#anyway LWA IS BACK!!!✨

[thesherrinfordfacility]

LWA: /Does/ Aziraphale build actual relationships with humans? It's an interesting question, because his interactions with Maggie or Nina are not much more intimate than they were with Anathema Device after he and Crowley ran her over. Aziraphale doesn't go to the pub because he wants to /avoid/ people ("this is why I don't go to the pub!"). Gaiman has said repeatedly that Aziraphale is just not that interested in interacting with people beyond a certain point. He's polite and friendly to everyone--which is the point: he's polite and friendly to everyone, including the two guys who threatened him in Edinburgh. Aside from the ball in S2, he doesn't invite humans into his shop to socialize. We know he went to a "gentleman's club" to learn how to do the gavotte, but enjoying a night out is still not the same thing as developing individual friendships. Presumably, like Book!Aziraphale, he was on good terms with various prophets, but even Book!Aziraphale doesn't go much beyond thinking about them with mild fondness. He and Crowley are attached to /humanity/, rather than to individual humans. The flip side of this is that it's not clear that either one of them would be much fun to be around for any length of time! They are canonically reality warpers, they don't exist in time the same way, and beyond a certain point they don't understand human psychology.

I was idly thinking about miracle ethics the other day, which maybe has some bearing on this question. I'm not sure that either the novel or the TV series has a thought-out position on the matter (in the novel, Adam denounces "messing about," but then Aziraphale and/or Crowley miracles up a reservation at the Ritz...which is surely messing about, or is it?). I think everyone is in agreement that in S2, the ball crosses a boundary line once Aziraphale begins overwriting everyone's minds, and both Nina and Maggie call him and Crowley out for treating them like toys. S1 and S2 also suggest that Crowley's interrogation technique is troubling, and it's noteworthy that Aziraphale dislikes it: in S1, Aziraphale objects to hypnotizing Sister Mary Loquacious and at least tries to be kind while questioning her, while in S2 he resists interrogating Gabriel "properly." Crowley's second interrogation in S2 comes across as invasive and even violent, enough so to cause Gabriel pain. By contrast, neither the novel nor the series seems to suggest that there's anything wrong with Aziraphale doing the Jedi mind-warping thing if it's in self-defense. (In fact, it's arguably odd that he /doesn't/ do it in 1793 and 1941.)

LWA!!!✨ hello, hi, been a while! i hope you're well :)

you're right, it is an interesting question! and its boggled me for a good little while - but the conclusion ive clumsily arrived at is that it's kinda as you say and what neil has said, but i do wonder if there's a little bit more to it (at least from how ive interpreted it, anyhow). because whilst i think aziraphale doesn't initially want, need, or set out to form emotional connection to humans, he arguably ends up doing it anyway, and to those humans the connection is indeed meaningful. in time, i think they come to mean something to aziraphale too.

because my thought process on this is indeed clumsy, the points im essentially trying to make are the following:

aziraphale definitely has respect and admiration for humanity - and this is in part due to things about humanity or that humanity has come up with that aziraphale personally enjoys

he indeed doesn't invite humanity into his inner sphere, or actively seek it out (your eg: bookshop and pub), and its his innate benevolence as an angel that manifests as friendliness and politeness

but i do think he does inevitably end up forming connections with certain individuals out of his tendency to kindness and protectiveness, even if he doesn't intend on forming those connections originally

whilst he may not have huge emotional investment in these relationships he unwittingly cultivates, they certainly have meaning to the other party

and whilst he may not feel any deep attachment to individual humans, he does seem to develop more personal sentiment as time goes on.

i think it's fair to say that the bonds, significant or otherwise, that form between aziraphale and individual humans appear to be a byproduct of his kindness and potentially of his protectiveness. that would track, given his perceived original purpose on earth, but i think aziraphale carries out his duty a little more subjectively than was originally intended.

he was sent to earth as guardian of the eastern gate which, by my reckoning, was more to keep danger out of eden rather than to directly protect adam and eve. but he hears they are to be exiled from paradise, will be thrown into the cold whilst eve was pregnant, and gives them his flaming sword as a means of protection. the scene from s1 doesnt show that they converse to any extensive degree, or that there is any significant interaction between them, but from aziraphale's recount of it, it does appear to be out of kindness and anxiety about what will happen to them without it (immediately proved right by the lion sequence). i don't think it would therefore be much of a stretch for adam and eve, retrospectively, to look back on their brief interaction with aziraphale as meaningful, and that there would have been an idle outline of a bond between them as a result; but in aziraphale's part, his connection to them appeared to start and end with this rebellious act of kindness, rather than any deep, personal stake in their wellbeing - again, perhaps just sheer protectiveness over god's first humans (that he helped to design and bring into being?) because to his mind it was the right thing to do.

next that springs to mind is shakespeare; whilst this could be seen as self-serving, i don't think that's entirely the case. it wasn't until shakespeare was whining, "been like this every performance, juliet, complete dud; it'd take a miracle for anyone to come and see hamlet!" that it seems to even occur to aziraphale that he could do something to help. he does push this on crowley to perform, but it is essentially his idea. and actually... what would aziraphale have to gain by it being more popular? he's seen the play and presumably enjoyed it, and whilst popularising it would perhaps mean he could see it again, i doubt he was thinking this deeply about it. instead, i think he just wanted it recognised as an act of kindness. he doesn't outright compliment the play (only compliments burbage), but the fact that he sees it as worthy of being made popular would indicate that it deserves it. the interaction he has with shakespeare didn't form any significant bond, but given shakespeare's exploration of fatalism in his work (especially hamlet), i don't think it's impossible that he would have looked back on this interaction as being potentially linked to hamlet's sudden (?) rise in popularity, even if he didn't fully understand just how true that is. again, a connection that to aziraphale maybe means very little, but to shakespeare may have meant a great deal.

then jumping to current day, aziraphale certainly appears to have possibly his most significant human relationship (as far as we can call it that) in the form of maggie. we know that she has been around the record shop since she was very young, and so has likely known aziraphale all that time, and he does seem familiar with her. it seems that it goes beyond friendly professionalism, or generic fondness; it takes him a while to understand the situation about the rent, and it's largely self-serving to forgive it, but the first interaction we see between them is aziraphale being kind enough to wipe the debt and allow her to keep her tenancy. again, yes, mainly so he has his steady supply of 78rpms, but the way he immediately jumps to "why? don't you like it anymore?", and "well it's entirely my fault for not collecting the rent!" feels like he genuinely at least has some feeling of protectiveness over her. when talking to her in the record store about nina in ep2, he again seems genuinely affected that she's upset, and that he can't quite help her with the issue. now, again, it may not be the case that aziraphale feels anything for maggie beyond fondness, almost like one would for a child, but her reaction on both occasions - and her subsequent protectiveness in kind over aziraphale come ep5 and 6 - indicates that from her perspective, whatever relationship they have with each other holds importance.

(caveat to the above, for anyone else reading - i do feel like there is something more to maggie, which ive half-heartedly theorised about, but may well look further into in the future. in any case, i think there may be more to why aziraphale and maggie have the level of connection that they do - and no, not that maggie is a demon)

there are multiple other interactions he has with humans that kind of follow the same theme. aziraphale seems to act out of perhaps self-interest predominantly, but there is always an element of kindness and/or protectiveness that comes along with it. and no, aziraphale doesn't appear to invite connection with all of humanity/just anyone, but i think this is the point; instead, i think he does evolve to entertain forming connections to certain individuals based on their own merit. i think it would be ever so slightly reductive to consider that he only does this out of angelic, detached benevolence, and instead i think it's a mark of a deeper personal character development; that aziraphale is allowed to form meaningful human relationships because his purpose on earth is no longer dictated to or audited by heaven, and he is free essentially to do as he wants. i don't think it's a stretch that aziraphale has suffered by his ostracism from heaven and the other angels, and other than crowley he has no interest in being friendly with demons; so why not open himself up to connections with the beings that he designed and nurtured, has protected, and has provided him with various means of finding happiness?

moving on to miracle ethics... yeah. the ball was a complete nightmare in this regard; aziraphale may have his ulterior reasons for the ball and it going the way it did (👀 @ crowley), but it is a huge violation in more ways than i probably could talk about and keep this answer length somewhat reasonable. that being said - did aziraphale even intend it to go as far as it does, or is he so furiously driven by his subconscious (?) motive to manifest a further development in his and crowley's relationship that even he is swept away in the tide? he remarks in ep2 that you cant just miracle up love, but instead he could create a situation (inspired by austen - what a dork) where it would happen organically.

there certainly isnt, as far as i recall, any intent on aziraphale's part to play god by assuring that the falling in love of nina will happen, but perhaps more in his own personal excitement for what the ball may precipitate for him and crowley, his power has manifested a bit more than he originally planned or even noticed. nina and maggie's comments about treating them like toys is still true - you could say that about humans setting up their friends or engineering blind dates etc - but i don't think aziraphale ever meant for the scale to be what it was. guests came in through the door in their fancy clothes; there's certainly no indication from aziraphale's perspective that they weren't already dressed like that (if he even noticed, frankly). there's nothing to suggest to aziraphale that humans wouldn't know how to dance the quadrille, and he doesn't partake in any conversations that sound like they are directly lifted from the pages of pride and prejudice. and that would parallel, as you said, his apparent disdain for the forceful removal of control that crowley seems to prefer to use. maybe this is a reflection on it being unkind and therefore against his angelic identification, or a more personal distaste for removal of agency (aziraphale seems pretty adamant in both s1 and s2 that being human comes with choices, even if the context in which he asserts this is... questionable).

as for aziraphale and his little dalliances with miracles being used in self defense; ill be honest LWA, im drawing a blank on when this occurs - other than perhaps the men that turn up in the shop threatening him into selling... is this the scenario you mean? (feel incredibly dim rn, but it's been a long day!)

[thesherrinfordfacility]

LWA: Some more idle thoughts about narrative construction and both seasons, prompted by your reflections about AWCW's inability to see consequences and Aziraphale's already-vivid awareness of them.

Crowley's and Aziraphale's pre-Fall selves are already set into their post-Fall approaches to consequences. Aziraphale, given adequate data, is very good at predicting the most plausible consequences of any given action; unfortunately, he's also very good at predicting consequences when he only thinks he has adequate data, which leads to repeated disasters (both the 1862 fight and the end of s2ep6 being the most obvious examples). It's not an accident that he's good at interpreting prophecy. It may also explain the weird Jane Austen misreading, which has nothing to do with how Aziraphale fell in love (past) but everything to do with constructing an iron-clad narrative in which there's a definite, logical romantic outcome (future). AWCW is politically naive, but fallen Crowley /still/ can't predict what ought to be the completely logical consequences of his actions. (Hence perhaps his own misreading of Richard Curtis, which mistakes the climax of a romcom for its inception.) S1ep1 keeps coming back to the fallout of Crowley pitching his stories too well to his demonic audience. He takes down the cell tower and does himself in, turns the M25 into a sigil and both gets trapped on it and temporarily murders an awful lot of people, and...then there's my favorite bugbear. Fans tend to overlook the likely outcome of Aziraphale giving in to Crowley's manipulation and killing the Antichrist, thanks to Madame Tracy stepping in, but beyond the cruelty /this is not something that Aziraphale could have survived/ (figuratively or literally). I was thrown straight out of the S2 episode in which Crowley gives away the entire bodyswap to Gabriel/Jim during his "protective" outburst, because as script-writing goes that there was a decision, but I have to grouchily concede that if Gaiman were to show up and remind me about the child murder business, he would have a point about narrative plausibility.

Crowley genuinely doesn't appear to believe that his relationship with Aziraphale has a developmental narrative. There's no story to be told about it. As I've said here before, his accounts of their relationship do not square either with what's on the screen or with what the actors have said they're playing. For Crowley, they've always been friends, they've always been a couple, they've always had the same kinds of conversations, whereas what's dramatized onscreen is a more heavily-romanticized take on the /book/ narrative, in which they gradually become friends over the course of centuries. There's no sign that /Aziraphale/ believes they've always been friends or a couple, which may be one of the reasons that Crowley's confession doesn't land.* In fact, one of the things that is now starting to bug me is the problem of Aziraphale's relation to Crowley-as-angel, because Aziraphale's problematic assumptions about fallen Crowley's continuity with AWCW (he's not trying to reverse-engineer Crowley, he really believes demon!Crowley effectively still /is/ angel!Crowley, just grumpier) mirror Crowley's refusal to acknowledge that his relationship with Aziraphale has an actual plot.

My take is that Aziraphale could obviously have done a much better job, Crowley-wise, of accepting the Metatron's proposal, but there's nothing to indicate that he could have done anything /else/. It's not just a mirror of Beelzebub's ep1 proposal to Crowley, but a warped mirror, in which the whole point of the "coffee or death" dialogue is that the Metatron is not really offering Aziraphale a choice in the matter.

afternoon LWA, hope you're well!!!✨

i didn't think to look laterally (not to this extent, anyway) at aziraphale and crowley when comparing their pre-fall selves with them later on in the narrative, but that's really fun to consider!!!

i absolutely love this interpretation of aziraphale's inner thought process, because whilst i had never really thought to see aziraphale as having an analytical personality type, he absolutely does; his approach to pretty much anything appears to be very systematic. in fact, im struggling somewhat to think of an instance where im confident that aziraphale reacts completely intuitively... maybe when he squares off against satan (crowley comes up with the time-stop, but where aziraphale chooses to face the devil down feels like he does so without any idea of how it could end)? any other action aziraphale takes, or words he says, feels like they've been very carefully deliberated over before delivery, even if he knows the outcome is going to be... well, shit.

you mention 1862 and ep6 as two examples, but, to me, aziraphale's way of thinking vs crowley's (which i'll come back to) is just encapsulated neatly in the entirety of s1; there are so many examples of where aziraphale consistently reacts to incoming data (when he discovers it or - when he deigns to - when crowley tells him stuff), and acts accordingly, and then immediately cycles back to analysing the result when it doesn't work.

my day-job (GO is practically The Other Job at this point) is largely based around analysis and research, and i regularly use a few thought models (maybe not consciously, but it's second nature at this point) in approach to a problem/question. so looking at the overall context of s1, aziraphale appears to follow a similar process:

scanning (identify the problem: the apocalypse)

analysis (gathering information/data, and identifying mitigating factors or outlying data: e.g. the hellhound conundrum, agnes' prophecy, adam is in tadfield, heaven actively wants the apocalypse)

response (how can the problem/question be addressed, and take into account any extraneous data that may affect the result: e.g. stop the dog, return to tadfield, engage shadwell and the WA, consult a higher authority through the portal, finds a human to 'possess' and get to tadfield)

assessment (the impact of the response, and any splinter effects or conclusions that the response initiated: e.g. realising that they had the wrong boy, identifying the right boy, where the apocalypse would happen, and that he and crowley were alone in stopping it themselves).

the last bit is especially indicative to me of aziraphale being analytical; he hears crowley say that god would not speak to him, but he still tries because it's a viable solution to scrutinise, and when it fails he immediately re-evaluates and then contacts crowley to try out an alternative, and share the information he has, because ultimately crowley ended up - on this count - being correct in his own initial, instinctive assessment.

obviously those phases of problem-solving throughout s1 are non-linear, and instead completely cyclical; aziraphale takes into account different factors and data at individual points in the story, and repeatedly comes up with various options in which to respond to problems as more data materialises - he continuously reassesses. initially, his approach to the problem of armageddon was to Not Act, and allow it to happen, because it was the great plan, and as an angel it was logical to him that whatever god had planned was for the best, was what was always intended, and would only ever be Good because... well, it came from god, right? had he perhaps thought a touch more intuitively, followed his instinct (which is arguably to thwart armageddon, the same conclusion crowley arrived at), he would have probably leapt on the chance to follow crowley's proposal... or possibly even proposed it himself.

but as it stands, he doesn't, and crowley gives him reason after reason to do so. all of this builds as significantly compelling data to aziraphale - to the point that when he's fully analysed (at this point) the potential outcome of Not Acting vs. Acting, he chooses to Act - a conviction that he sticks to. even at the bandstand, he doesnt sway on wanting to stop armageddon, but that the way that crowley proposes they do so not only directly conflicts with aziraphale's moral boundaries (killing a mf child), but also conflicts with aziraphale's sense of logic and reason (running away). and then as a last thought for aziraphale; he goes to instinctively shoot adam when crowley pushes for the last time, and is immediately thwarted by madame tracy - she does it as an emotional, knee-jerk, moral-based, human reaction, "you can't just shoot children!" - but given that that reaction is what aziraphale actually agrees with, it only reinforces that his way of thinking, logically and analytically, is the correct one, just because they happened to arrive at the same conclusion.

but this is where crowley comes in. crowley on the other hand acts very intuitively, instinctively, and i daresay emotionally - his immediate reaction to delivering the antichrist is panic, and to immediately call aziraphale (the narrative at the very least doesn't show any kind of analysis of the issue on crowley's part - would he have arrived at a different response if he had? and plus, as you say, him taking down the phone network was a class A monkey-paw job, well done crowley). but then he goes on to convince aziraphale into stopping armageddon with him (which, admittedly, does work, but only once crowley changes tack, stops invoking the emotional, and instead lays out the logical, does aziraphale agree).

when the issue arises of the hellhound (which, let's reiterate, crowley did not think to tell aziraphale before this point...), and the prospect of their upbringing plan not working because of this, crowley's reflex is to destroy the antichrist completely - but tempt aziraphale into doing it. when aziraphale pushes back on this more resolutely at the bandstand, crowley's immediate instinct is to just run. fair enough, given that crowley ends up being correct that aziraphale's resolution to beseech to heaven will just go ignored, but he similarly doesn't consider that aziraphale needs to test the hypothesis first, engage a more methodical and strategic approach, before resorting to more scorched-earth measures.

but as you say, this definitely harks back to the pre-fall scene. narratively, we still don't have any confirmation on what leads to aziraphale having any concept of punishment, or a sense of consequence; there is no iron-clad context (that I can see anyway!) as to why aziraphale would start to formulate this rationale - that asking questions might lead to a larger, damning (ha) consequence - when we can only surmise up until this point that angels would consider their creator as benevolent and omniscient.

AWCW presumably doesn't mean anything nefarious behind his questions (i think that can be reliably interpreted from his behaviour and delivery), so why would god ever punish him? this is beside the point, however; in any case, crowley tends to rush to a response, to act, without stopping to consider other factors, other data, and the potential consequences. in the pre-fall scene, if he had acknowledged the warning, the 'data', as it were, that aziraphale was giving to him (that something could go wrong if he continue the path he's walking), he might have arrived at the same action but with considerably more caution, and potentially prevented what happened to him (which, in contextual hindsight, is not necessarily a good thing). we don't have the full narrative yet to tell us what exactly happened during AWCW's fall, but it does seem like crowley is a chronic case of "fuck around - find out."

in this respect i personally find it entirely in character - and rather in-keeping with crowley's overall narrative in both s1 and s2 - that crowley reveals the ruse of the bodyswap in s2; he's not thinking about the consequences that it could have, but thinking entirely based on instinct. he's not thinking about whether gabriel/jim might remember the information, whether gabriel (regardless of his presumed reformation of character in ep6) might exploit that information, but entirely acting on the emotional wave that gabriel is posing a direct risk to aziraphale's safety and wellbeing. plus, we don't know how long he was sat in justine's restaurant for; it's entirely possible that he was three sheets to the wind by the point aziraphale happens upon him.

once again! not sure i arrived at a point! but i think in hindsight this is a really interesting way to read the final fifteen; it's fairly obvious that crowley is acting and reacting emotionally during the feral domestic, and aziraphale is - as metatron-aziraphale theories are indicating at the moment - acting and reacting based on a conclusion he's arrived at from data we've potentially only partially seen/data hidden in plain sight. but then we switch to aziraphale saying "i need you!", which is a hitherto uncommon emotional outburst from him, and crowley... saying nothing. is that crowley's way of thinking logically, analytically? because anything he says is not going to change the outcome - aziraphale will ascend, he will not, and they will still be apart?

on the note of their relationship, it's a really interesting dynamic - how crowley and aziraphale both see it from their perspectives. on one hand, you have aziraphale that goes from crush, to acquaintance, to confidant, to friend, to best friend and person he's in love with. crowley's perspective is... well, it is the same, right? so why does he retrospectively suggest that it's something that it, by all accounts, wasn't? look, maybe crowley was in love from the wall, immediately fell for aziraphale when he told him about the sword - but that's not what's actually shown in the narrative, to the audience. so... if he did, did he even realise it? is that why he looks back on their history as being something that, as far as shown to the audience, it isn't?

the s1 flashbacks are all shown from aziraphale's perspective (why am i only realising this now) - mesopotamia, golgotha, rome, arthurian england, 1601, 1793, 1827, and 1941 all show aziraphale first. the scenes are all set up with aziraphale opening them. it's only eden, uz, 1862, and 1967 that show crowley first... and all of them are pivotal moments for crowley's character development, as well as the development of their relationship specifically. that they learn to confide in each other, then they learn to trust in each other, then they learn the extent of what they mean to each other, and then they learn (or acknowledge) the danger of them being together.

so actually - does crowley think that there's no plot to their relationship? or is it that by 2023, he counts on the fact that the plot has already happened? that the biggest problem they confronted in his view - the holy water and the breaking away from heaven and hell - has been resolved (see: it hasn't), and that they've now reached the happily ever after? rather than the fact that we are actually only just getting to the climax of their personal story? which is also likely the stage that aziraphale was at by ep5, and is considering that crowley, by the time of the confession, is still a chapter ahead? "you go too fast for me, crowley."

(christ i don't even want to know the word count of this answer)

and this is similar potentially to how aziraphale sees crowley own angel-to-demon-to-just-crowley development; that he thinks that crowley as a person would want to be an angel again, "just like the old times, only even nicer", because why wouldn't he? he's a good and kind person, why wouldn't he want to be restored to the station and to the place that - in aziraphale's view - inherently embodies that? heaven has been corrupted, and he could make a difference, but heaven was always meant to be the place of good... right?

well, once again, aziraphale is without data - he doesn't, presumably, fully understand why crowley couldn't ever become an angel again, couldn't set foot in heaven again (not in that capacity, at least). so the conclusion he draws absolutely misses the mark; thinks this is the long-awaited happily-ever-after for crowley, when actually crowley is perhaps a chapter or two behind. s2 has shown more that crowley is able to somewhat accept that he is a good person, but he still has a way to go before he fully acknowledges it, and reconciles that with the, we can only guess, full circumstances of his fall.

last point - so glad that someone else spotted the mirror of the beelzebub proposal in ep1 to the metatron proposal in ep6; i think i gasped when i realised the implication of that conversation between beelzebub and crowley!!!✨

[thesherrinfordfacility]

I love TV Crowley and I don't think he's a bad/unfaithful adaptation of book Crowley I just. I wish that when he says things like "I'm going to run off to Alpha Centauri" or something along those lines, about abandoning the Earth, more emphasis is placed on the fact that He Would Not Actually Go Through With That. Like for as much as he threatens to do so, when it comes down to it he truly cannot bring himself to up and leave the humans like Gabriel and Beelzebub did. It would grate on him and he'd end up turning right back around and I want something other than Aziraphale to be the clear, immediate reason for it. Crowley notably hates the 14th century and that was the century where over a third of the population (245 million people) died due to a combination of the Great Famine and the Black Death. I think about that sometimes idk.

hi (again?) nonnie!!!✨ you're good dw, i got what you were saying and it's perfectly valid; ultimately as i added to the tags of the last ask, for many reasons it's difficult to accurately translate a character to screen when you don't have the more overt narration of their internal thought processes, because these give great influence to how the reader should view the character.

its not at all bad (the way that book crowley was depicted in tv crowley), there are elements i like about each more than i do about vice versa (same for aziraphale, and anathema, and madame tracy and- you get the idea), but he is in many ways different. and i trust that maybe we'll see the other facets of crowley's character in s3, by nature of s3 perhaps being more solid in the original plan for the GO story in general (again, bc t+n discussed it)... particularly those traits demonstrated more in the book, because if there's a particular season where i think this is going to necessary, it's that one.

might be worth having a read of this first ask that i got from LWA✨ (if youre new here, first of all welcome! and second, Longwinded Anon/LWA is a legend in these halls for dropping their analysis of different elements of the story and characters in my ask box from time to time... they have truly elevated my way of thinking about the story that's perhaps a tad more critical than most, but i think that's important!!!). anyway, this ask has a bit of critique on book vs show crowley that might of interest!!!✨

[thesherrinfordfacility]

Longwinded Anon (LWA)✨ gets their own special hotlink and dedicated masterpost✨mainly because im fed up of searching through my whole entire blog when i need to refer back to their asks:

oldest ones first:

ahhh, the first ever LWA ask, a golden post. i remember it fondly. my response as you can probably tell was just sheer incredulity that was sent to me, instant brain crush. anyway, talks about the influence of politico-moral dynamics on GO and how this extends to how we perceive crowley. i promise my responses get more intelligent after this.

more on crowley in terms of his arguably unreliable narrative and questioning the choices he makes as a result. in this i actually answer the first one as well as this.

see now im not 100% on this one but it sure does feel like it was LWA, maybe not... either way, full response/meta on who the second coming might be is linked within, as i elaborated on it more in a different ask.

this one gave me a cardiac arrest because LWA decided to spam me with everything they could possibly think of, it was so fun! so this time they talk about aziraphale and his own flaws as concerns his superiority complex and the damsel in distress nonsense, a bit about s3, the pre-fall scene and how this sets up the boys' dynamic, discussion on how long the boys have liked let alone loved each other, lucifer theory (sob), and who indeed the wider question on the angel that crowley was (AWCW) might have been. i responded with talk about aziraphale's insecurity, crowley's saviour complex, their love languages, aziraphale pre-fall, and (wails) lucifer theory.

talking about the apology dance and forgiveness between the two of them in general, and i added in a sprinkle of talking about manipulation.

here we discussed the whole business of crowley's temptation to get aziraphale to kill the antichrist (still a bugbear that crops up again later on in the LWA timeline), and more on crowley's tendency to push his protectiveness on aziraphale (and aziraphale laps it up). also talking about aziraphale's superiority complex again, and the nuclear miracle.

a little bit on the emerging topic of how GO looks at religiously allegorical literature, and a ✨challenge✨ to find where bits of the book may have been transposed or conceptualised into s2.

LWA kindly gave me their thoughts of where, if it does, the lockdown audio clip fits into the canon, and then more on the antichrist/aziraphale manipulation business and how the boys keep secrets from each other, as well as how it impacts on their individual morals. there's also, fair warning, a little bit of gentle but intelligent criticism on how this sometimes get mistranslated in fanfiction.

so here gets a little critical of the magic trick theory, but also similarly looks at some of the technical and narrative weaknesses of s2, as well as looking again at how lopsided the love-story element gets when we look at the boys' journey through history.

this looks at how GO is not a carbon copy of any one biblical text or piece of literature but is inspired by, and reimagines, a bit of everything.

a wee rant on the 'god ships it' trope and its moral implications. im sorry but it rubs me up the wrong way (but no shade at all meant to anyone who writes or likes it!), and i tried my best to explain why it does.

so this was following the startling (see: i was absolutely blindsided at 4am by this) confirmation that aziraphale did not in fact know about crowley living in his car. discussed why that might be, but also again a bit more on the antichrist shitstorm from s1 and its effect on the trust between them.

shorter one, once again examining the wider thought that the boys have loved each other since eden, and whether or not this actually has any validity when considering the narrative objectively as it's been given to us.

talking about the theme of rescuing, how crowley somewhat forces this on aziraphale and aziraphale plays into it, even though he can save himself - and what this might spell for their future

further ruminations on the holy water argument and what this spells for in 1941 and 1967

after a small absence, LWA came back!!! with analysis on aziraphale's willingness/disdain for forming human relationships, and a bit on the ethics of miracles too!

the one about 1650/aziraphale's stint as a bishop, about (as always) the boys' fumble with morality, and then about what will/should happen to heaven

LWA's ability to draw parallels absolutely everywhere is mind-boggling and im essentially that spiderverse meme pretending that i know what im talking about. this one was about aziraphale and his depiction with halos/aureola

this one was really difficult! talking about aziraphale and crowley's respective approaches to problem solving throughout the whole story, and how they both view the narrative of their relationship (such as it is) throughout history

they keep getting more challenging to respond to intelligently. getting into the nitty-gritty of how aziraphale and crowley operate in the grey, and what they ask from each other

it never ceases to amaze me that LWA actually reads any of my idiotic ramblings but here we are: some really fun (for me anyway) talk about shax and demon/angel abilities in general

talk about actions and consequences - and aziraphale and crowley's difficulty with understanding and accepting them - and subsequently the occasional fandom-blindness to this very thing ("Dead Whale Theory") (genius)

actually think this is my favourite one so far? talking about the extent to which crowley is content existing in the system, and how much he benefits from it, to the point that he doesn't model any resistant behaviour to aziraphale beyond malicious compliance and exploiting loopholes. lots more than that, and honestly i could have talked about this for a fortnight

LWA lurking in my walls again and choosing to haunt me by talking about, if there is trauma to be interpreted from crowley's fall, why would they have even talked about it? so goes into whether they were even friends for the majority of their association, plus some speculation on how crowley chooses to look back on their time together as having been in love for any great length of time.

wise words of comfort re: s3

okay so here is where LWA look closer at nina and maggie mirroring the boys, where their respective interactions are inappropriate (ie. nina's questioning of crowley and aziraphale's personal lives), how free will gets tampered with in their plotline, and where crowley in typical fashion ends up listening to the wrong part of the ep6 advice that they give him :(

AND THEY'RE BACK BABY✨ a long (lol like a month. calm yourself, rhi) awaited return, where LWA chooses to whack me over the head with questioning the power imbalance between heaven and hell, whether there is anything to say that heaven takes human souls in the first place, and why therefore aziraphale might even be told to do the things he does by heaven

and then on a lighter note; where and when would aziraphale have been a garden designer, as per furfur's little book? and if crowley actually indeed has a green thumb (open for debate)

LWA back to discuss a really good post that explored book vs tv canon, how far this extends into the book/tv characterisations, and then how s3 could resolve when the show has largely lost a lot of the political overtones

this one was really difficult but such a great point - compared to the book, aziraphale and crowley's 'issues' are divided up between them, and what results is that they do not understand or recognise how the other sees themselves, nor are they (imo) able to truly completely empathise with the other's position and beliefs (LWA tag was missing but they came back to confirm it was them!)

right i think ive captured all of them (sods law if i haven't, tough shit territory really), and this will be updated as they come in providing that LWA continues to haunt me. feel free to like or ignore, ill be linking this in my main masterpost anyway!!!✨

a spicy one that made me pace my living room a good few times - but an important one in that it goes further again into actions and consequences. love it love it love it

just a little one about how crowley - for all our thoughts on how he's got a finger on the pulse of fashion - might not really know how to dress himself properly