[polyamzeal]

Here is polyamory representation you might not have expected. In the Explorer's Guide to Wildemoute, a Dungeons & Dragons supplement book for the setting of Matt Mercer's Critical Role, polyamory is explicitly stated as a possible option for your character's parents and being raised in a polyamorous family. Thank you Wizards Of The Coast, Matt Mercer, and the rest of Critical Role for this representation in D&D.

[wheeloffortune-design]

This is my mental timeline of Crowley’s and Aziraphale’s feelings towards each other. Even though I like the idea of Crowley having been in love for 6000 years, I think it may have been slower to grow. 

[not-a-space-alien]

Hello! You wrote a post, which I reblogged, listing reasons to read Good Omens. I went out and bought the book and I would really want to thank you, because I loved it! I have only just finished it and I have heard there is a radio recording (maybe?) so if you could list me a few Good Omens related things to investigate, I would be hugely grateful. No pressure though. Thank you so much!

[Note:  Since first publishing this, I’ve been using it to compile links and things to be a resource for the fandom.  If you think of anything I could add, or if any of the links you try are dead, please let me know so I can fix it!]

Hello my dear!  I’m so glad you liked it! :D  My work here is done!   Here are some things:

-BBC radio 4′s audio drama adaptation.  It was available to listen to for free when it first came out, but I’m not sure it is anymore.  I would definitely say that buying the CDs is worth it since they have quality bonus content.  Also, transcripts for the audio drama are available here.

-Good Omens TV series!  It’s all out now, 6 episodes available on Amazon Prime streaming service. The easiest way to watch is probably to sign up for a free trial of Prime, but if you don’t want to, here’s a link to a…low quality…Hmmmm something that looks suspiciously LIKE mp4s of the TV show, but definitely aren’t, nothing illegal here, nope!

UPDATE 11/13/17:  Here is a masterpost of all the adaptations of the novel that I’m aware of 

-Here’s Neil Gaiman’s version of what Aziraphale and Crowley’s New Year’s resolutions would be.

-Oh, also after the book Aziraphale and Crowley got a cottage together in South Downs, apparently??

-A piece about a hilarious interview every GO fan should know about

-Good Omens comprehensive reference guide (Ie I Don’t Get That Pop Culture Joke Can You Explain It)

-Good Omens theological reference guide (Ie I Never Learned That In Bible Class What Are They Talking About)

-Good Omens TV tropes page

-The covers.  The various cover arts throughout publishing.  Here and here

That’s about it as far as canon stuff goes, I’m afraid.  If you’re into fandom stuff, here are some things that might interest you:

-Discord servers

-My list of recommended Good Omens blogs

-Fanfic recs from this corner of tumblr

-TV tropes fanfic recs

-Fanlore wiki page

-Good Omens fandom starter kit

-Here’s another starter kit! (some updates)

-Good Omens Holiday Exchange, a yearly event where fanfic writers and fan artists collaborate to make gifts for each other, which everyone is welcome to enjoy.  Going on right now, actually!!

[intelligencehavingfun]

Okay, but, do you know what we’re not talking about enough? The body swap scene.

So, in my opinion, the mark of a good plot twist is that you shouldn’t see it coming the first time around, but the second time through, you should wonder how you possibly missed it. The body swap scene is that 100%.

David Tennant plays Aziraphale-as-Crowley almost identically to how he plays Crowley. The exceptions are marvelous to watch – seeing the Bentley is my favorite, when Aziraphale-as-Crowley smiles more broadly and easily than Crowley ever lets himself until the end dinner at the Ritz be still my heart.

But in Hell? No discernible difference. The swagger is there. The casual seeming disregard for the danger he’s in. Seriously, the energy of his entrance when he’s brought into the courtroom is identical to his “Hi, guys” in the graveyard at the beginning.

I love this. Because it’s how Aziraphale would play it. Hell doesn’t frighten Aziraphale the way Heaven does. Demons are, in his book, straightforward. He just has to out-intimidate them, and Crowley already does that. So be Crowley, and that’ll do the deed. And he knows Crowley well enough to pull it off without a single hesitation. The only time it felt even slightly not-quite-right (in terms of not questioning that it was Crowley) was the utterly amazing little nose wrinkle. And I’ll forgive Aziraphale that – he knows he’s won; he can gloat a little.

But MICHAEL SHEEN, FRIENDS.

Crowley-as-Aziraphale is a completely different story because Crowley is not as good at the facade as Aziraphale is. 

He almost is. When Crowley-as-Aziraphale is getting dragged away by the angels? That reads as Aziraphale 100%. But in the park with Aziraphale-as-Crowley? In the bookshop? And especially in Heaven opposite the angels? That is so obviously Not-Aziraphale that I DO NOT KNOW how I missed it the first time through. And that is a testament to Michael Sheen’s talent.

Aziraphale is a being who shows emotion with his entire self. He is never still, not his hands, not his body, not his face. Everything he is feeling plays out across every inch of him. He is effusive and genuine and has no idea how to push away any emotion even a little bit.

Think of all the other times we see him in Heaven! He’s nervous, he’s anxious, he’s flustered, he’s doing that thing with his voice and his face when confronted with these beings who genuinely terrify him. He can’t hide it. 

But Crowley is all too familiar with pushing down emotion. Crowley is guarded, he is caution personified, he reserve and preservation, and with his angel’s life in his hands, on Heaven’s home turf? He can’t shake that.

Crowley-as-Aziraphale is so still. His face, his body language, his posture, it’s all this perfectly calm facade hiding a smoldering fury that Aziraphale might be incapable of achieving. But when Crowley-as-Aziraphale is confronted with the angels and see how they treat his soulmate best friend, he cannot hide that fury. It’s in his eyes, his face, his voice. But Michael Sheen-as-Crowley-as-Aziraphale plays it so well because it comes across as Crowley-as-Aziraphale saying to the angels, You broke him. You pushed him too far and you broke him and this is what it looks like, and you should be terrified.

And it’s all so perfect, and they’re both so talented, and I don’t think we talk about it enough.

[lightning-crown]

I don’t know how I missed it the first time either, honestly. or, rather, how I knew something was wrong but I just assumed Aziraphale had been pushed past his limit. Aziraphale was so - so calm, too calm, too still, he wasn’t nervous and he wasn’t glancing around and he wasn’t trying to avoid looking at Gabriel straight in the eye - he wasn’t even dithering. 

it would be terrifying for people who know what Aziraphale is actually capable of (read: Gabriel & Co.) because when he’s not acting like normal he’s not acting like normal, he could be a wild card at this point and a principality powered by fury isn’t something a staid businessman like Gabriel wants to deal with on a good day. that’s why it’s absolute gold and a goddamn testament to how well Michael Sheen can act. 

also: that part in the park where they meet up to swap back? damn. I actually thought it was Crowley talking until Aziraphale-as-Crowley replied, and then I realized - you guys remember those two publicity photos or whatever where in one photo Aziraphale is sitting with his hands clasped in his lap and Crowley has one arm hooked over the corner of the bench and he’s leaning over, and then in the other photo they’re swapped but in the same positions?

the voices just confirmed the foreshadowing (does it count as foreshadowing when it’s done from beyond the fourth wall? idk). and I went w i l d because these two actors are so good they can pull off playing each other playing a character. holy shit. just - David Tennant and Michael Sheen, guys. 

[linipikk]

Crowley and Aziraphale have those moments with each other when their brain kind of suddenly stops working, leaving them with the biggest and shiniest hearteyes ever..and it is different for each one.

The moments when Crowley looks more smitten is when Aziraphale does something generally un-angel: like being an agent of chaos

performing temptations:

plainly going against Heaven rules:

or just being a little bit of a bastard in general.

( modern day Crowley is just dark glasses+ intense heart eyes for the angel half the time tbh) And Aziraphale looks more deeply in love is when Crowley “miracles” something, out of the goodness of his demon heart:

…Basically the entire scene in the Bastille and Crowley rescuing Aziraphale from the guillotine 

AND it’is the second  with the Nazis, when Crowley says it outright that it clicks on Aziraphale :

(and Aziraphale ended up testing it some times, just to see if Crowley would still do some other demonic miracle for him)

and still Crowley just keeps doing his thing:

And I’m pretty sure they know what they are doing because at the end, Crowley keeps it to the “temptation” and Aziraphale to the “miracles” 

(and then both giggle about it and go on a DATE)

[princesshamlet-deactivated20210]

when i watched good omens, i didn’t expect to love tv crowley, and it fuckin blindsided me. all at once, i thought, oh gosh, damn, and fuck, roughly in that order, and here’s why.

where tv crowley and book crowley most significantly diverge is the bookshop fire. in the book, “Crowley cursed Aziraphale, and the ineffable plan, and Above, and Below.” in the tv show, instead of cursing him, he calls out for him desperately before falling to the floor with a quiet “you’ve gone.” for book crowley, az is “Aziraphale. The Enemy, of course. But an enemy for six thousand years now, which made him a sort of friend.” for tv crowley, aziraphale is his “best friend.” naturally, in the bookshop fire, tv crowley is in fucking agony. this is not how book crowley reacts.

see, one of book crowley’s most basic traits is his optimism. “Because, underneath it all,” the book says, “Crowley was an optimist. If there was one rock-hard certainty that had sustained him through the bad times—he thought briefly of the fourteenth century—then it was utter surety that he would come out on top; that the universe would look after him.”

it’s a really beautiful passage. and i can’t relate to it at all. 

after the fire, book crowley thinks he might “get completely and utterly pissed out of his mind while he waited for the world to end.” where book crowley only considers it, tv crowley actually does it. he does go to wait out the end of the world while drunk, and does give up, and he does break down, and he is not an optimist; he is a mess. that struck me. i’ve never seen a heroic character so blatantly need help before. but crowley gets help; he finds a friend and confesses how much aziraphale means to him; he gets back in the car and forges onward through the fire, even though he’s clearly Not Okay.

and there, on the flaming m25, book crowley and tv crowley diverge again. tv crowley is not an optimist; he’s not holding the bentley together with the hope that it’ll all work out. but he does it anyway. tv crowley doesn’t have optimism, but he has something that is, to me, even more important. in the show, “Crowley has something no other demons have, especially not Hastur: an imagination.”

an imagination. strangely enough, in the book, crowley admits to lacking it: “They’ve got what we lack. They’ve got imagination,” book crowley says. but tv crowley has that imagination, and that is what saves him–and that, to me, makes so much sense.

tv crowley is traumatised. when he fell, some part of him broke, and while he claims he “sauntered vaguely downwards,” he really took a “million-light-year freestyle dive into a pool of boiling sulphur,” and it hurt. tv crowley is hurt. and so am i. 

i also give up. i also break down. i don’t, and can’t, ever believe that the universe is looking out for me–or for anyone. i am not an optimist. but you know what? i have imagination. i have friends. and if it came down to me to help save the world, that is exactly what i would rely on.

[fondlylupin]

I’m convinced this is the moment Crowley fell in love.

[bahamutswings]

It clearly was and no one could ever convince me otherwise. Btw what I love the most about this exchange (apart from the obvious) is that Az didn’t give away his sword out of foolishness or carelessness, it was an act of kindness and Crowley fell for him just for that reason, he was being kind but by doing so was already messing things up. And we perfectly know how Crowley loves chaos and breaking the rules xD

[hubblegleeflower]

And even then, at the very beginning, Aziraphale knows, he KNOWS, that he wasn’t supposed to do give the sword away, that he’ll be in trouble if he gets caught, he’ll even try to lie to God about it. He knew he was doing something of which Heaven would Not Approve but he saw the humans and pitied them and showed them kindness and tHAT WAS HIS REBELLION and Crowley always said he didn’t mean to fall, he just asked questions. Well, Aziraphale didn’t stop to even ask the question, he just did what he thought was right, out of kindness, out of love, so damn RIGHT this is the moment Crowley fell in love because I believe one of the first questions he asked was “why can’t we be kind to each other?” This is why he showed no surprise at the crucifixion. But Aziraphale just went ahead and helped the humans because they were cold and vulnerable and weaker than him, and Crowley saw that and said to himself, “Ah, here. Here at last is someone I can worship.”

[noadventureshere221b]

YES THIS IS CORRECT

[hetrez]

Aziraphale is chaotic good and spent 6,000 years trying desperately to be lawful good before he threw his hands up and went, “My boyfriend’s way is better than any plan you fuckers have,” and embraced his true self.

Crowley, gripping a tire iron in one hand and the Antichrist in the other while the whole world shakes: “WAIT BUT AM I THE BOYFRIEND?”

[neil-gaiman]

On the list of things ABSOLUTELY NOBODY HAS EVER ASKED ME FOR. Here’s the dialogue from the TV show that the Young family are watching in Episode 3, before Adam heads off for an early night.

[fuchsimeon]

Wait so you wrote this and then someone acted it out and filmed it and then the actors had to act out watching it all for some background stuff???!!!

I love writing/creating

[neil-gaiman]

Not quite. (If I understand what you are asking correctly.) The actors acted watching a TV show. Then a year later, when we were doing the sound, Douglas the director asked me what they were watching, as we had a temporary soundtrack on of some thriller or other. So I wrote that, we recorded it with actors, and it’s mixed into the deep background of that scene…

[lyricwritesprose]

I am glad Neil Gaiman confirmed that Crowley was presenting as female during the crucifixion scene

Because I have seen people argue that his Nanny outfit was transphobic, and I happen to think that’s a bad take.  It would have been transphobic if the joke had been, “Ha ha, a man in a dress,” but instead the joke was, “Ha ha, demonic Mary Poppins.”  But, you know, even though I think it’s a bad take, I can kind of understand where it’s coming from.  We’ve been so socialized to think the joke is going to be, “Ha ha, a man in a dress,” that it’s difficult to put a man in a dress without the joke sort of popping up, if that makes any sense, whether the creator meant it or not.

But, if Crowley was presenting as female at the crucifixion scene, that’s a different angle.  Because nobody is drawing any attention to his presentation, and the only jokes going on have nothing to do with how he’s presenting himself.  (In fact, that scene is appropriately grim, overall.  The biggest joke is a very dark one about how of course preaching a message of love and peace will get you horrifically murdered by the government.)  Crowley’s presentation is just … there.

And if you ask me, that changes the context of the Mary Poppins bit a little bit, too.  Presenting as female is not something that Crowley did one time, for a disguise.  Presenting as female is just something he does every now and then.

I wish we’d seen a little more of it.  Another historical segment, closer to our own time, when “female presentation” looks a bit more like we’re used to seeing and the issue isn’t confused by everyone wearing robes.  But even so, I’m glad to have it there and even more glad to have it confirmed.

I bet that post-canon Crowley sometimes dresses up in a black dress to go to the opera with Aziraphale.  Probably with high heels that could kill a man and very snake-themed jewelry.

[the-moon-loves-the-sea]

Yes, oh yes. He’s wearing women’s jeans in the modern scenes too and that is a tiny detail that just gets to me, because it’s such a secret queer move: wear one forbidden thing, the least noticeable, as a comfort, a small assertion of yourself, if just to yourself. At the crucifixion he’d have an easier time staying close dressed as a woman, since they allowed the female disciples to follow along, and as Nanny he had the perfect excuse to dress up, but any other time it could have brought him trouble, and not the properly hellish kind. It would have been a self-assertion of a very human, personal kind.

I think the less it matters if he draws attention to himself, the more he’ll try on more feminine elements. He was always so frightened of being watched. His outfits were dramatic, but they were the kind of dramatic that told you not to mess with him. I think the new vulnerability and safety he feels with Aziraphale would help, and so would the knowledge that no one’s going to check up on him, no one needs intimidating, and he isn’t anyone’s secret agent. There’s no agenda any more, no secrets to defend or forbidden softness to armor up; he’s just Crowley.

[lyricwritesprose]

I can’t locate it again, but I remember seeing a post saying that his glasses in the modern era are three hundred dollar women’s sunglasses.  (Of which he evidently owns … well, as many as he wants, I suppose, he can warp reality after all.)  So, yes, there’s also stealthy self-assertion to look for.

[the-moon-loves-the-sea]

Oh yeah, I remember seeing that too! I’d forgotten. His hair is always just on that fine line between fashionable and femme too.

[the-moon-loves-the-sea]

Thanks @aredhel-of-doylkien none of us remember our sources but we all remember that Crowley is That Snake when it comes to accessories I guess

[tartan-thermos]

I am also solidly convinced that the waistcoat he wears in the 2012 scenes is a woman’s waistcoat. I’m aware that men’s waistcoats can have different cuts and styles, but (at least to my uneducated eye) Crowley’s waistcoat specifically looks like it was tailored to cinch in above the hips, and to accommodate breasts.

[dietraumerei]

AAAAAH I suspect I’m the last person to notice this, but check it out – they’re wearing the same outfit. Trousers, waistcoat, shirt, jacket, neckwear. They’re just doing it in *completely different ways*. How cool! It’s kind of interesting – Crowley’s riding the edge of femme/is femme if you know exactly what to look for, but reads as just cool slinky dude to us. Aziraphale is dressed out of time, fussy and unfashionable, and reads as gayer than a tree full of monkeys on nitrous oxide. His femme characteristics are all personality-based: he’s soft, he’s kind and gentle (with an asterisk, that’s a meta for another day), the general cultural link between presenting gay and being femme. Aziraphale’s genderfuckery is how he approaches the world; Crowley’s is how he visually presents. I feel like there’s more here to dig into, but I’m not quite grasping it right now.

[antiqua-lugar]

I do the same thing Crowley does in the series re:stealth-assertion and self-expression so not only I am now incredibly happy but I am also incredibly moved. Those two queer idiots are exactly what I needed when I needed it.

[strangelyineffable]

Here are the glasses. They are indeed from the women’s Valentino line.

[vaspider]

That’s definitely a women’s jacket, or cut to look like one. The pockets are placed too high for a men’s coat. 

I can’t believe I didn’t catch that. Wow. 

[greenbergsays]

I just love how with two simple words, we’re told that Crowley 100% already knows what’s going on with the Ark, he just played dumb to have an excuse to talk to Aziraphale.

He should not know the name of Noah’s son if he hasn’t a clue what’s going on here, but he does know the name of Noah’s son, which mean he’s a Lying Liar Who Lies.

Like, I’ve seen some posts that talk about how Crowley let the kids braid his hair and such, and I just imagine him hanging out with Noah and his sons for a while, befriending the kids

Definitely Not Helping, because he’s a demon, after all. I mean, if you think about the story of Noah and then try to figure out what Crowley is doing there, his job there is officially probably to stop everyone from believing Noah and his family, but he doesn’t really have to lift a finger for that. His first experience with humans doing his work for him, really.

And as the time of the storm approaches, Noah loading animals into the ark, Crowley supervising, he sees a figure in white and then immediately says to himself, “right, time to act dumb so that the pretty angel will talk to me again.”

I mean, look at the way he’s looking at Aziraphale. That is the face of a demon thinking, “Gosh, you’re cute. Let’s find a tent and make-out like the world’s about to flood.”

You should also, Definitely For Science, see Crowley’s expression when Aziraphale starts to explain the Ark to him.

“Ah, yes, I definitely, 100% know nothing about this. First I’m hearing of it, honestly!”

Crowley, you’re a dumbass, and I love you.

[intersexaziraphale]

A little more in depth on the Desert Stills, Presentation, and Clothes

So! I realized that not everyone knows what I do about clothes or scene examination, and decided to explain why Crowley is definitely dressed like a woman and Aziraphale like a man in these two stills.

First, environmentally: all the men in these scenes are wearing turban style headwraps; all the women are wearing looser scarves. Aziraphale is clearly aligned with the men via framing; in both shits only men are standing behind him, and vice versa for Crowley. None of the men have long hair; Crowley does. None of the men are wearing belts or have their waists emphasizing via draping and cinching, but Crowley does. Environmentally, this aligns Crowley with women and tells us he is dressed like a woman.

Second, historically:

As we can see from these two helpful pages on Biblical clothing, Crowley is still dressed like a woman and Aziraphale is still dressed like a man; they are clearly apart of the same group so they are not dressed differently due to cultural influences.

Someone mentioned Thobes, Muslim clothing, and Beoduins, and I’d just like to say: don’t. They’re blending into the same group here, and Thobes and “Muslim clothing” didn’t exist at the time as it’s very likely around 33AD or earlier. Saying otherwise is not supported by given evidence, and is likely ahistorical, as is using any purely modern terminology in this context.

[ineptshieldmaid]

Excellent, and in addition, please allow me to get iconographic here:

the women at the crucifixion, liturgically and in Christian art, are associated with empathy for Christ’s suffering. Like. That’s what women do, in that scene: they weep. In medieval drama and meditative texts, audiences get to enter into the pain of the scene through the women: the grief the women feel, and the pain Christ feels through the women’s grief at his pain. It’s traditionally through the voices of women, too, that anger and confusion at god’s choices are voiced.

Here’s Hans Memeling’s Crucifixion tryptich:

That’s Mary Mother of Christ in the black - conventions vary as to whether she’s in black or royal blue, but you can tell it’s her because she’s swooning into John the Baptist’s arms. Kneeling is Mary Magdalene (you can tell because her hair is uncovered, and it’s red - MM’s hair is often red or red-gold)

Now, this is late medieval. Further into the renaissance the veils the women are wearing in these scenes get less structured. Here’s Sofinisba Anguissola’s Pieta:

Mary’s wearing a wimple under her veil here, but the overall flowing effect is not dissimilar to what Crowley has going on.

But the Virgin is hardly the main iconographic reference that’s coming to my mind here. Red-haired Crowley, with a blue-black veil loosely slung?

Here’s Lucrina and/or Domenico Fetti’s Repentant Magdalen:

I’m sure I’ve seen similar Madalenes with brighter red hair, but I can’t find one right now. Nevertheless. If this resemblance wasn’t deliberate I will eat my hat.

Conclusions:

1. Crowley as a woman at the Crucifixion is extremely resonant and liturgically apt, because what Crowley is doing is a. experiencing empathy for pain and b. questioning and evoking doubt, both of which are roles largely assigned to women in post-patristic Christian tradition (yes, Peter and Thomas doubt. Jesus himself has that ‘take this cup’ moment. But medieval and renaissance Christianity loved to explore the contradictions of anger, empathy and faithful acceptance through both the archetypal holy woman, the Virgin Mary, and the archetypal redeemed sinner, Mary Magdalen). Gaiman has compared Crowley’s questions to the strong Jewish tradition of questioning and arguing with God - although Christian tradition has generally allowed less space for that, if there is going to be space for a Jewish-like Questioner of God in this scene, it’s always in the mouths of the women.

2. Crowley’s specific colouration, the long red curls, the fact the veil is slipping off? Mary Magdalen all the way. Is that meant to position him as redeemable, or as inherently a temptress? Both? Neither?

3. In the tradition of depictions of the Crucifixion, Christian and vaugely-Christian-aware audiences since… uh… at least the twelfth century have been primed to identify with the women (you still see it in contemporary evangelical worship and the like). Positioning Crowley as a woman in that image is apt to the text: that scene is meant to align you with Crowley, with Crowley’s empathy and questioning. 

Thank you, thank you, I got three degrees and this is what I do with them, I’ll be here all week, etc.

[senshilegionnaire]

@zuzelcomix

[cogitaeworks]

“You were saying, sweetie?” “It’s the little things.” “Good.”

Based on this post by @kedreeva.

Don’t worry, Newton, you are just too polite to judge people. You don’t need to be a latina witch to know when it’s going down though.

But we always do.

[kedreeva]

oh my GOD it’s perfect

[yumbles]

sunday afternoon plans, at the usual spot

prints available here, an addition to my growing GO print roster haha.. i’ll be at rose city comic con in portland with this and a few other pieces on 9/13!

[nixarim]

Sticker designs 

 (best Crowley is long hair Crowley)

[fuckyeahgoodomens]

[yuhengwanye]

#fandom has written off Gabriel as dumb but like #you don’t show up unannounced with a violent enforcer your employee is clearly uncomfortable around and trap him in a room by accident #this is deliberate mob level intimidation #“politely” reminding him exactly what theyre capable of if he steps out of line #and its terrifying #he cant even look at them

@ileolai hitting the nail on the head as usual!

In addition, Sandalphon is blocking the exit. And he and Gabriel are standing at complete 180 degree points with Aziraphale in the centre. This is a thing I have known sadistic interviewers to do: to deliberately sit (or stand) at such angles to the victim/interviewee that they can never have both interviewers in their eyeline at the same time. To make eye contact with one, you have to lose sight of the other. Normally I’ve seen it done with the two interviewers at 90 degrees, so the interviewee has to keep turning their head. This is even more cruel: Aziraphale has to turn his back on whomever is not speaking. It’s a deliberate tactic to make a victim more awkward and wrong-footed, and in this case, even physically vulnerable.

[ileolai]

Yep. You’ve articulated what I was trying to get at with ‘’trap’’. You don’t block off the exits like that to have a polite conversation. You do it to threaten somebody.

It’s like they took the mob intimidation bit from the original book and turned it into something far more horrifying and with more weight for his character arc, because this is what gangsters do to scare people. imo Gabriel is fairly well aware of whats going on long before the surveillance photos come into it and he just likes watching Aziraphale squirm with anxiety over how much he knows, because he’s not stupid, he’s a sadistic bully. 

[guardian-of-soho]

And Aziraphale is playing the game so well. He tells himself he trusts them but he absolutely doesn’t. He smiles, he nods, he tells them nothing. He has a quick answer for the jibe about the evil smell. He shows zero reaction to their loud comments about pornography (react, and prove you’re more used to humans than to angels? That you find angels embarrassing now? That you know more about earth than the guy who stationed you there?). He’s covering his ass expertly—he knows how to defend himself. He’s watched angels fall.

[the-moon-loves-the-sea]

@kedreeva oh NO you’re right.

[kedreeva]

Like don’t get me wrong, I like a good clueless boss as much as the next person. But that’s not Gabriel. Michael asks if Gabriel minds Michael following up through back channels and Gabriel plainly says “there are no back channels, Michael” and it’s not because Gabriel thinks there are no back channels, of course there fucking are, he’s been using them too. But how dare Michael bring them up so baldly. How dare Michael betray the ruse, and to his face like that. They’re the good guys, you know.

[kobetyrant-deactivated20141020]

Britney is younger than Bey…

[blueivysedges]

white people age like milk lol

[melaninking1810-deactivated2016]

Lmao

[erinthebrave]

yeah. the stress of having your parents financially dependent on you since childhood, learning disabilities, mental illness, two divorces, and drug and alcohol abuse will age you. 

not to say bey has had it easier since you know, racism. but bey definitely has class privilege and as far as we know, health/ability privilege over britney. but yeah, go on and say how poorly britney has aged. It’s not like she’s been working and paying her family’s bills since she was like 15.

[femininewritings]

I have to agree on this…it’s not fair to make racial comments about one woman in comparison to another. As women, we need to be trying to cooperate with each other, not tear each other down. It only perpetuates an endless damaging cycle, in my humble opinion.

[hughdancydance]

Not to mention the fact that Beyonce, the woman who stood in front of the word Feminist in big letters on national television, probably would be really upset to see that people are saying things like this. 

Also 

She looks just fine to me. 

[dreamychocolateprincess-moving]

what a good post

[grayskymorning]

Let it be Sunday | Joy the Baker