Traveller Beyond Time

The ground beneath our feet is spinnin' at 1,000 miles an hour and the entire planet is hurtling around the sun at 67,000 miles an hour, and I can feel it. We're fallin' through space, you and me, clinging to the skin of this tiny little world, and if we let go... That's who I am.

[virginiaisforhaters]

Wow it’s almost like most of human history has been about controlling women… or something…

[morosexual-aziraphale]

I saw a thread, I think on @pinkpiggy93's artwork, and I just have to say something, because there is a toxic, gatekeeping side to this fandom which I wish would disappear.

can we please acknowledge the bisexual, asexual, nonbinary, and genderfluid representations and interpretations in the GO canon? I am so so tired of seeing my one source of good representation overshadowed by ppl insisting that crowley and aziraphale are gay men and only gay men when it is stated both in the book and the show that they are canonically sexless beings, one of whom canonically, multiple times, changes their gender presentation and sometimes dresses androgynously.

besides - by insisting that they are gay men and only gay men, by calling any other interpretation of them homophobic, you're completely overlooking the beautiful, wonderful idea that these two love each other so wholly and completely that they don't care what the other's presentation or gender is, they love their partner no matter how they look or identify.

you can headcanon what you want, that's why this fandom is so beautiful. but once you start harassing other people by reading their own ideas and experiences into the story, you've overstepped. this story is built on the idea of being different and being your own person. nothing is black and white - not gender, not sexuality, and certainly not the headcanons of a massive fandom. please be kind and respectful.

thank you.

[bornonthesavage]

What I find really interesting about the Good Omens Lockdown special is that it seems like Aziraphale is still trying to play the 6000 year old game of “Convince me! Tempt me! Get me to say yes!” And Crowley seems to have put his foot down and is waiting for Aziraphale to be the one to explicitly say yes. For him to tell him he wants him to come over and spend lockdown with him. He gives him a two day deadline before he’ll be asleep and unable to talk to him for several months. In the beginning Aziraphale even seems hopeful that he is out tempting and causing mischief so that he has an excuse to make him come over and keep an eye on him. I give it 8 hours before Aziraphale caves and calls him back.

[ineffable-endearments]

GOD this is their dance EXACTLY though!!!!!

“Why did Aziraphale tell Crowley not to come over?!” because he can’t TELL Crowley to break the rules, goodness, he may be retired but he still has moral standards to uphold!

Except…in an extremely roundabout way, he did. At the very beginning. He can’t tell Crowley to shirk lockdown on purpose, but he can insinuate that it’s…expected. Appropriate, even. Surely Crowley must be out breaking some rules…

[vaguely-problematic]

[new-bitch-who-dis]

Hey, as a heads up for people selling Bi Pride-themed items: this account has suddenly started claiming that they owned the copyright to the bi flag and is asking anyone who sees it being sold to report it back to them. They do not.

Please spread this around. I'd hate to see LGBT+ creators who dont know any better getting scamed into giving these shady people money.

[cliopadra]

I. have been. rewatching. that goddamn. lockdown video. since the bloody. moment. it. came. out. 

I. am. deceased.

anyway, I’ve sort of calmed down enough to draw so have a shitty comic.

[fuckyeahgoodomens]

[onlinecounsellingcollege]

Questions to Ask When You Have Negative Thoughts

1. What is the evidence that says this thought is true?

2. What is the evidence that contradicts this thought?

3. Where does this thought come from?

4. Who has said this about me in the past?

5. What was their motivation at the time?

6. Should I allow that person to shape my thoughts and life?

7. What is the thought trying to tell me/ make me believe?

8. Why am I allowing limiting thoughts to bring me down?

9. How can I challenge this thought?

10. Am I ready to let this thought or belief go?

11. Am I ready to heal?

12. How can I let this thought or belief go?

[themostineptthateverstepped]

So you know why I love Good Omens?

Because it's HAPPY.

I am tired of watching shows and films that think that the only way to be compelling or "edgy" is to showcase abusive relationships and torture and kill their protagonists.

Good Omens is compelling because it shows genuine love, respect, and kindness when it would have been so easy to show literally anything else.

Crowley, a demon, doesn't lie to Aziraphale, doesn't hurt him or trick him, doesn't disrespect or power-trip him; he cares about him and treats him well. Aziraphale, an angel, never for a moment rejects Crowley for being a demon, he doesn't try to change him, tell him he is wrong or attempt to "save" him, but instead recognizes all of the good in him and treats him well.

The only unhealthy relationships are between heaven and hell, and they FREE THEMSELVES OF THESE ABUSES.

The whole thing is filled with healthy relationships of all kinds.

Adam and the Them? Even though Adam is seen as the leader of the group, he takes this as a responsibility to provide his friends with the best games and bring them joy, not as a means of controlling them.

Witches and witchfinders fall in love.

No one is tortured or tormented, the world does not end, and a fucking nightingale sings in Berkeley Square.

Good Omens was the first time I have watched a series that didn't leave me tense wondering when the hurt was going to start. I actually realized how emotionally abusive media has become, and that is so fucked up.

[samblueberry]

Hello, yes thank you for seeing me.

[prokopetz]

Two hundred years from now, cultural anthropologists are going to be speculating – in exactly the same manner that we speculate about medieval drawings of knights fighting giant snails – why a whole bunch of artists just simultaneously started drawing snakes wearing sunglasses.

[ineffable-endearments]

So the BBC Studios Twitter shared some more behind-the-scenes pics of Neil with the cast. One of them included the bookshop.

But wait…what is that statue?

1. I can’t even with Aziraphale having a statue of Eve(?) literally holding out the Forbidden Fruit standing around in his bookshop. I mean, for fuck’s entire SAKE.

2. What is that on her head??? A hat? Were hats invented in Eden? A helmet? A hairdo?

3. I can’t see it that well from this angle, but from what I CAN see, the statue looks…a little bit androgynous, wouldn’t you say…? IS that Eve? Not that humans in England could be expected to accurately reproduce what Eve really looked like, but if we go strictly on the casting in the show, it looks a lot more like a certain wavy-haired tempter.

Does anyone recognize this statue or know what is on Eve’s head or have a better angle of it?

[behold-my-squees]

@ineffable-endearments I don’t know about the rest of it, but that hat looks like a Phrygian Cap, a symbol of liberty in the French Revolution. The red hat in the Bastille scene is related to this concept.

Check out the gallery on Wikipedia. They can be more or less stylized but the shop statue is pretty much a classic example.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrygian_cap

Phrygian cap - Wikipedia

Phrygian cap - Wikipedia

As such, it might be a statue of Marianne, the personification of France. She isn’t usually fully nude tho.

It would be very apt to interpret as a Crowley statue representing both knowledge and liberty.

[ineffable-endearments]

Thank you so much! That’s immensely illuminating!

[sarahthecoat]

i’m going to tag @sagestreet in case this statue is familiar. (Sherlock fandom’s resident expert)

[srebrnafh]

This could also be Eris, or Venus, holding the Apple of Discord. Venus was depicted naked all the time, and if the statue is not antique but from much later times, the cap could have been used to “modernise” it.

[ineffable-endearments]

Thank you, another possibility!

And @tapgurl1

YEAH. Like I dunno it seems pretty symbolic to me. I do love all the teeny tiny details. It’s amazing.

[aethelflaedladyofmercia]

Like that’s 100% a Phrygian Cap. We can debate what’s going on with the statue but that’s pretty clear.

The Caps were a symbol of the French Revolution/Republic; they were also a symbol in Ancient Rome. Primarily used to indicate easterners (who, in the Roman perception, are barbarians but like classy barbarians) like Trojans and Thracians and of course actual Phrygians.

The Trojan connection is relevant because that might be the Apple of Discord, part of the mythological portion of the Trojan War story, where Eris (Discord) threw a golden apple among the goddesses, saying only “To The Fairest.” Hera, Athena and Aphrodite fought over which of them it should be, asked Paris of Troy to judge, and it all went downhill. As @srebrnafh said, this could be a reference to that legend. In Roman times, Paris was often depicted with the Cap; if I had to guess tho I’d go with Eris (being a bit of a trickster figure) rather than Venus (even though she’s the one commonly depicted nude). Paris is often depicted somewhat androgynously and NGL this statue definitely has that going for it.

The Cap was specifically associated with a few cults especially Mithraism which was a major growing religion in the first few centuries CE before “losing out” to Christianity. (People like to point out that December 25 was a major Holy day in Mithraism and that the religion has some similarities to early Christianity. There’s enough in common to be worth mentioning in this context but the claims that Christianity is a “clone” of Mithraism are SEVERELY exaggerated.) I don’t know of apples having any particular meaning in Mithraism though.

Roman captives were often depicted in Caps. Roman Freemen (freed slaves) wore a cap called a Pileus which is similar in construction but strictly conical. Confusing the two got us the red caps of the French Revolution.

Marianne is the personified symbol of the French Republic and is frequently depicted with a Phrygian Cap. I skimmed her Wikipedia page and found lots of classical symbolism but no real reference to apples. Still the two images below are I think relevant.

Ok I don’t think I’ve helped add anything towards reaching a conclusion but that’s all the relevant info I could find.

Also, does anyone remember that post I made weeks ago about Aziraphale and Crowley’s escalating exchange of increasingly suggestive and not-at-all subtle gifts that they both refuse to acknowledge? Yeah I think we found another one.

[doctorscienceknowsfandom]

I came here from @mochacoffee​‘s post about the bookshop. I haven’t been able to find the original of this statue, but I have some insights.

First of all, it does not depict a woman. The hairstyle, the jawline, the lack of breasts: this is in NO WAY supposed to be a cis woman. It is a very young man or boy.

The Phrygian cap plus the apple means this is supposed to be Paris, no doubt about it. And it looks to me as though he’s got his forefinger on his chin, to mime “this is my deciding face”.

One of Paris’ characteristics is that he was exceptionally beautiful, and he is often depicted (in Greek & Roman art, and also later) as a not-particularly-muscular young man. If you google-image-search for “Bust of Paris of Troy” you’ll see that he’s so pretty that sometimes the statues are mis-identified as being Helen, though she doesn’t wear the cap & always has longer hair. 

These are busts of Paris & Helen by Antonio Canova.

Aziraphale’s statue is the youngest & most gender-ambiguous version of Paris I’ve seen, the original was definitely post-Renaissance & very probably Victorian. In fact, it reminds me of statues of Ganymede:

Ganymede, like Paris, was from Troy, so also wears a Phrygian cap. Having a statue like that in one’s Soho shop was as much a signal as a Pride flag.

In conclusion: Aziraphale keeps a statue in his shop of a sexy, gender-ambiguous person who’s about to cause some serious trouble with an apple.

[tifaria]

Hey all, I believe I found the sculpture in question. It is indeed labeled as Paris, and there are multiple views of it at this link. 😊

Bronze Figure of Paris, After the Antique

Holding an apple and with finger to his lips, on veined black marble stand. Figure 18 1/2 in., overall 20 1/4 x 5 1/4 x 5 1/4 in.Property f

[worse0mens-deactivated20240701]

So, I was looking through my copy of The Divine Comedy (as you do) when I took notice of this

If I could direct your attention to the 3rd Heaven…

Principalities, Spirits Inclined To Love

[aethelflaedladyofmercia]

On the one hand, the idea that as a Principality Aziraphale is naturally inclined to be loving.

On the other hand, the idea that Aziraphale talked Dante’s ear off about his “friend — well, not FRIEND, acquaintance — really not much more than that, business associate really — oh, but let me tell you about this time we were in Greece…” for four hours and Dante just ASSUMED whatever rank this angel was must be the “dumbass in love” rank. 😆

[worse0mens-deactivated20240701]

Reblogging for that valid-as-fuck addition

[miraworos]

Also intrigued by the second heaven of archangels and their love of glory…

[good-omens-meta]

Wait, is Aziraphale higher ranking than the archangels? Why do they still act like they’re better than him?

[aethelflaedladyofmercia]

This comes up every few weeks. 

The angelology here (with archangels as the second-lowest rank) is NOT the only one, just the most common. Others put archangels higher; for example the Book of Tobit states that only seven angels (including Gabriel, Michael and Raphael) are allowed to stand in the presence of God, thus making them the highest-ranked angels.

Someone asked Neil Gaiman on his blog, and he said there is a difference between archangels (second-lowest rank) and capital-A Archangels (placed higher than the rest). I always think of it like how a shift manager and a Regional Manager technically have the same title (manager) but vastly different status.

Regardless, Neil Gaiman has made it clear that Gabriel and the others outrank Aziraphale, not the other way around.

Edit: sorry if this sounds annoyed. It’s after midnight here. I’m not annoyed at any person in particular, just that the structure of Tumblr fandom is such that we need to have this exact same conversation every 2 weeks. Someone needs to put a FAQ together.

[good-omens-meta-library]

Select additional comments:

theniceandaccurategoodomensblog: It is an interesting phenomenon. I’m surprised at just how often it comes up and comes up in this way, with the questioner asking basically “Why do the Archangels act like they outrank Aziraphale when he outranks them?” Rather then “why is the ranking in Good Omens portrayed differently to how it is normally understood?”

What I mean is: Good Omens is the canon. What happens in Good Omens is canon. An external source cannot trump what is canon as far as what is true or not in Good Omens ‘verse because canon is canon. Here it seems fans slip into letting an external source trump actual canon in their minds. It’d be like letting some book about witchcraft not written by JK Rowling dictate how you understand Harry Potter even when it explicitly contradicts Harry Potter and I’ve never seen that happen. It happens for some other details in Good Omens too not just this. Is it because the topic is religious? I suspect so. I can’t see any other explanation. Anyway, it is interesting.

Keep reading

[fuckyeahgoodomens]

Hello! I'm glad to have found this blog (good job btw). As someone better versed on the show than me, might you answer these two questions? a) fandom tv!crowley is often depicted with dark nails. Did I miss it in the show??? b) fandom also often references them holding hand on the tadfield airbase. Again:??? Is this a book thing? Or just me not paying attention enough (totally a thing). Thanks in advance and take care!

Hiya, thank you :). 

a) No, in the show he doesn’t have the dark nails, but the fandom sometimes very strongly feels that he should :D.

b) Yeah, in the book there is the part:

Aziraphale held out his hand.

“Nice knowing you,” he said.

Crowley took it.

They don’t hold hands in the show at the airfield but they do hold hands later in the bus ;):

[babel-of-screaming-sounds-deact]

Was rewatching GO and noticed this book in Aziraphale’s bookshop. This is, apparently, the book of Micah. What is interesting, though, is the illustration, which is clearly a knight carrying an angel on horseback. And it’s right next to his telephone, it’s open, he was reading it.

I don’t know if there’s any immediate background in the book of Micah explaining this picture, but to me this totally looks like someone’s rescue kink confirmed. 

As if the story of Adam and Eve on full display next to his desk wasn’t enough. 

[babel-of-screaming-sounds-deact]

So I looked at the book of Micah and wanted to add two small things about the chapters on display here (5 and 6 at least) that I found curious.

In the book Micah is prophesizing about the imminent destruction of Samaria and Judah as caused by their sins before God. It’s roughly divided into 3 parts, them being: judgement against the nations (ch. 1-3); prophecy of restoration (ch. 4-5); Israel standing in court before the Almighty (ch. 6-7).

What caught my eye was the verse 13 from chapter 5, which says:

And I will pluck up thy Asherim out of the midst of thee; and I will destroy thine enemies.

Asherim is a generic term ascending to the cults of pagan goddesses, the main one being apparently Asherah. Now, Asherah and our well-known Ashtoreth are different deities; however, according to some sources, there was a period when they intermingled and even blended into one. Also, as an afterthought: a sacred tree or even a sacred grove of trees were involved in Asherah’s worship.

And there’s also chapter 6 where the prophet talks A LOT about mountains. Verses 1-2, for instance:

Hear now what the Lord says; Rise; contend with the mountains, and may the hills hear My voice.

Hear ye, O mountains, the controversy of the Lord; and you mighty ones, the foundations of the earth; for the Lord has a controversy with His people, and with Israel He shall contend.

Now, Saint Jerome interprets it as follows: the mountains and the hills are Angels of the Lord, to whom the care of human affairs is entrusted. Moreover, he is saying that the Angels would have to answer before the Lord too in case they didn’t care about the humans well enough. And on top of that, he adds that there is another possible interpretation: that the foundations of the earth are, if I understood it correctly, demons – those standing in sheol, or the underworld. Meaning that they would have to answer in court together.

[mochacoffee]

So I did a little digging into this because this is a lovely post/meta and I wanted to know more, and I found something interesting! I don’t think this is the Book of Micah; I think it is another book quoting the Book of Micah. The text is blurry so it’s a little difficult to read, but if you compare what words we can see, it matches this page of text exactly:

This page comes from The Commemorative Edition of the Works of John Bunyan, Volume 2 (Google Books link here). (Interestingly, the image of the angel on horseback is not on the adjacent page of this book, or on any page nearby. In the show it appears to have been torn from another book and placed there. Undeniably extremely intentional. I couldn’t find the exact drawing but I bet it would illuminate a lot, particularly in conjunction with the text, so if anyone recognizes it please do share!) The text is considering the meaning of the parable of the Pharisee and the Publican. The parable tells the story of one man (a Pharisee, someone who follows Jewish law and tradition very strictly) who boldly asks for God’s favor because he’s convinced of his own worthiness. There’s another man (a Publican, a tax collector) who quietly asks God for mercy because he has sinned, and doesn’t expect that he’ll necessarily get it. The parable concludes by saying if you glorify yourself you’ll be humbled, and if you humble yourself you’ll be glorified. I’m simplifying it here, but to my interpretation, the passage above is elaborating on why the Pharisee is not forgiven. Bunyan argues that if you go around making demands of God, you’re basically declaring yourself above God entirely. The only way to be forgiven is to truly repent — to believe you’ve done wrong and feel bad about it. If you do anything else you’re basically digging yourself a hole of more sins and that hole leads directly to hell.

So apparently Aziraphale is studying repentance and forgiveness. Specifically, the philosophy behind who gets it, who doesn’t, and why. The logic. The rules. It’s possible this is for himself since he’s done his fair share of — how shall we put it — ask-for-forgiveness-worthy things. But given what he says at the bandstand (“May you be forgiven” “You were an angel once”), I think it’s more likely this is about Crowley. There’s an excellent meta here that speculates Aziraphale has an apocalyptic plan B: if Crowley can be forgiven, they can still be together when heaven wins the war. I want to highlight @kedreeva​‘s contribution in that post, specifically the timeline she lays out, because it’s long-term. We see this book open on Aziraphale’s desk in fucking episode one when Crowley first calls him about Armageddon:

So if we are to believe Douglas Mackinnon’s infamous “Everything is meant,” this could indicate that Aziraphale has been anticipating a conversation like the one at the bandstand since before Adam was born. He’d already been thinking about what Armageddon would mean for their relationship when it came and how he could get through it without losing Crowley. He’d already been thinking about making a bid for his forgiveness and researching what it would take for him to earn it. Crowley would need to truly repent. But he doesn’t. He rejects the implication immediately. And this is the moment everything comes crashing down for Aziraphale, when he realizes Plan B is absolutely not going to work, meaning he must succeed at Plan A. If the war happens he is going to lose Crowley, so the war cannot happen. And it doesn’t have to! If he can just reach the right people he can get everything sorted out. He can, he can, he can, definitely, because if he can’t that means it’s all over and Crowley is out of his life forever (at best, destroyed at worst) and that is not an option.

[fuckyeahgoodomens]

[fanlan1]

Forever disappointed we didn’t see Hastur and Ligur’s “car shaped” object in the show. Just what the hell would that look like? Crowley’s boots I get, he’s a snake and they are boots that almost look like snake skin boots. He’s just walking around bare foot.

But the car shaped object…I can’t help imagining Hastur and Ligur with their limited imagination just getting under a card board box, walking around with it on top of them and disillusioning it to look like Crowley’s car, the only car they remember really.

[chanterelle-charlie]

The idea of Crowley seeing this thing and being scared of it is hilarious. Like:

[fanlan1]

Oh my god! I love this!