selfish outlook, and one that is incredibly easy to fall into as humans with limited time on Earth. There’s no shame in having this outlook as far as Heaven and Hell are concerned. But Adam resists with Aziraphale and Crowley’s help, insisting that the connections he has with his friends and family and the inherent messiness and complexity of humanity is precisely why the world should remain the way it is. It’s a really beautiful sentiment (and a very Pratchett one). If we all gave in to apathy about changing the world and loving those around us, then we wouldn’t be living much of a life at all. In encouraging Adam to make his own human choices, regardless of what Heaven and Hell (the status quo) want, Aziraphale and Crowley demonstrate a queer ethos and an alignment with queer time. They may never see humanity fully at peace, but they can do their best to shepherd them on that quest.
When God gives them the “choice” to remake the world in S3, it doesn’t feel like much of a choice at all. Throughout the book and the previous two seasons, Heaven and Hell are depicted as overstuffed, underperforming bureaucracies who often aren’t aware of their own goals due to the indecipherable power structures. All they seem to be concerned with is sticking it to The Enemy. There are some occasional scenes where they are seen punishing humanity, but never on a scale strong enough to show that they’re actually good at their job of policing human morality (and it’s almost always to prove their cruelty to each other, like when the story of Job ends up being a bet between the two organizations to see who’s truly the best. Humans are just collateral in this eternal beef). When Aziraphale and Crowley opt to “remake” the world without Heaven and Hell dictating human actions, it feels like a fool’s errand. Heaven and Hell were never effective in policing humanity previously, and so it doesn’t change much when they are erased at the end of S3.
Additionally, by doing this, Aziraphale and Crowley abandon their pursuit of queer time, no longer fighting against the status quo and essentially giving themselves up as sacrificial lambs. It’s admirable that they’re willing to be on each other’s side so much that they will cease to exist, but it also means that their millennia-long pursuit of shepherding and loving humanity comes to an end. It’s a really hard pill to swallow for me, personally, and I feel like I can’t pass informed judgement on it with how short the scene was and with how out of character they both acted. (It’s extra heartbreaking to have them decide to do this under an apple tree and then never delve into the significance of that.)
The issue of there being no kiss is a really nuanced one. As someone on both the aro and ace spectrums, I’m all for different expressions and explorations of what love can be. Aziraphale and Crowley are really interesting characters for this since they aren’t human, and have been confirmed to be asexual/sexless beings. I enjoyed the novelty of the finger kiss, especially since Aziraphale has so many Victorian dandy-esque tendencies that could understandably lend themselves to such a gesture of affection. However, it felt incredibly flat and narratively unfulfilling for a few reasons.
Firstly, while there was potential for exploration of how an angel and demon might show their affection for each other in contrast to two humans, that was sadly never shown. Their love story was intentionally paralleled with a human one (Nina and Maggie in S2), so there was every reason to expect that they would mimic human social customs after living among them for so long.
Secondly, it perfectly encapsulates a major issue I have with the finale, which is that it is clearly a well-meaning story made by allies, but one that lacks any true queer substance. The finger kiss and hand holding happened without Aziraphale ever apologizing for his patronizing attitude towards Crowley and without him ever explicitly telling Crowley that he loved him. God states that They were always amused by Aziraphale’s love for Crowley ever since the Beginning. Aziraphale states that with Crowley, he was complete, but that that was taken away from him after Crowley’s Fall. All of this dialogue is clearly meant to be unassailable proof of their love for each other, especially when combined with the millennia of acts of service for each other. However, it doesn’t actually delve into the heart of their love, and fails to give it proper substance. The screenplay is content to let the audience know that Aziraphale and Crowley love each other without actually showing us a moment where the two explicitly verbally confirm it. Again, this could be interesting if the angle of a queer connection outside of human customs was explored, but since that isn’t delved into, the confirmation of their love ends up feeling rushed and unsure (and it never comes straight from their own mouths, which feels incredibly disappointing). It’s yet another instance of an issue that has cropped up in recent years now that queer media is more mainstream, which I like to call Being Gay Is Fine As Long As You Don’t Do Any of That Kissing Stuff.
Rachel Talalay, the director of this season, said in an interview that she, Michael Sheen, and David Tennant felt that showing another mouth-to-mouth kiss would have “the same or less” impact as the one in the S2 finale. Complete mismatch of stakes aside, this quote shows a fundamental misinterpretation of how to depict queer intimacy. Talalay says in the same interview that “they [the fandom] desperately want [a kiss], and they can write their whole sex scenes in fanfic.” In doing so, she equates showing a queer kiss or makeout scene with sexual activity, and subconsciously reveals that she feels that such queer intimacy is too “on the nose.” This feels to me like a clear watering down of queer desire in the service of what allies feel to be “more meaningful” — aka These People Really Love Each Other (We Promise!) But Not Enough To Kiss Onscreen (Don’t Be Ridiculous). It’s a sort of unintentional infantilization and refusal to let queer couples stand on common ground with straight ones. (You never hear this kind of thing being said about cishetero couples.) This stings even more because she, Sheen, and Tennant are demonstrably great allies to the queer community, but this interview shows the fundamental disconnect between well-meaning allyship and true, firsthand queer experience (what’s that Crowley said about the road to Hell?). I’m in no way saying that anyone on this show had malicious intent, but the subtext of the season and cast/crew interviews is still very telling of the storytellers’ biases.
This is carried even further by choosing to reincarnate Aziraphale and Crowley as humans. In gaining corporeal, human forms, the queer significance of their nonbinary, magical forms is stolen away from them. The millennia of queer time they spent arguing and questioning and striving and laughing together is erased, and they are sentenced to a few linear decades of marriage, looking feebly up at stars they once created. I won’t lie and say that it wasn’t touching to see an older gay couple have a meet-cute resulting in marriage onscreen. It’s true that there’s a beauty in the fact that they’ll find each other in every universe — but we only see two of those universes, and they won’t get to live in the one they helped create and cherish together. If that’s the case, then what’s the point? (And fuck that nightingale!!)
If you got this far, thank you so much for reading! I definitely have many more thoughts about the finale, but those are all the ones that pertain to specifically queer theory and queer themes throughout the show. I’d love to hear what others have to say, whether you agree with my points or not! (But of course please be civil. I don’t pretend to speak for every queer person. Variety is what makes us so beautiful after all!) I’m really bummed that this is how the show ended after years of waiting, but it does provide interesting insight into how queerness is portrayed in pop culture and viewed by society at large, for better or for worse.
i just had a vision. aziraphale and crowley in the sky cottage (floating bookshop). not summoning god by writing in the magical blank book but by delighted moans of “god, oh god, yes, right there”. blockable offence post i know 😔
With three movies to compare between, I really appreciate how each Knives Out movie explores justice from a different thematic angle, not based on the murder that was committed but based on the cruelty that led to that murder.
In Knives Out, a compassionate, ethical young woman treats everyone around her with generosity, and the people around her repeatedly try to take advantage of her kindness to force her into losing the fortune that was gifted to her by a dear friend. There, justice means that she keeps the fortune and decides that actually, she doesn't have to be kind and giving to people who've proven themselves assholes.
In Glass Onion, a woman loses her sister to a gang of wealthy, successful people who've sacrificed their principles for the sake of ambition and ego. There, justice means that everyone involved will be made notorious: whatever their other accomplishments, they will forever be known for being complicit in the burning of the most famous painting in history.
In Wake Up Dead Man, the church takes advantage of a young girl's loyalty and faith to place her under a lifelong burden and fill her with guilt, shame, and hatred. Justice means helping her understand what was done to her and the women around her, and giving her compassion so she can find peace.
This is cool because it means the movies contradict each other! The compassionate justice of Wake Up Dead Man would be totally misplaced in Knives Out, and so would the toppling-monuments justice of Glass Onion. And because each movie has something different to say, they all stand on their own and feel fresh.
This is also why Benoit Blanc is the uniting figure but never the protagonist of these movies. He's an agent of legal justice in that he's the detective and it's his job to figure out whodunnit, but the protagonist -- Marta, Andi and now Jud -- is always the character who delivers thematic justice.
Just finished wake up dead man and since i am not christian nor familiar with the religion, i wont comment on the religious themes in the story but what i do want to talk about is the scene where blanc decides to not reveal the truth himself
(Also applauding the use of natural settings and light in an era of green screen and studio lighting, which helped convey the most important message of movie: faith and kindness)
In the first scene in the church, people already noticed the significance of light as "faith", how it goes dark as blanc rants in honestly about the church and how it slowly lights back up behind jud as he draws from his faith. Blanc is never shown with such searing sunlight on himself, as he is an atheist, until the final "big reveal" sequence of every detective fiction, where sunlight shines so blindingly bright on him, and he is mesmerized as he understands the real emotional truth. He sees, and accepts, faith, but not of himself, but of martha. He sees and understands her belief, and lets the high tension moment of revelation go, because he knows that martha believes jud as a true servant of god, and she will come for her final confession to him.
I know this isnt a big analysis as many have done, but i find this particular moment so beautiful because it lasts for almost 10-ish seconds and it just focuses on blanc as he looks at the light in awe, and idk man it just moved me so much
the benoit blanc movies show really beautifully how to write a queer character whose story is not centered around their queerness. it's shown that benoit blanc is gay married (to hugh grant!) it's shown that he participates in queer mediums like musical theater and fashion, but none of those things are ever explicitly remarked on. he doesn't have a big coming out scene because he doesn't need one; and the subtle details about him not speaking to his mother, the way he associates a church with homophobia, allows us to draw conclusions about how his family felt about his queerness without making that the sole conflict in his story. the conflict in benoit blanc's story is not that he exists in the world as a gay person, it's that he's always trying to wrangle a bunch of 30 somethings into not confessing to crimes they didn't commit
I love the symbolism of the jewel becoming part of the new cross after the events of Wake up dead man. I am literally chewing dry wall over how perfect this ending is for Jud Duplenticy, specifically.
Throughout the movie Jud keeps repeating that religion should not centralise the ego, hatred and violence. It should centralise community, love and acceptance in line with the teachings of Jesus. And then Jud takes this jewel that has caused so much pointless violence within the community. That has caused so much pointless violence against him. And what does he do? He gives it to Jesus.
He doesn’t keep it for himself, he doesn’t throw it away or give it to the church. No, he gives it to Jesus. Jesus who internalised all sin to give the world a clean slate after his death. Jesus who forgave humanity.
Jud forgives and lets go of the grief the community and church brought him. He acknowledges the sins his community and his church have committed and counters the hatred and violence with love. Because that’s what Jesus believed in. That’s what he fundamentally believes in. He is not here to “fight the wicked or bring them to justice”, but “to serve them and bring them back to Christ”
By “displaying” the stone as the heart of Christ Jud also buckles down on his belief that we need to openly acknowledge our shame and not hide it away. We should not let it fester until it consumes everything good in us, but acknowledge and accept it as a part of us. Because God acknowledges and accepts it as a part of us.
It’s a poignant callback to the exchange between him and Benoit Blanc where the detective accuses him of only joining the church, because it gave him a place to hide from his mistakes and to get a clear way to absolution. And Jud, who has openly talked about the mistakes that lead to him joining the church from the very beginning of the movie, counters that he didn’t find his way to god, because he wanted to find absolution.
He says he made these mistakes with open eyes, but that his faith helped him acknowledge those mistakes. He believes that his mistakes don’t condemn him for eternity in the eyes of God. He believes that God does not hide or fix people who have made mistakes. He believes that God loves people when they are guilty.
So he takes this jewel that has been tainted by violence and hatred. That represents the sins of the community. And makes it the heart of Jesus. Symbolically the community is not only forgiven, but also told they are loved even though they are guilty. Because that is the heart of Jesus’ teachings in Jud‘s eyes.
Thematically it fits so beautifully into Jud’s character arc. Honestly one of the most satisfying endings I have seen in a while
It isn't just that Knives Out protagonists win by being kid and steadfast. They win by sticking to what it is they're good at. What they've been called to do, as thankless and as demeaning as those jobs can sometimes make them feel. They didn't play the "game" like Benoit did. They just did what they knew they were good at.
Marta wins because she was a nurse and a caregiver before anything else. She wins the inheritance because she gave Harlan companionship, not just medical care. She gets the truth out of Ransom because she acted as a nurse, trying to save Fran even though she still dies in the end. Had Harlan just fucking listened to the actual medical expert in the room instead of himself, he would have lived.
Helen wins because she's a third-grade teacher—her job is literally educating, caring for, and looking out for kids. Glass Onion isn't just the working class vs the wealthy, it's an actual functioning adult woman vs a bunch of adult-sized toddlers, whining and throwing temper tantrums and thinking only of themselves. She plays games with her third graders, and in the end she wins by making a game of destroying everything Miles ever held dear, even getting the others to side with her.
Jud wins because he's an actual fucking priest, who actually embodies everything his god taught. He doesn't try to poach Wick's "flock" or anything, nor does he allow himself to surrender to anger and vindictiveness in the way Wick did. Jud is absolved of all his crimes because he just wants to do good by his church, in the name of his god.
Just as Blanc is an excellent detective, so too are these three spectacular at their jobs.
Rian Johnson and Daniel Craig just keep reiterating the same points in every film and I do love them for it.
• Respect the working class
• Fucking respect women.
• Listen to the local queer person who is excellent at their jobs and you will go far.
Okay, okay, Knives Out trilogy has some mind blowing mystery of course. But the message? The message each movie gives makes it much more than just a detective movie that just gives you suspense and thrill and the ache to solve the mystery with Benoit.
At the core of all the three movies, choosing to be kind has been the fundamental personality of the people Benoit stuck to just to solve the case while also at the end, reassures and appreciates them for their beliefs and values
the benoit blanc movies show really beautifully how to write a queer character whose story is not centered around their queerness. it's shown that benoit blanc is gay married (to hugh grant!) it's shown that he participates in queer mediums like musical theater and fashion, but none of those things are ever explicitly remarked on. he doesn't have a big coming out scene because he doesn't need one; and the subtle details about him not speaking to his mother, the way he associates a church with homophobia, allows us to draw conclusions about how his family felt about his queerness without making that the sole conflict in his story. the conflict in benoit blanc's story is not that he exists in the world as a gay person, it's that he's always trying to wrangle a bunch of 30 somethings into not confessing to crimes they didn't commit
by the way. being educated/trained in linguistics does not automatically free you from having reactionary thoughts about the validity of different ways of languaging. it does give you the tools to recognize and counter those thoughts as being false. you still have to be an active participant in shaping your own linguistic worldview.
Now that the quality of Duolingo has fallen (even more) due to AI and people are more willing to make the jump here are just some alternative apps and what languages they have:
Language Transfer (Languages: French, Swahili, Italian, Greek, German, Turkish, Arabic, Spanish, English for Spanish Speakers)
"I want a good audio-based app and money's no object"
Pimsleur (Literally so many languages)
Glossika (Also a lot of languages, but minority languages are free)
*anecdote: I borrowed my brother's Japanese Pimsleur CD as a kid and I still remember how to say the weather is nice over a decade later. You can find the CDs at libraries and "other" places I'm sure.
"I have a pretty neat library card"
Mango (Languages: So many and the endangered/Indigenous courses are free even if you don't have a library that has a partnership with Mango)
Transparent Language: (Languages: THE MOST! Also the one that has the widest variety of African languages! Perhaps the most diverse in ESL and learning a foreign language not in English)
"I want SRS flashcards and have an android"
AnkiDroid: (Theoretically all languages, pre-made decks can be found easily)
"I want SRS flashcards and I have an iphone"
AnkiApp: It's almost as good as AnkiDroid and free compared to the official Anki app for iphone
"I don't mind ads and just want to learn Korean"
lingory
"I want an app made for Mandarin that's BETTER than DL and has multiple languages to learn Mandarin in"
ChineseSkill (You can use their older version of the course for free)
"I don't like any of these apps you mentioned already, give me one more"
Bunpo: (Languages: Japanese, Spanish, French, German, Korean, and Mandarin)
gracieabrams
stormborns
origamiaround
amandla
2087
dailybridgerton
