Literature A nice take on common tropes.
I really loved this book. There was so much about it that was not only funny, but filled with good storytelling. The tropes that I recognized in it were used quite well. Good Omens is a true page-turner that's full of fantastic twists and turns in the plot. It's no wonder Pratchett and Gaiman tell us readers that this is "the most repaired book" they have ever signed. I can see why someone wouldn't want to give up their paperback or their hard covers so easily.
While Good Omens tells a relatively simple story, it's the character interactions and relationships that make it a truly memorable book. It also has several messages within the text that aren't overly Anvilicious. What I really like is the interpretation of the conflict of demons vs. angels - and how there can be good and bad on either side.
What's really special about Good Omens is its ending. I'm not going to leave any spoilers - you'll just have to read for yourself!
I'm sure it's all part of the ineffable plan.
Literature A Piece of History
The big thing about Good Omens was that it was co-written by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman, probably the two writers of a certain type of fantasy and phenomenally good at what they do. I mean Terry Pratchett is the best-selling British author of the whole 1990's. The book was written in 1990 and was the Neil Gaiman's first novel.
As a book, it's pretty good. The styles work well with each other, it means there isn't so much Neil Gaiman Symbolism! and his One True Plot* is consigned to a substory. Equally it tempers early Pratchett unfocus and makes it work in a modern day setting which Pterry has never quite managed. It's not the best of either but it's genuinely funny and probably one of the most witty of all their books, if the humour is grounded a bit in 1980's which dates it. People use cassette players and in-car phones. The past truly is another world. All the same it lacks a strength of theme and drive. It's good but not completely outstanding.
The main theme is humanism but there is nothing particularly challenging. If you've got faith it's not going to shake it, on the other hand if you're looking for a very detailed exploration of humanism, this isn't Dogma. In the end it comes off as even a little self-defeating. The central idea is that if it's wrong to do wrong, why does God let us do it? It's a good question and Pterry fans will recognise it (if God puts bricks under hats etc), some philosophers have called it the greatest challenge on faith, but this book doesn't commit. In one place in particular, someone asks this and yet two paragraphs later the same person is asked if he should make people good and replies it wouldn't be right. Heck the protagonist is a bit of a Jesus analogue and one point Death says 'You can't kill me' and he replies ' I don't know about that' or similar. I'd put it down to co-incidence, but this is Neil Gaiman and you know, Symbolism!
But the historical importance alone makes it worth reading. It's fun to work out who wrote what, parts with the Four Horsemen have a distinct Gaiman vibe, as does the young confused person who Becomes A Man and gets the girl, whereas some of the cross banter of the kids can only be Pterry. This is something you should read just so that you can have read it.
Literature Great concepts, execution... not so much.
I love Neil Gaiman. He's hit-or-miss, but damned if The Sandman isn't the best fantasy series I've ever read. I really enjoy Discworld. I love dry British comedy. I even loved the TV adaptation of this book: best show I'd seen in years, even though it had its own flaws. So naturally, I'd love this book.
...But I didn't. I really, really didn't. "Hated" is too strong of a word, but it was rough going.
I know this is unfair, but having watched the show first ruined it for me: It was the perfect Pragmatic Adaptation, punching up the jokes and characters while trimming a lot of the filler, even if it made some weird choices with the ending.
But I think that even taken alone, there's a lot here that doesn't work. It has some really cool and inspiring ideas, but the execution is just meh.
The head-hopping was interesting, but it was weighed down by too much detail. Large portions of it become a blur of Narrative Filigree, which works in Discworld, but for some reason, doesn't in a realistic-ish modern setting.
Everyone raves about how funny it is, but IDK, a lot of the jokes fall flat. It's not all the writers' fault: Some of the Ripped from the Headlines ones have been lost to time or don't translate overseas, and others that were fine in 1990 come off as a bit racist or sexist now. But they were writing it for its time and place, not Americans 31 years later.
The jokes suffer just as much from their own delivery, though. In trying to cram one into every paragraph, the book throws a lot of witty lines at the wall at random, and IMO most don't stick. A lot of them are labored too: It'll deliver a punchline, then keep going for paragraphs, trying to one-up it but watering it down instead. And the sequences with The Them are basically episodes of Kids Say the Darndest Things that go on for about 10,000 pages, grinding the plot to a halt each time.
There were moments of outright brilliance, though. Having a kid's fantasies become real on a global scale was cool. Modernizing the Four Horsemen was a fantastic idea that must've laid the foundation for what Gaiman would later do in American Gods. The early-modern English was nearly spot on. And some lines and descriptions were genuinely great, which is what kept me going through the rest.
And some of the problem is a case of "Seinfeld" Is Unfunny: It makes some great points about the arbitrary nature of good and evil, which I'm sure were radical at the time, but many other writers have made them since. Pratchett himself nailed the same concept a year later with Small Gods, which is part of why this seems lacking in comparison.
I know most people don't agree with me on any of this, though, which is why it's considered a comedy classic, so feel free to ignore it.