Here’s a take that nobody asked for

This ain’t a take it’s just facts

this is erasure, Nanny Ashtoreth is clearly holding an umbrella

you know that post about doctor who that’s like “it’s actually very easy to understand doctor who canon. if i like it, it’s canon. if i don’t, it isn’t”

that’s me cherrypicking characterization choices from the show, the book, and the radio drama and discarding the rest. for example, you’re never gonna find anything on this blog that isn’t minorly annoyed to actively scornful of the scene in the show where Crowley’s looking at the astronomy book and pleading with god.

Because it’s stupid and antithetical to the way I see Crowley as a character.

Like. Part of me is like “hmm do I really want to post this Salt Take on the internet and have to discuss it with others” but I literally yelled about this so loud in a diner with my brother the other day that I can’t go back in there now because I’m embarrassed the staff will remember me going off the rails about God and forgiveness and a fictional demon. So.

Salt take incoming, I guess.

Crowley may not have meant to fall but I’ve always seen him as having some measure of pride in having done so nonetheless. He takes pride in his work, he takes pride in his theories about low-grade evil and spreading the work out so humans think it up themselves, he reminds himsef it isn’t all bad, being a demon. Crowley is proud to be a demon, too proud to want or need forgiveness and definitely too proud to ask for it.

And when I’ve voiced this in the past people have said “oh but he’s asking for forgiveness for humanity, not for himself” and like, cool. Still dumb and out-of-character. Crowley knows intimately and personally that God is not fair and God will not listen, “oh but that’s why it’s tragic, because he’s pleading to God even though he knows it won’t accomplish anything” nope, sorry, still dumb and out of character, Crowley disbelieves in God’s goodness and ability to be moved so much that he’s ready to singlehandedly try to stop the apocalypse, he goes to Aziraphale because they’re friends and he wants his help but when he thinks Aziraphale’s lost he gets on the m25 by himself and holds a flaming car together because he feels, deep down, that he’ll always come out on top, that the universe will take care of him, and I’ve always taken that line to mean Crowley does have an underlying Belief and it’s in himself. Crowley trusts himself, his own moral instinct, he knows he’s good even if he isn’t Good and I feel that him trying to talk to God in this way, pleading and bargaining, as if he doesn’t already know that the answer will be a resounding silence, betrays that.

But like, you know. If you liked this scene you’re valid, blah blah, we all have our own ways of interacting with the text, etc etc.

Also none of this is going to stop me from pointing excitedly at the Big Book Of Astronomy and going “Crowley’s a space nerd and I love him”. Cherrypicking!

The other side of this is that many Jewish fans have looked at this scene and gone “oh worm, Crowley’s one of us” and that is the ONLY context in which I have any appreciation for this. If you’re Jewish and Crowley arguing with God resonates that’s good and I love you and I’m happy for you.

it’s really interesting (read: endlessly irritating) to me that people seem to read this as a parental neglect parallel when the idea of religious and moral disallusionment is Right There. It’s literally baked into the text.

Crowley doesn’t need to worry about “not being good enough” because he’s learned that his ideas of good and God’s ideas of Good are two different frameworks. It doesn’t matter if God loves Crowley because the love of a being that doesn’t value the things you value is worthless.

Like do you worry about not being “good” under the model of good put forth by your grandparents’ homophobic church? Do you worry about being “good” under the moral system put forth by republicans? Of course not. Crowley’s fraught relationship with God doesn’t stem from personal issues, it’s political.

My friends have informed me that this last bit is nonsense and that some people do worry about being good under the moral frameworks imposed on them by other people and like. Hm. Interesting (genuinely this time) to know this is the sticking point on this. If you’ve got some Guilt you’re valid and I’m sorry for assuming my experiences with this are universal.

I keep opening up and then discarding replies to this, because I genuinely can’t think of a diplomatic way to say, “Congratulations on the most devoid-of-empathy take and subsequent backtrack I have seen on the internet today.”

the love of a being that doesn’t value the things you value is worthless 

jesus christ.

@tartan-thermos you could, y'know, just not say it and allow people to work through things on the internet on their own blog without outright attacking them for realizing their experiences aren't universal? Looks like you could learn the same lesson tbh

Before you go off on this, I advise you to read the other civil and well-thought-out responses which the OP chose to ignore in favour of posting this mealy-mouthed, condescending back-pedal.

I have! I've also talked to Mir a great deal and know where this is coming from! I'm sorry you read an acknowledgement of other people's takes as a backpedal, and I'm sorry you believe yourself entitled to their time and energy on this when you're a random stranger on the internet entering a conversation not meant for you a few months late.

Do I agree with Mir? Nope! But I understand that they haven't lived the same life I have and that a certain narrative is useful for them at the moment, just as a different one is useful for me, and yours is useful for you.

I can't blame Mir for responding to their friends and not someone they don't know who just dumped a load of words onto their post when they're a busy person with shit to do today.

I'm... I'm literally the person in the screencap? I commented conversationally on a recent post ON A FANDOM BLOG I FOLLOW to offer a brief explanation of why a scene *in the show version of the canon the blog is about* worked for me. Not even anticipating a reply! Certainly not a reply on the blog, rather than in the comments. OP chose to respond to me with the commentary they did. Please explain to me how any of that qualifies as 'entering into a conversation not meant for me a few months late'.

Apologies for the screencap; the app for this site is hellish.

1) They literally were already engaging in conversation about the scene and why it didn't work for them, in reply to a comment. Why on earth would I intuit from that that they had no desire to engage or discuss the scene?

2) When I leave a drive-by comment on something, I generally expect maybe another comment in reply, at most. OP instead chose to elevate the comment and response to a reblog. Okay!

3) Except they chose to respond with snark and condescension, and a fairly wild misrepresentation of the point I made. And then reblogged it AGAIN to respond further. Since OP elevated this to reblogs, I reblogged it myself to restate my point.

4) To be crystal clear, I am not 'throwing a fit' for want of attention. I am 'throwing a fit' for the frankly shocking callousness with which OP has dismissed, ignored, and patronised the experiences of people responding to her with lines like: 'the love of a being that doesn't value the things you value is worthless' ; 'Like do you worry about not being “good” under the model of good put forth by your grandparents’ homophobic church? Do you worry about being “good” under the moral system put forth by republicans? Of course not.' ; and of course the back-pedal, complete with dismissive, passive-aggressive Capitalization, 'you're valid', and the assertion that this is all just about *some* people just plain caring too much about externally-imposed values. You know, instead of acknowledging any of the replies explaining that the scene speaks to some people who still wrestle with the deep scars and complicated feelings that are the legacy of familial/religious/social abuse or rejection.

you know that post about doctor who that’s like “it’s actually very easy to understand doctor who canon. if i like it, it’s canon. if i don’t, it isn’t”

that’s me cherrypicking characterization choices from the show, the book, and the radio drama and discarding the rest. for example, you’re never gonna find anything on this blog that isn’t minorly annoyed to actively scornful of the scene in the show where Crowley’s looking at the astronomy book and pleading with god.

Because it’s stupid and antithetical to the way I see Crowley as a character.

Like. Part of me is like “hmm do I really want to post this Salt Take on the internet and have to discuss it with others” but I literally yelled about this so loud in a diner with my brother the other day that I can’t go back in there now because I’m embarrassed the staff will remember me going off the rails about God and forgiveness and a fictional demon. So.

Salt take incoming, I guess.

Crowley may not have meant to fall but I’ve always seen him as having some measure of pride in having done so nonetheless. He takes pride in his work, he takes pride in his theories about low-grade evil and spreading the work out so humans think it up themselves, he reminds himsef it isn’t all bad, being a demon. Crowley is proud to be a demon, too proud to want or need forgiveness and definitely too proud to ask for it.

And when I’ve voiced this in the past people have said “oh but he’s asking for forgiveness for humanity, not for himself” and like, cool. Still dumb and out-of-character. Crowley knows intimately and personally that God is not fair and God will not listen, “oh but that’s why it’s tragic, because he’s pleading to God even though he knows it won’t accomplish anything” nope, sorry, still dumb and out of character, Crowley disbelieves in God’s goodness and ability to be moved so much that he’s ready to singlehandedly try to stop the apocalypse, he goes to Aziraphale because they’re friends and he wants his help but when he thinks Aziraphale’s lost he gets on the m25 by himself and holds a flaming car together because he feels, deep down, that he’ll always come out on top, that the universe will take care of him, and I’ve always taken that line to mean Crowley does have an underlying Belief and it’s in himself. Crowley trusts himself, his own moral instinct, he knows he’s good even if he isn’t Good and I feel that him trying to talk to God in this way, pleading and bargaining, as if he doesn’t already know that the answer will be a resounding silence, betrays that.

But like, you know. If you liked this scene you’re valid, blah blah, we all have our own ways of interacting with the text, etc etc.

Also none of this is going to stop me from pointing excitedly at the Big Book Of Astronomy and going “Crowley’s a space nerd and I love him”. Cherrypicking!

The other side of this is that many Jewish fans have looked at this scene and gone “oh worm, Crowley’s one of us” and that is the ONLY context in which I have any appreciation for this. If you’re Jewish and Crowley arguing with God resonates that’s good and I love you and I’m happy for you.

it’s really interesting (read: endlessly irritating) to me that people seem to read this as a parental neglect parallel when the idea of religious and moral disallusionment is Right There. It’s literally baked into the text.

Crowley doesn’t need to worry about “not being good enough” because he’s learned that his ideas of good and God’s ideas of Good are two different frameworks. It doesn’t matter if God loves Crowley because the love of a being that doesn’t value the things you value is worthless.

Like do you worry about not being “good” under the model of good put forth by your grandparents’ homophobic church? Do you worry about being “good” under the moral system put forth by republicans? Of course not. Crowley’s fraught relationship with God doesn’t stem from personal issues, it’s political.

My friends have informed me that this last bit is nonsense and that some people do worry about being good under the moral frameworks imposed on them by other people and like. Hm. Interesting (genuinely this time) to know this is the sticking point on this. If you’ve got some Guilt you’re valid and I’m sorry for assuming my experiences with this are universal.

I keep opening up and then discarding replies to this, because I genuinely can’t think of a diplomatic way to say, “Congratulations on the most devoid-of-empathy take and subsequent backtrack I have seen on the internet today.”

the love of a being that doesn’t value the things you value is worthless 

jesus christ.

@tartan-thermos you could, y'know, just not say it and allow people to work through things on the internet on their own blog without outright attacking them for realizing their experiences aren't universal? Looks like you could learn the same lesson tbh

Before you go off on this, I advise you to read the other civil and well-thought-out responses which the OP chose to ignore in favour of posting this mealy-mouthed, condescending back-pedal.

I have! I've also talked to Mir a great deal and know where this is coming from! I'm sorry you read an acknowledgement of other people's takes as a backpedal, and I'm sorry you believe yourself entitled to their time and energy on this when you're a random stranger on the internet entering a conversation not meant for you a few months late.

Do I agree with Mir? Nope! But I understand that they haven't lived the same life I have and that a certain narrative is useful for them at the moment, just as a different one is useful for me, and yours is useful for you.

I can't blame Mir for responding to their friends and not someone they don't know who just dumped a load of words onto their post when they're a busy person with shit to do today.

I'm... I'm literally the person in the screencap? I commented conversationally on a recent post ON A FANDOM BLOG I FOLLOW to offer a brief explanation of why a scene *in the show version of the canon the blog is about* worked for me. Not even anticipating a reply! Certainly not a reply on the blog, rather than in the comments. OP chose to respond to me with the commentary they did. Please explain to me how any of that qualifies as 'entering into a conversation not meant for me a few months late'.

you know that post about doctor who that’s like “it’s actually very easy to understand doctor who canon. if i like it, it’s canon. if i don’t, it isn’t”

that’s me cherrypicking characterization choices from the show, the book, and the radio drama and discarding the rest. for example, you’re never gonna find anything on this blog that isn’t minorly annoyed to actively scornful of the scene in the show where Crowley’s looking at the astronomy book and pleading with god.

Because it’s stupid and antithetical to the way I see Crowley as a character.

Like. Part of me is like “hmm do I really want to post this Salt Take on the internet and have to discuss it with others” but I literally yelled about this so loud in a diner with my brother the other day that I can’t go back in there now because I’m embarrassed the staff will remember me going off the rails about God and forgiveness and a fictional demon. So.

Salt take incoming, I guess.

Crowley may not have meant to fall but I’ve always seen him as having some measure of pride in having done so nonetheless. He takes pride in his work, he takes pride in his theories about low-grade evil and spreading the work out so humans think it up themselves, he reminds himsef it isn’t all bad, being a demon. Crowley is proud to be a demon, too proud to want or need forgiveness and definitely too proud to ask for it.

And when I’ve voiced this in the past people have said “oh but he’s asking for forgiveness for humanity, not for himself” and like, cool. Still dumb and out-of-character. Crowley knows intimately and personally that God is not fair and God will not listen, “oh but that’s why it’s tragic, because he’s pleading to God even though he knows it won’t accomplish anything” nope, sorry, still dumb and out of character, Crowley disbelieves in God’s goodness and ability to be moved so much that he’s ready to singlehandedly try to stop the apocalypse, he goes to Aziraphale because they’re friends and he wants his help but when he thinks Aziraphale’s lost he gets on the m25 by himself and holds a flaming car together because he feels, deep down, that he’ll always come out on top, that the universe will take care of him, and I’ve always taken that line to mean Crowley does have an underlying Belief and it’s in himself. Crowley trusts himself, his own moral instinct, he knows he’s good even if he isn’t Good and I feel that him trying to talk to God in this way, pleading and bargaining, as if he doesn’t already know that the answer will be a resounding silence, betrays that.

But like, you know. If you liked this scene you’re valid, blah blah, we all have our own ways of interacting with the text, etc etc.

Also none of this is going to stop me from pointing excitedly at the Big Book Of Astronomy and going “Crowley’s a space nerd and I love him”. Cherrypicking!

The other side of this is that many Jewish fans have looked at this scene and gone “oh worm, Crowley’s one of us” and that is the ONLY context in which I have any appreciation for this. If you’re Jewish and Crowley arguing with God resonates that’s good and I love you and I’m happy for you.

it’s really interesting (read: endlessly irritating) to me that people seem to read this as a parental neglect parallel when the idea of religious and moral disallusionment is Right There. It’s literally baked into the text.

Crowley doesn’t need to worry about “not being good enough” because he’s learned that his ideas of good and God’s ideas of Good are two different frameworks. It doesn’t matter if God loves Crowley because the love of a being that doesn’t value the things you value is worthless.

Like do you worry about not being “good” under the model of good put forth by your grandparents’ homophobic church? Do you worry about being “good” under the moral system put forth by republicans? Of course not. Crowley’s fraught relationship with God doesn’t stem from personal issues, it’s political.

My friends have informed me that this last bit is nonsense and that some people do worry about being good under the moral frameworks imposed on them by other people and like. Hm. Interesting (genuinely this time) to know this is the sticking point on this. If you’ve got some Guilt you’re valid and I’m sorry for assuming my experiences with this are universal.

I keep opening up and then discarding replies to this, because I genuinely can’t think of a diplomatic way to say, “Congratulations on the most devoid-of-empathy take and subsequent backtrack I have seen on the internet today.”

the love of a being that doesn’t value the things you value is worthless 

jesus christ.

@tartan-thermos you could, y'know, just not say it and allow people to work through things on the internet on their own blog without outright attacking them for realizing their experiences aren't universal? Looks like you could learn the same lesson tbh

Before you go off on this, I advise you to read the other civil and well-thought-out responses which the OP chose to ignore in favour of posting this mealy-mouthed, condescending back-pedal.

you know that post about doctor who that’s like “it’s actually very easy to understand doctor who canon. if i like it, it’s canon. if i don’t, it isn’t”

that’s me cherrypicking characterization choices from the show, the book, and the radio drama and discarding the rest. for example, you’re never gonna find anything on this blog that isn’t minorly annoyed to actively scornful of the scene in the show where Crowley’s looking at the astronomy book and pleading with god.

Because it’s stupid and antithetical to the way I see Crowley as a character.

Like. Part of me is like “hmm do I really want to post this Salt Take on the internet and have to discuss it with others” but I literally yelled about this so loud in a diner with my brother the other day that I can’t go back in there now because I’m embarrassed the staff will remember me going off the rails about God and forgiveness and a fictional demon. So.

Salt take incoming, I guess.

Crowley may not have meant to fall but I’ve always seen him as having some measure of pride in having done so nonetheless. He takes pride in his work, he takes pride in his theories about low-grade evil and spreading the work out so humans think it up themselves, he reminds himsef it isn’t all bad, being a demon. Crowley is proud to be a demon, too proud to want or need forgiveness and definitely too proud to ask for it.

And when I’ve voiced this in the past people have said “oh but he’s asking for forgiveness for humanity, not for himself” and like, cool. Still dumb and out-of-character. Crowley knows intimately and personally that God is not fair and God will not listen, “oh but that’s why it’s tragic, because he’s pleading to God even though he knows it won’t accomplish anything” nope, sorry, still dumb and out of character, Crowley disbelieves in God’s goodness and ability to be moved so much that he’s ready to singlehandedly try to stop the apocalypse, he goes to Aziraphale because they’re friends and he wants his help but when he thinks Aziraphale’s lost he gets on the m25 by himself and holds a flaming car together because he feels, deep down, that he’ll always come out on top, that the universe will take care of him, and I’ve always taken that line to mean Crowley does have an underlying Belief and it’s in himself. Crowley trusts himself, his own moral instinct, he knows he’s good even if he isn’t Good and I feel that him trying to talk to God in this way, pleading and bargaining, as if he doesn’t already know that the answer will be a resounding silence, betrays that.

But like, you know. If you liked this scene you’re valid, blah blah, we all have our own ways of interacting with the text, etc etc.

Also none of this is going to stop me from pointing excitedly at the Big Book Of Astronomy and going “Crowley’s a space nerd and I love him”. Cherrypicking!

The other side of this is that many Jewish fans have looked at this scene and gone “oh worm, Crowley’s one of us” and that is the ONLY context in which I have any appreciation for this. If you’re Jewish and Crowley arguing with God resonates that’s good and I love you and I’m happy for you.

it’s really interesting (read: endlessly irritating) to me that people seem to read this as a parental neglect parallel when the idea of religious and moral disallusionment is Right There. It’s literally baked into the text.

Crowley doesn’t need to worry about “not being good enough” because he’s learned that his ideas of good and God’s ideas of Good are two different frameworks. It doesn’t matter if God loves Crowley because the love of a being that doesn’t value the things you value is worthless.

Like do you worry about not being “good” under the model of good put forth by your grandparents’ homophobic church? Do you worry about being “good” under the moral system put forth by republicans? Of course not. Crowley’s fraught relationship with God doesn’t stem from personal issues, it’s political.

My friends have informed me that this last bit is nonsense and that some people do worry about being good under the moral frameworks imposed on them by other people and like. Hm. Interesting (genuinely this time) to know this is the sticking point on this. If you’ve got some Guilt you’re valid and I’m sorry for assuming my experiences with this are universal.

I keep opening up and then discarding replies to this, because I genuinely can’t think of a diplomatic way to say, “Congratulations on the most devoid-of-empathy take and subsequent backtrack I have seen on the internet today.”

the love of a being that doesn’t value the things you value is worthless 

jesus christ.

you know that post about doctor who that’s like “it’s actually very easy to understand doctor who canon. if i like it, it’s canon. if i don’t, it isn’t”

that’s me cherrypicking characterization choices from the show, the book, and the radio drama and discarding the rest. for example, you’re never gonna find anything on this blog that isn’t minorly annoyed to actively scornful of the scene in the show where Crowley’s looking at the astronomy book and pleading with god.

Because it’s stupid and antithetical to the way I see Crowley as a character.

Like. Part of me is like “hmm do I really want to post this Salt Take on the internet and have to discuss it with others” but I literally yelled about this so loud in a diner with my brother the other day that I can’t go back in there now because I’m embarrassed the staff will remember me going off the rails about God and forgiveness and a fictional demon. So.

Salt take incoming, I guess.

Crowley may not have meant to fall but I’ve always seen him as having some measure of pride in having done so nonetheless. He takes pride in his work, he takes pride in his theories about low-grade evil and spreading the work out so humans think it up themselves, he reminds himsef it isn’t all bad, being a demon. Crowley is proud to be a demon, too proud to want or need forgiveness and definitely too proud to ask for it.

And when I’ve voiced this in the past people have said “oh but he’s asking for forgiveness for humanity, not for himself” and like, cool. Still dumb and out-of-character. Crowley knows intimately and personally that God is not fair and God will not listen, “oh but that’s why it’s tragic, because he’s pleading to God even though he knows it won’t accomplish anything” nope, sorry, still dumb and out of character, Crowley disbelieves in God’s goodness and ability to be moved so much that he’s ready to singlehandedly try to stop the apocalypse, he goes to Aziraphale because they’re friends and he wants his help but when he thinks Aziraphale’s lost he gets on the m25 by himself and holds a flaming car together because he feels, deep down, that he’ll always come out on top, that the universe will take care of him, and I’ve always taken that line to mean Crowley does have an underlying Belief and it’s in himself. Crowley trusts himself, his own moral instinct, he knows he’s good even if he isn’t Good and I feel that him trying to talk to God in this way, pleading and bargaining, as if he doesn’t already know that the answer will be a resounding silence, betrays that.

But like, you know. If you liked this scene you’re valid, blah blah, we all have our own ways of interacting with the text, etc etc.

Also none of this is going to stop me from pointing excitedly at the Big Book Of Astronomy and going “Crowley’s a space nerd and I love him”. Cherrypicking!

The other side of this is that many Jewish fans have looked at this scene and gone “oh worm, Crowley’s one of us” and that is the ONLY context in which I have any appreciation for this. If you’re Jewish and Crowley arguing with God resonates that’s good and I love you and I’m happy for you.

it’s really interesting (read: endlessly irritating) to me that people seem to read this as a parental neglect parallel when the idea of religious and moral disallusionment is Right There. It’s literally baked into the text.

Crowley doesn’t need to worry about “not being good enough” because he’s learned that his ideas of good and God’s ideas of Good are two different frameworks. It doesn’t matter if God loves Crowley because the love of a being that doesn’t value the things you value is worthless.

Like do you worry about not being “good” under the model of good put forth by your grandparents’ homophobic church? Do you worry about being “good” under the moral system put forth by republicans? Of course not. Crowley’s fraught relationship with God doesn’t stem from personal issues, it’s political.

This is a pretty disingenuous way to frame it when that isn’t even close to the argument I’m making. The point I’m making is that you can be completely disillusioned about the moral/religious/social paradigm in which you were raised, have broken free of it and have a completely clear-eyed view of what a totally warped set of circumstances it was... and it still doesn’t preclude you from sometimes - late at night, when you are in a dark place - falling victim to that niggling little voice of personal hurt inside you. Even when you know it’s bullshit.

Understanding that the person and/or system that rejected you is garbage, and that their standards are garbage, doesn’t magically undo the hurt you experienced when you were rejected, or keep you from wishing that it somehow could have been different. You’re not wishing that you could have just been ‘good’ under the model of your grandparents’ homophobic church. You’re wishing that your grandparents would have loved and accepted you anyway, even though you know damn well that realistically, they never would have.

That’s the point I’m making. Because that, in my experience, is what that kind of thing does to you. Which is why that scene still kind of works for me, even if it’s turned up to 11 in a way I don’t associate with book Crowley.

Like do you worry about not being “good” under the model of good out  forth by your grandparents’ homophobic church? 

In fact, a briefer summary: some of us don’t worry about being ‘good’ under the model of good put forth by our grandparents’ homophobic church, and recognize that our grandparents’ beliefs are shitty and morally bankrupt, but are still sometimes angry and upset and bitter because we miss our grandparents anyway.

you know that post about doctor who that’s like “it’s actually very easy to understand doctor who canon. if i like it, it’s canon. if i don’t, it isn’t”

that’s me cherrypicking characterization choices from the show, the book, and the radio drama and discarding the rest. for example, you’re never gonna find anything on this blog that isn’t minorly annoyed to actively scornful of the scene in the show where Crowley’s looking at the astronomy book and pleading with god.

Because it’s stupid and antithetical to the way I see Crowley as a character.

Like. Part of me is like “hmm do I really want to post this Salt Take on the internet and have to discuss it with others” but I literally yelled about this so loud in a diner with my brother the other day that I can’t go back in there now because I’m embarrassed the staff will remember me going off the rails about God and forgiveness and a fictional demon. So.

Salt take incoming, I guess.

Crowley may not have meant to fall but I’ve always seen him as having some measure of pride in having done so nonetheless. He takes pride in his work, he takes pride in his theories about low-grade evil and spreading the work out so humans think it up themselves, he reminds himsef it isn’t all bad, being a demon. Crowley is proud to be a demon, too proud to want or need forgiveness and definitely too proud to ask for it.

And when I’ve voiced this in the past people have said “oh but he’s asking for forgiveness for humanity, not for himself” and like, cool. Still dumb and out-of-character. Crowley knows intimately and personally that God is not fair and God will not listen, “oh but that’s why it’s tragic, because he’s pleading to God even though he knows it won’t accomplish anything” nope, sorry, still dumb and out of character, Crowley disbelieves in God’s goodness and ability to be moved so much that he’s ready to singlehandedly try to stop the apocalypse, he goes to Aziraphale because they’re friends and he wants his help but when he thinks Aziraphale’s lost he gets on the m25 by himself and holds a flaming car together because he feels, deep down, that he’ll always come out on top, that the universe will take care of him, and I’ve always taken that line to mean Crowley does have an underlying Belief and it’s in himself. Crowley trusts himself, his own moral instinct, he knows he’s good even if he isn’t Good and I feel that him trying to talk to God in this way, pleading and bargaining, as if he doesn’t already know that the answer will be a resounding silence, betrays that.

But like, you know. If you liked this scene you’re valid, blah blah, we all have our own ways of interacting with the text, etc etc.

Also none of this is going to stop me from pointing excitedly at the Big Book Of Astronomy and going “Crowley’s a space nerd and I love him”. Cherrypicking!

The other side of this is that many Jewish fans have looked at this scene and gone “oh worm, Crowley’s one of us” and that is the ONLY context in which I have any appreciation for this. If you’re Jewish and Crowley arguing with God resonates that’s good and I love you and I’m happy for you.

it’s really interesting (read: endlessly irritating) to me that people seem to read this as a parental neglect parallel when the idea of religious and moral disallusionment is Right There. It’s literally baked into the text.

Crowley doesn’t need to worry about “not being good enough” because he’s learned that his ideas of good and God’s ideas of Good are two different frameworks. It doesn’t matter if God loves Crowley because the love of a being that doesn’t value the things you value is worthless.

Like do you worry about not being “good” under the model of good put forth by your grandparents’ homophobic church? Do you worry about being “good” under the moral system put forth by republicans? Of course not. Crowley’s fraught relationship with God doesn’t stem from personal issues, it’s political.

This is a pretty disingenuous way to frame it when that isn’t even close to the argument I’m making. The point I’m making is that you can be completely disillusioned about the moral/religious/social paradigm in which you were raised, have broken free of it and have a completely clear-eyed view of what a totally warped set of circumstances it was... and it still doesn’t preclude you from sometimes - late at night, when you are in a dark place - falling victim to that niggling little voice of personal hurt inside you. Even when you know it’s bullshit.

Understanding that the person and/or system that rejected you is garbage, and that their standards are garbage, doesn’t magically undo the hurt you experienced when you were rejected, or keep you from wishing that it somehow could have been different. You’re not wishing that you could have just been ‘good’ under the model of your grandparents’ homophobic church. You’re wishing that your grandparents would have loved and accepted you anyway, even though you know damn well that realistically, they never would have.

That’s the point I’m making. Because that, in my experience, is what that kind of thing does to you. Which is why that scene still kind of works for me, even if it’s turned up to 11 in a way I don’t associate with book Crowley.

Guys, I think I’ve got Crowley’s angelic name

Currently writing about the Hebrew Bible, so while I had the old concordance out I thought I’d have a look for words that could form Crowley’s angelic name. I had lots of options - I was thinking of something with a kaf/qof, then resh, then it could be alpha, ayin, he, lamed, etc. Then Karahiel (Banquet of God) etc. could become Crawly, and hence Crowley. It’s difficult because it implies that the name Crawly is in English, but eh, it’s a comedy book. BUT THEN I found the root כרע - to bow, to kneel, to be brought low, to crouch, to be subdued.  So we can then make a theophoric name (as most of the angels’ are) using the imperative כְּרַע (single - kra!) or  כִּרְעוּ (plural - kir'u!) and the suffix -el, and there we have it! Krael or Kiruel, meaning Kneel or Bow down before God. So as well as plausibly being twisted to become the English Crawly, a demonic twisting of the name would be about kneeling and submission as well.

I think that you can get around the implication that ‘Crawly’ is in English if you are willing, as I am, to be a bit cute about it.

So, per Neil Gaiman, you can choose to interpret the original conversation on the Wall as taking place in Enochian (or whatever other language angels might speak), and that words and idioms like ‘Crawly’ and ‘went down like a lead balloon’ are simply the nearest approximations that our puny, modern human brains are capable of understanding.

“But!” you say. “If his name isn’t really ‘Crawly’, but in fact some sort of demonic uttering of which we mortals wot not, then the evolution to ‘Crowley’ doesn’t make much sense!”

Ohohoho, say I.

Kiruel means ‘Kneel or Bow down before God’.

A hypothetical demonic twist on ‘Kiruel’ also refers to kneeling, submission, and/or crawling (approximated by the English-speaking authors for our mortal benefit as ‘Crawly’).

But our demon does not like this name for himself. Bit too squirming-at-your-feet-ish. So, he tells Aziraphale, he’s changed it. Changed the meaning. Something a bit more... upright. A bit more challenging; a bit more in defiance of the name he was given. Of course, we don’t actually hear the name he gives Aziraphale. They’re not speaking English at Golgotha, after all; most likely, they’re speaking Aramaic. We simply hear the closest approximation we can understand. The name he gives Aziraphale at Golgotha isn’t ‘Crowley’ - but it’s close enough in meaning to ‘Crowley’ that that’s what we hear, as ‘Crawly’ is close in meaning to ‘Kiruel’ and its demonic perversion. Close enough, in fact, that further down the line, his name becomes Crowley.

So what does ‘Crowley’ mean? It’s Irish, from ‘Cruadhlaoich‘ - meaning ‘[firm/tough/hardy] [hero/fighter/warrior]’. It’s defiant. It’s a middle finger in the face of his original names, the ones centered on kneeling and submission and obeisance.

So what, then, was the name given to Aziraphale at Golgotha? The one that means the opposite of submission, the opposite of kneeling, the opposite of crawling?

Well, I don’t know shit about Biblical linguistics, but I do know that a dictionary of Aramaic offers me just a few of the following nuggets:

qˀym  (qaˀˀīm)  adj. standing one  Syr. also ܩܝܝܡ ‏ 1. standing one, firmly positioned

qwmmw, qwmmwtˀ  v.n.L standing 1. standing, permanence

qywm, qywmˀ  (qāyōm, qāyōmā)  nom.ag. standing one; overseer  Nestorian voc.: qayyōmā; Sam.:קעום  ‏. 1. standing one 2. protector, patron

qymtny  (qyāmtānāy)  adj. of resurrection 1. of resurrection

Basically what I’m saying is: someone with even a modicum of familiarity with Aramaic ( @aziraphalelookedwretched !!!), please take this ball from me and run with it. Because I am newly ready to die on this hill of Crowley discarding the names that signify submission and obeisance, and of his chosen names simply being variations on the theme of indomitability. Defiance.

things show only fans might not know and that upsets me

crowley:

aziraphale:

miscellany:

i love them so much. im begging you please read the book it’s so good

The reason that alphabetising his music collection didn’t work to come him down, is the fact that Crowley ALREADY alphabetises his music.

Dancing demons are described as ‘moving like a white band on Soul Train.’

Both Aziraphale and Crowley are absolutely fleeced by Shadwell because they couldn’t be bothered to actually look at the names of the ‘soldiers’ that worked (or didn’t) under Shadwell. This results in Crowley having to listen to Madame Tracey babble about her day.

Because he uses the original WFA pay scale, this fleecing actually only amounts to about sixty pounds a year.

Crowley has to have two phone lines, because one of them is forever being called by telemarketers.

Even though he probably has no idea how to use it, Crowley updates his incredibly stupid computer every few months, because that’s what Cool Guys do, and Crowley really wants to look Cool.

Aziraphale blows up a traffic warden’s ticket book, and it amazes Crowley so much it makes the angel blush.

Aziraphale does NOT like being cold.

The Bentley is entirely capable of driving itself.

Crowley has only ever filled the tank up once, and that was because he’s such a GIANT FUCKING DORK that he wanted to get the James Bond bullet decal stickers to put in the back window. 

Aziraphale created Shropshire.

Aziraphale isn’t a technophobe, or living 150 years in the past. One of the ways Crowley woos him into his plan is by pointing out that Heaven doesn’t have CDs or daily crosswords, or movie theaters.

Crowley evidently plays arcade games.

Az has actually been running his bookshop since at least the 1650s.

He seems to conveniently forget that he swears while drinking. He refers to the Kraken as a Great Big Bugger. He loses all of his posh primness when drunk, and becomes an argumentative little shit.

The entire bit with the little bird and the end of the universe. That scene is gold.

“Potentially evil. Potentially good, too, I suppose. Just this huge powerful potentiality, waiting to be shaped,” said Crowley. He shrugged. “Anyway, why’re we talking about this good and evil? They’re just names for sides. We know that.” I love this line so much.

Aziraphale’s idea of banishing demons is to just strongly hint that he has work to do and that it had gotten late. Crowley always got the hint.

After the world doesn’t end, Crowley and Aziraphale just sit their asses down on the air field tarmac and share a bottle of wine.