Fans of Good Omens have been shipping Aziraphale and Crowley as a gay couple for years, but author and showrunner Neil Gaiman refuses to label them in this way. The show is not queer-coded. It's explicitly queer. The book does not portray an overtly gay relationship, although the book says explicitly that people perceive Aziraphale as gay, and that "angels are sexless" (some people interpret this as meaning asexual; I interpreted it as simply meaning that they lack reproductive organs).
It stands apart from past shows that have queerbaited us, like Supernatural, which teased its gay subtext for 15 seasons, then ended with a baseless love confession from Castiel to Dean.
Good Omens was released on Amazon (not Netflix) at the end of May and was almost immediately pronounced to be an incredible success, much to the delight of fans and critics. The actors, fun production, impeccably rendered dialogue, and generally tongue-in-cheek undercover satire that Neil Gaiman has made into a personal brand during these adaptations, all came through.
The novel was faithfully. [14] And this, if anything, is worthy of criticising and discussing. Is labelling characters ‘queer’ still queerbaiting because it is not specific enough for some or is this ‘good enough’? [15] In The Nice and Accurate Good Omens TV Companion, Gaiman explains that he needed something for Aziraphale and Crowley to do in this episode.
I kept having that first feeling, vaguely waiting for the second part, but it never came. While it becomes clear at the end of the episode that this was just an act Moriarty was putting on to fool Sherlock, he never really loses the metrosexual image. But he was intelligent. Gaiman appears to be a firm believer in this philosophy.
This is used often as a way of getting queer relationships past the censor. Actions speak louder than words after all. Posted June 6, Aziraphale and Crowley may be genderless, but they look like men and use male pronouns. I would also caution you against using sandman as a paragon of trans representation, as there are a number of issues with how it portrays trans women in particular which you can find discussion of elsewhere on the internet.
What makes Deadpool a positive example of queercoding is how we view the character. Their joint storyline again, joint , because they never really do anything without each other is barely a third of the book, and only 60 of those pages have both. The world has changed, and Good Omens has been willing to change with it, so again, I just have to ask: if not for gay reasons, then why?
BeADreamer Posted June 6, And so it was in fanfiction that I found the book I actually wanted to read, stories with Crowley and Aziraphale's relationship as the focus and not just a subplot of a larger ensemble.
Sure, it's on record in multiple places that Sheen and Tennant played the characters as being in love — in one interview , Sheen told Tennant, "Aziraphale just loves Crowley… My objective in this scene is to not show you how much I love you and just gaze longingly at you the whole time," and Tennant, laughing, answered, "Crowley absolutely loves Aziraphale; he hates that he loves him; it's really annoying for him" — but even then, where did they get an idea like that?
What does make Good Omens unique is that this fan-created queer love story — a fairy tale for the end of the world — pretty much came true when the story was adapted from the page to the screen. I've dubbed this the Jack Sparrow phenomenon. No need to define it in the human, mortal sense. If the intention is to depict Aziraphale and Crowley as being lovers, then I think they could have done a bit more. Well… maybe. Did Neil and Sir Terry, circa , really mean to write two agender characters?
These men-shaped creatures are in love, people. You might be wondering where I stand on this whole issue. Posted June 8, You can just say it. This then led to a backlash to the backlash, sparking a whole debate as to what constitutes good LGBT representation. The photos on IMDb?
Copyright ©rumhire.pages.dev 2025