Ah ben tout à coup tout le monde veut débattre avec Mélenchon... Honnêtement j'ai un peu de mal à comprendre la logique, parce que j'ai pas l'impression qu'Attal ou Bardella soient de meilleurs orateurs. Est-ce que c'est pour sortir l'épouvantail Mélenchon (qui a, globalement, réussi à fermer sa gueule, ce que je peux pas dire de tout le monde, en particulier au PS) et faire peur à ceux qui votent PS mais trouvent que quand même, LFI va trop loin, c'est les extrêmes, toussa toussa ? Est-ce qu'ils espèrent pouvoir profiter de l'hostilité marquée des journalistes envers Mélenchon (qui, pour être honnête, le leur rend bien) ?
Bon perso je vais pas regarder de débats parce que ça m'insupporte et je vais voter Front Populaire de toute façon, mais je m'interroge.
Regarding the minisodes, I don't think the point was to show us that they trust each other implicitly. It's something I've been thinking about, so excuse the long reply.
The flashbacks in season 1, IMO, had 2 purposes:
Showing us how their relationship came to be as it is in present day. How they met, how they started getting along, how the Agreement came to be, fall out and reconciliation that they had over the centuries, etc.
Setting up the Holy Water ( if I remember the book correctly, it only shows up for the scene in Crowley's apartment, he didn't get it from Aziraphale and since the body swap is TV only, it never comes up again)
Your mileage may vary, but I think that this season's minisodes were only partially about their relationship (because everything is at least a bit about their relationship), they were more about Aziraphale. Specifically, Aziraphale's moral struggles.
A companion to Owls (the Job Minisode) shows us Aziraphale lying to the Heavenly Host to protect humans, and being very miserable about it (as a side note, I was screaming "Dude, you lied to GOD in the garden of Eden" during my first viewing, but on careful re-watch, his "I must have put the sword down somewhere" can still fall under the "technically true if extremely misleading" category, which apparently doesn't count for him).
In the Resurrectionists, Aziraphale spents most of his time encountering consequentialism for the first time, and trying to reconcile it with a deontological philosophy. Is defiling tombs a Wrong thing to do, if it leads to Good? I might be thinking to much about it, but it's interesting to see that after some reluctance, Aziraphale has a pretty standard reaction to encountering Consequentialism : it's great! It solves so many problems! And then runs smack down into 2 classic counter-arguments to Consequentialism: 1. you cannot actually know what the consequences to your actions are going to be (i.e., Wee Morag dying). 2. Consequentialism implies that the subject should be impartial as to who benefits and who suffers, as long as the overall Good outweighs the bad. But as Crowley points out, "It's different when you know them, isn't it?"
The moral argument in Nazi Zombie Flesheaters is at the very end. Aziraphale says that Crowley helping him means that he's not as bad as he says. Crowley replies that Heaven sees thing in black and white and sometimes, you have to blur the edges. They toast to shades of grey. Very very light/dark grey. And that's basically the moral position of Aziraphale as we know him in the present day: willing to make some concessions. But it's a compromise, and it's more about Crowley being good than, for instance, Heaven being bad.
The minisodes do other things, of course. A Companion to Owls reminds us of how awful Gabriel was, the Resurrectionists makes a link to the pub and explains why Crowley asks for the Holey Water, the Nazi Zombie Flesheaters shows us the trust (and I'll bet money that we haven't seen the last of these zombies). But I think they do work as foreshadowing for Aziraphale being overjoyed at the idea of being friend with Crowley without the moral complications.
(The discussion in the other reblogs was great, but I wanted to answer some points in this post specifically)
Can someone who actually liked the ending of s2 please explain to me why?
Translated: "According to initial estimates, the left comes first in the second round of the legislative elections, slightly ahead of the presidential camp.
At 8 p.m., according to the first estimates from the Ipsos institute with the Talan group for France Télévisions, Radio France, France24/RFI and LCP-National Assembly, the left-wing coalition Nouveau Front populaire comes out on top in the second round of elections legislative elections, with between 172 and 192 seats.
The presidential camp gathered under the Ensemble banner would win between 150 and 170 seats.
The National Rally and its allies (the fraction of the Les Républicains party which followed the contested president of the party, Eric Ciotti, in his alliance with the RN) would obtain from 132 to 152 seats.
The Les Républicains party, for its part, would win between 57 and 67 seats."
Let's see how it goes.
We'll have the first results of the French legislative election in 5 hours. On the off chance that someone who reads this is still on the fence, go vote for whichever candidate isn't RN.
p1 p2 p3 p4 p5 p6 p7
MASTER POST
Check his pulse.
Worked my way through the whole backlog of the critshow. Now the big question: should I make a Patreon account and go through Perilous Tides and Hero Salad?
They're right, you know. There is more. FAR more ...
But for now, here ya go. Welcome back. 😈
I swear I saw this after posting
I have tried not to get obsessive with this election, so I may have missed it, but I got the impression that Mélenchon did his level best to keep his mouth shut during the campaign. I expect this time is now over.
we need more pathetic female characters written by authors who don't hate women
Jean-Marie Le Pen est mort 💖