I Know Someone Who Looks Like You.

I know someone who looks like you.

Good Omens Faces & Names, Labels & Identities

One theme that I see running fairly strongly through S2 is the idea of identity.

I'll start with Nina and Maggie precisely because they chose to use the actresses' real names as their characters' names. I'm sure the actresses are back because they are respected and liked, but it also works to serve a purpose. That of emphasizing identity. Who someone is beneath the outward appearance. And maybe to get us to slow down and question our assumptions about someone when we see their face.

It's Nina Sosanya, the actress. But also Nina, the coffee shop owner. And, Satanic Sister Mary Loquacious and Mary Hodges, Tadfield Manor owner.

It's Maggie Service, the actress. But also, Maggie, the record shop owner. And "Skinny Latte". And Satanic Sister Mary Garrulous.

Is it Madame Tracy or Shax? Is it Shakespeare or Furfur?

With Gabriel we have Jim, James, and of course "Supreme Archangel".

Aziraphale is "Angel", Mr Fell, Mr McFell, Mr Wherever-He-Is and your partner. Even "Hey you!" from Gabriel.

Crowley is Crawley, Anthony J Crowley, [Mr] Six Shots of Espresso, [Mr] Struck By Lightning, Mr Crowley. And, from the Metatron, Demon.

Did I miss any other nicknames for our characters? Let me know in the comments.

By comparison, we have Beezelbub, same name and same being inside, but with a different face. Interestingly, Crowley knew it was Beez and simply noticed the different outward appearance. But Gabriel did not immediately recognize the new face as being the someone he knew.

Some of this may seem a bit so what? It's a show, so of course the actors are not the same as the characters. But how many viewers, upon realizing that Nina and Maggie were also in S1, upon recognizing that Shax looked like Madame Tracy from S1, thought that maybe they were still the characters they were from S1, even if only for just a moment? Because they had the same face. Because they looked like someone we knew.

Returning to Gabriel. Or Jim. But he's actually both, at least in my opinion. I think Jim was always in there, but smothered by Gabriel The Supreme Archangel. And by setting aside the memories of how he behaved as the Supreme Archangel, we get to see the nice angel that he used to be, or could be.

I take all this as a warning to be careful with my assumptions about who's who based only on seeing their face.

Now this is the part where I veer off into my own theory-land with all of this. I currently still hold the shared-soul theory because I haven't seen anything to outright debunk it. The theory that a part of Crowley has gone up to heaven within Aziraphale. This is where I think the edges have been blurred and the face we see in the elevator, riding up to heaven with The Metatron, looks like Aziraphale, but there's more inside than just Aziraphale.

Connecting Two of Michael's E1 Scenes

A few days ago I noticed that Michael's position sitting at the desk when she's talking to Beelzebub is basically identical to when she's sitting at the desk when the alarm goes off.

I've put the two together, taking out everything in-between, into one clip.

The one scene follows surprisingly neatly into the other. Yet they are at opposite ends of the episode.

It could be a coincidence, a style choice, for these two scenes to be so similar to each other.

Or, these two scenes are actually one scene, in-universe, but we've been shown it split apart.

But if it is one scene, it raises questions.

Because in-between these "two" scenes we are shown the following happening, in the following order:

Gabriel getting named Jim, discovering cocoa, the Terrible Thing, and bringing in the box.

Muriel finding the matchbox in heaven.

Aziraphale and Crowley chatting in the coffee shop.

The fight in the back room and Crowley storming off.

Nina and Maggie getting locked in the coffee shop.

Muriel and Saraqael showing the matchbox to Michael and Uriel.

Beelzebub taking Crowley to hell to talk about the missing Gabriel.

Crowley returning to the book shop.

The I Was Wrong dance.

The hiding miracle.

If the full scene took place early in the episode, this might imply that the alarm went off before the hiding miracle happened. And if the full scene took place late in the episode, that implies that Beez talked to Crowley in hell before getting the call from Michael.

I would love to hear your thoughts on this. Do you agree that these scenes go together? Does it make you question any other sequences of events? Would it make you question what triggered the alarm?

My Musings

2 AziraCrow Theory - The theme of 2 and a possible interpretation of its prevalence.

Blurring the Edges - Blurring the edges of the end credits. What it might mean.

Michael's E1 Scenes - One scene shown split apart?

I know someone who looks like you - On names, labels, and identities.

Cranking up the stars and nebula - A few observations on Crowley's constellation schematic.

Job flashback and foreshadowing? - An obscure theory about the destruction of Job's property and the unused apocalyptic story concept art.

Thoughts on Pride & Prejudice - Jane Austen and the books

Arrivals - Compare and Contrast - Looking at Gabriel's arrival and Muriel's arrival to the bookshop.

Weird Coffee Shop Guy - There's something odd about this guy.

Unable to Reconcile - Confusion over cause and effect with the half-miracle vs blowing up the halo. Might not be anything.

Haven't seen you since - Unpopular opinion piece on why I don't think Azi and Crowley were seeing each other between the Garden Wall and Job.

Excellent!

The Price of a Life: Death and Dying in Good Omens

In this meta I want to take a closer look at one of the prominent themes I’ve spotted running through Season 2 of Good Omens. While S2 has been billed as the gentle and romantic bridge towards S3, in a few ways it actually had darker tones than S1. If that’s your cup of tea - read on!

What is the value of a human life? 

This is a question which has been pondered by philosophers far back into the reaches of history. More recently, economists have attempted to put a price on human life, which is then used when justifying the various societal costs associated with governing a population (i.e. healthcare, education). These two different schools of thought are sometimes at odds. Immanuel Kant proposed that humans have invaluable dignity, but not a price - being “not merely something to be used for the ends of others, or traded on the market”[1]. In opposition, value of life calculations, by definition, put a price on the value of an individual.

What side does Good Omens S1 take?

In Good Omens Season 1, one of the significant moral dilemmas, at least for Aziraphale and Crowley, was about whether or not to kill the antichrist.

I've never actually... killed anything. I don't think I could. Not even to save everything? One life... against the universe.

Following their failed attempts to influence Adam’s childhood development, once at the airfield, Aziraphale believes it to be a foregone conclusion that Adam should be killed - eliminate one to save the many. Of course, their attempts fail and Adam faces off against Death, the Four Horsepersons and Satan himself, eventually getting his own way. However, the moral question posed about killing Adam never reaches a definite conclusion.

With the flashback scenes that S1 added to the book, we are shown this same theme when Aziraphale and Crowley attend the crucifixion. The crucifixion is shown in agonising detail here, and gives us an empathetic look at the sacrifice of one life for, presumably, the overall good of humanity. (Although, what metaphysical impact Jesus’ death had in the Good Omens universe isn’t exactly clear). We see Aziraphale and Crowley stand idly by while the Great Plan is enacted.

Does S2 do things differently?

While Good Omens S1 dabbles lightly in the philosophical question about the value of life, Season 2 picks up this thread time and time again - sometimes attaching some numbers!

One of the key mysteries of present-day S2 is the mammoth miracle performed by Aziraphale and Crowley. Registering on the scales at 25 Lazari, this is 25 times the cost of human life in Heaven's accounting system. Presumably, one Lazari is the amount used when Jesus resurrected Lazarus of Bethany four days after his death. As we'll see, this attaching of numbers to human lives is then repeated throughout each of the minisodes.

Firstly we have the flashback sequence with Job and his children. Aziraphale makes the argument that just doubling the number of new children wouldn’t adequately compensate Job and Sitis for the loss of their existing children - since they “quite like the old ones”. The value of human life is not a simple accounting exercise and one life cannot be substituted for another, in the case of the people you love - they’re priceless.

We see this same idea demonstrated again throughout the Resurrectionist minisode. We first meet Elspeth MacKinnon when she is exhuming a body to sell, in order to buy her and her partner a slightly better life worth living. However, the surgeon Dalrymple is not above haggling over human remains. To him this is a business transaction, in which dead bodies are worth no more than five pounds a pop. To Dalrymple, the cost of saving future lives is that others should risk the grave gun gathering bodies which he may then dissect.

Aziraphale is first opposed to anyone being dug up, but then is won over by Dalrymple’s argument, at least until Wee Morag is killed and suddenly for sale. As Crowley says, echoing the Job minisode, “it’s a bit different when it’s someone you know”. In opposition to Dalrymple’s accounting exercises, and, indeed, the 90 guineas with which Aziraphale buys Elspeth's life, Crowley is offering an alternative view. A life is of higher value when it is someone we, personally, know and care for.

We also witness this theme during the 1941 flashback / Nazi-zombie minisode. The magic shop owner warns Aziraphale that he is about to take on a death-defying trick - one which people have died trying, no less! “Your life is worth a lot more than seven pounds five shillings,” argues the shopkeeper. Instead, it turns out that a customer’s life is worth about 27 pounds and five shillings, since he more than willingly accepts that offer - “on your head be it!”.

As human beings, the price we are willing to place on an individual life, how much we are willing to sacrifice for that person, is all dependent on how well we know them.

“He’s just an angel I know”

But it’s the knowing that makes all the difference.

“It’s a bit different when it’s someone you know”

So, for his life, what price are you willing to pay?

What if it was “one life... against the universe”?

Lastly, death is the price that all humans must pay, no matter what. As the Metatron asks at the end of S2 - “Does anyone ever ask for Death?”. But those are thoughts worthy of a future post.

Thank you to everyone at the @ineffable-detective-agency as always, but especially @lookingatacupoftea and @embracing-the-ineffable for their feedback on this post.

[1] Nussbaum, M., & Pellegrino, E. D. (2008). Human dignity and bioethics: essays commissioned by the President's Council on Bioethics. JAMA, 300, 2922.

This is a hilarious idea.

imagine if Season 2 has been a comedy of errors this whole time.

Michael and Uriel asking Azirapahle for help, but so did Gabriel on one of his trios to see Beelzebub.

And Saraqael has been helping them along for her own uses, but all of them to get to the same outcome.

and none of them know about the others

just... sneaky angels being idiots because they don't know how to trust one another

thanks to @dunkthebiscuit and @embracing-the-ineffable for this hilarious idea

LMAO.