#I8R Comparisons

[infinite8revisions]

The Pimp and the Slaver: A Character Comparison and Analysis.

TL:DR - "I think it was a smart and rather aware decision to make AMC's Louis a pimp."

I remember when I first heard that AMC cast a black actor for their "Interview With The Vampire" adaptation. I thought to myself, "how will they reconcile that Louis was the owner of a plantation that profited from slave labor now that the character is black?" While some may argue it wasn't a major plot point or characteristic, you can not argue that it's where Louis spent the majority of his mortal life and the infancy of his vampiric one.

Pictured Above: Okay Alley Plantation where some of the 1994 Interview With The Vampire movie was filmed.

Due to the stereotypes surrounding it, some people may have issues with the word pimp. I would like to give a reminder that, In an occupational context, the word pimp has been used for hundreds of years to refer to:

"A person (especially a man) that controls sex workers, arranges clients for them, and takes a cut of their earnings."

Now, because this is the internet, I feel the need to make it clear that I do NOT think a Pimp is equivalent to a Slaver (though they overlap in many ways). I AM saying that both character's fortunes were made through the exploitation of black bodies.

From here on out I'm going to differentiate between book/movie Louis and series adaptation Louis by calling the former "Book Louis" and the latter "AMC Louis".

Honestly, I should separate book and movie Louis too. I noticed they tried to clean him up a bit in the movie by having him "free" the slaves.

I use the word "free" extremely loosely because he didn't so much free them as he pulled a Michael Scott.

Above: stills from "The Office", and a clip from Interview With The Vampire (1994).

Louis! You cant just say they're free and expect anyone to honor it! There's paperwork to fill out! I mean, what white authority figure is going to roll up to a plantation fire and believe a group of slaves that say "yeh, our master was the devil! He set the house (and probably himself) on fire! oh...and right before, he said we were free!"

The book was far more realistic about this, there Lestat and Louis kill a good amount of them and the ones that weren't killed became runaways or fled to nearby plantations.

"Meantime, Lestat was after the slaves. He would leave such ruin and death behind him no one could make a story of that night at Pointe du Lac, and I went with him. Always before, his ferocity was mysterious, but now I bared my fangs on the humans who fled from me. my steady advance overcoming their clumsy, pathetic speed as the veil of death descended, or the veil of madness. The power and the proof of the vampire was incontestable, so that the slaves scattered in all directions. And it was I who ran back up the steps to put the torch to Pointe du Lac." "Some fifty-five slaves were scattered around the grounds. Many of them would not have desired the life of a runaway and would most certainly go right to Freniere or south to the Bel Jardin plantation down river." -Interview With The Vampire- Part 1

Pictured Above: A Voodoo doll of Lestat: Interview With The Vampire (1994)

Sometimes I think people forget, (or overlook) just how evil Lestat was portrayed in Louis' interview. Not only did he kill the young Freniere and prostitutes, he was said to regularly feed from and killed slaves.

Pictured Above: The deaths of slaves caused by Lestat circa Interview With The Vampire (1994).

"I assure you. That Lestat hunted for mortals every night, I knew. But had he been savage and ugly to my family, my guests, and my slaves, I couldn’t have endured it." "You must understand, Lestat knew this perfectly. Both of us had hunted the Freniere plantation, Lestat for slaves and chicken thieves and me for animals.” -Interview With The Vampire - Part I

When Lestat addresses Louis' interview. He never mentions the enslaved people of Point du Lac, but he does say the following.

"But this is the tale that was told by Louis in Interview with the Vampire, which for all its contradictions and terrible misunderstandings manages to capture the atmosphere in which Claudia and Louis and I came together and stayed together for sixty-five years."

"When he says I played with innocent strangers, befriending them and then killing them, how was he to know that I hunted almost exclusively among the gamblers, the thieves, and the killers, being more faithful to my unspoken vow to kill the evildoer than even I had hoped I would be? (The young Freniere, for example, a planter whom Louis romanticizes hopelessly in his text, was in fact a wanton killer and a cheater at cards on the verge of signing over his family's plantation for debt when I struck him down. The whores I feasted upon in front of Louis once, to spite him, had drugged and robbed many a seaman who was never seen alive again.) But little things like this don't really matter. He told the tale as he believed it." -The Vampire Lestat: Epilogue Interview With The Vampire

To me, this means "the slaves I killed deserved it and the ones that didn't...well, no one is perfect!" Which is understandable and pretty on brand for Lestat.

Above: Tom Cruise as Lestat: Interview With The Vampires (1994)

Going back to Louis telling "the tale as he believed it", I honestly think his "monster of a memory", dramatizations, and misremembering's are just Anne's attempt to redeem Lestat. When originally writing IWTV, Lestat was going to (officially) die in the fire that engulfed him before Louis and Claudia leave America. She ended up writing him back into the story and falling in love with his character, turning him into the brat prince we all know and love. It makes me think that that in order to mold Lestat into who she wanted him to be, rather than the villain she originally wrote, she threw Louis under the bus. That's just an opinion tho!

On to AMC Louis.

I think it was a smart and rather aware decision to make AMC Louis a pimp. Both AMC and Book Louis profit from the mistreatment of others. This consistency allows some the ignorance, hypocrisy, and irony of the book character to remain even though there was a change in race and there for his social status and privilege. During Lestat's recounting, he describes many aspects of Louis' personality. At one point he says the following:

"He was, after all, a discriminating and inhibited child of the middle class, aspiring as all the colonial planters did to be a genuine aristocrat though he had never met one..." -The Vampire Lestat: Epilogue Interview With The Vampire

This statement rings true for both Book Louis and AMC Louis despite their different cultural, racial, and generational backgrounds. Due to their occupations as a "planter" and pimp respectively, there is an innate ironic undertone that comes from listening to someone express their melancholy, depression, and self suffering knowing their lifestyle was build of the backs of broken bodies.

Side Note: I think of this line from "Hamilton" whenever Book Louis is referred as a "planter".

On that note, I feel there was (some) redemption for Louis as a character in season 1 of AMC's IWTV. This came in the form of his confession and the awareness of what he had done. At no point in the book does Louis reflect on any of the pain, hurt, or exploitation of the people who served Pointe du Lac. Louis (both in book and film) is known for many things, but taking accountability has never been one of them!

Armand doing a spot on impression of Louis. (AMC's IWTV S2)

However, in (what I believe to be) the best scene in S1, Louis takes accountability! It's one of the (many) reasons I tend like AMC Louis over Book Louis. He isn't just a shell of a person, a bystander. He's appears deeper and more complex. This Monologue has so many contextual, cultural, and religious conversation pieces within it. It was masterfully written and performed.

"Bless me father for I have sinned. Grievously, sinned. I'm a drunk Lord, I'm a liar, I am a thief, Lord. I profit off the misery of other men, and I do it easy. Drugs, liquor, women. I loiter men and grab what they got. I take daughters with no homes and I put them out on the streets, Lord. And I lie to myself saying that I'm giving them roof, and food, and dollar bills in their pocket, but I look in the mirror and I know what I am. The big man in the big house stuffing cotton in my ears so I can't hear their cries. And Lord, I dragged my family into this mess with me. I shame my father. I failed my brother. I lost my mother and sister, and rather than fix it like a man should, Lord, I run, like a coward. I run to the bottle. I run to the grift. I run to bad beds...."

In this next comparison, contrary to the last, I believe AMC Louis actions were more deplorable than Book Louis. In both telling's, Louis empire comes crashing down in a fiery blaze. In the book, those enslaved at Point du Lac being to rise against Lestat and Louis, sensing that they are inhuman. Louis suggests they leave before a full revolt breaks out but Lestat refuses while throwing hella insults at Louis...

"You whining coward of a vampire who prowls the night killing alley cats and rats and staring for hours at candles as if they were people and standing in the rain like a zombie until your clothes are drenched and you smell like old wardrobe trunks in attics and have the look of a baffled idiot at the zoo." -Lestat, Interview With The Vampire: Part I

I mean, what he said was true, but jeeez Lestat, tell 'em how you really feel why don't you!

Things come to a head resulting in the massacre and fire at Pointe du Lac. In this telling, Louis attempted to flee before things became bloody and out of control. Once shit hit the fan, he more or less gives up.

"because I had had enough of Pointe du Lac and Lestat and all this identity of Pointe du Lac’s prosperous master. I would torch the house, and turn to the wealth I’d held under many names, safe for just such a moment." Interview With The Vampire: Part 1

I give him credit here because it was never Louis' intention to cause harm or destruction. In this case (according to Louis anyway) it was Lestat's carelessness and stubbornness that lead to murmurings of a revolt and the deaths that followed. Yes, I'm defending Book Louis a little because he at least had awareness of how bad things could be and attempted to subvert it. AMC Louis on the other hand? He poured gas on the fire.

Pointe du Lac in flames: Interview With The Vampire (1994)

The fall of AMC Louis' empire was a hard watch for me. It's was incredibly frustrating because (as a black man) he should know better. He knows that his actions affect the black population around him. At that time (and still) minorities are seen as a monolith. When one fails, we ALL take the blame. You still see this regularly in the media. When a member of the majority commits an atrocity It is a reflection on that person (and maybe their family). But when a minority does the same, its all of them. It's causes a mass reinforcement of harmful stereotypes that hurts everyone in the community. In the worst cases it causes cities to burn and innocent lives to be lost.

Pictured above: Louis attacking Alderman Fenwick. AMC IWTV Season 1 Episode 3

Now, when I make posts like this, I often go back and rewatch things objectively to see if I still feel how I feel. And I do. In fact, Lestat and I feel the same.

Pictured Above: Stills from IWTV Season 1 Episode 3.

Right!? It's 1922! People were being lynched and burned for FAR less than murder. Quoting Lestat again:

Pictured Above: Stills from IWTV Season 1 Episode 3.

This was purely insecurity and selfishness. This was Louis feeling slighted and wanting his get back. Even if he had killed Fenwick and left it at that, I could let it go...MAYBE. But to display the body like that with the "White's Only" sign? He knew what would happen, he may not have been consciously thinking about it, but he can't feign naivety. This was self destruction, much like Book Louis setting fire to Pointe du Lac (and not even much different than Armand's self destructiveness). And, just like in the book, the black souls around him were collateral. While he was able to cut his losses, those he subjugated were left to die and suffer.

Above: A dead Alderman Fenwick.

Note: I am not discounting what happened to Louis. He was swindled, and understand his pent up frustrations, I do. It just doesn't justify his actions for me. At the end of the day this was over money and power. I'm gonna quote Lestat one more time:

Lestat: We don't need the money. Louis: It's not about that. You think I'm gon' let that snake bite me and my people? Lestat: You have your investments on the Claiborne Avenue. Louis: What, hats? Little grocery stores? Nickels, dimes, quarters. Lestat: So, it is about the money.

In conclusion, I LOVE drawing comparisons between the book and series. It shows how you can change a story on a variety of levels, while keeping the integrity of the characters and plot. Brava to the writers and cast. You give me so much to think and write about!

[infinite8revisions]

If you think what Santiago (said he) did with Claudia's ashes was bad? At least she was dead for it. Lets talk about what Armand did!

In part 2 of "The Vampire Armand" he finally begins to recount what happened in "Interview With The Vampire". If you haven't read the book, I dunno if you're ready for this!

"Let me say only that before she was shoved out into a brick-lined air well to await the death sentence of the god Phoebus, I tried to grant her fondest wish, that she should have the body of a woman, a fit shape for the tragic dimension of her soul."

Okkkaaayyy....

"Well, in my clumsy alchemy, slicing heads from bodies and stumbling to transplant one to another, I failed."

"Ah, what a grand disaster was that, the child-headed monster woman unable to speak, dancing in a frenetic circle, the blood gurgling from her shuddering mouth, her eyes rolling, arms flapping like the broken bones of invisible wings."

"It was a truth I vowed to conceal forever from Louis de Pointe du Lac and all whoever questioned me.... As for the others, my stupid cynical flock, who listened so lasciviously at my door to the screaming, who maybe guessed the extent of my failed wizardry, those vampires died by Louis's hand."

He's lucky that wasn't in the show. Imagine what AMC's Louis would do if he ever found this out. That wall slam would be a welcome trade off! lol!

[infinite8revisions]

Kissed By Death vs. Kissing Death

Trigger Warning: This Post Contains Discussions and Depictions of Suicide.

Warning: Spoilers for "Elisabeth Das Musical"

This should come as no surprise, but I enjoy different variations of the same story. The most subtle differences can change things resulting in a different interpretation.

The performance inspiring this post is the 2016 Japanese production of “Elisabeth das Musical” staring Yuu Shirota as Der Todd (death) and Furukawa Yuta as Prince Rudolph.  The scene: Mayerling Waltz.

In act 2, Rudolph commits suicide at the imperial hunting lodge in Mayerling. This production differentiates itself from others by having Prince Rudolph kiss death rather than death kissing Rudolph. Not only that, but Rudolph independently pulls the trigger rather than in tandem with Der Todd. I thought this was a fantastic artistic choice.

Above: A 2006 production of Elisabeth das Musical

It’s subtle, but REALLY drives home that Rudolph made a conscious decision to end his own life. He holds the gun, thinks about it, then embraces death, taking the kiss for himself. This is a departure from the standard portrayal where death is often seen holding the gun along with Rudolph (sometimes forcing it into his hands) and stealing the kiss just seconds before the gun goes off. Both renditions tell the story of suicide, showing the manic franticness and fear of a person about to make a life ending decision. However, that last part, being kissed by death vs kissing death gives different a slightly different meaning.

Below I have some scenes for comparison (after MUCH trial and error due to tumblr only allowing one upload per post.) -_-

This first clip is from the 2005 Austrian production at the Theater an der Wien staring Máté Kamarás as Der Todd and Johann Ebert as Rudolph.

This second clip is from the 2009 Belgium production in Antwerp staring Oliver Arno as Der Todd and Thomas Hohler as Rudolph.

Finally the 2016 Japanese production of “Elisabeth das Musical” staring Yuu Shirota as Der Todd (death) and Furukawa Yuta as Prince Rudolph.

There's a peace there, a release, a forfeit. He fought for as long as he could, but then he just didn't want to fight anymore.

In the typical portrayal of this scene, it seems (to me) that Rudolph's death is rash, impulsive, and he is unsure until the end. Which is also much closer to the historical truth btw.

In refence to the personification of death, there is also the implication that, although Rudolph is suicidal, death is making the ultimate decision, pushing and (in some productions) even forcing Rudolph to kill himself. It makes it as though Der Todd killed Elisabeth's son, which again, in the context of personifying death is a metaphor.

This may not be the last you see of Elisabeth das Musical from me, I'll leave you with a 17mintue comparison compilation I found on YouTube:

[infinite8revisions]

I forgot I did this. Yes, it was a middle of the night project lol. (I suggest watching it full screen.)

TOHO's production of Elisabeth das Musical

Left: Yu Shirota (White Version)

Right: Inoue Yoshio (Black Version)

[infinite8revisions]

The Cold Is My Price For Freedom

I've listened to "Let It Go" in many different languages. My favorite BY FAR is the French version. When I saw "Frozen" in theaters, I remember thinking how powerful that entire scene was. When hearing Libérée, Délivrée, that feeling multiplied! The lyrical changes made are powerful and allow us to see this familiar scene in a new way. I identify with this version a lot and I hope to give you a new song to add to your playlist!

Here are the French lyrics translated into English along with the official version on YouTube:

Winter Moves softly in the night The snow is queen in it's right A Kingdom of solitude My place is here, forever The wind that blows on me doesn't think about tomorrow It is far too strong I've struggled in vain

Hide your powers, don't speak of them Pay attention, the secret will carry on No misgivings, no torments of feelings

Liberated, delivered I will never lie again Liberated, delivered It's decided, I'm leaving I left my childhood in summer Lost in winter The cold is the price for my freedom

When you take the high ground Everything seems insignificant Sadness, anguish, and fear Left me a long time ago

I want to see what I can do With this magic replete with mystery Good or bad, I say neverminded Nevermind

Liberated, Delivered The stars fill up my arms Liberated, delivered No, I am not crying Here I am, yes, here I am Lost in winter

My power comes from the sky and overwhelms the space My soul expresses itself in drawing and sculpting in the ice And my thoughts are flowers made of frozen crystal I will not return The past is in the past

Liberated, delivered From now on nothing is stopping me Liberated, delivered No more princess perfect I am here, like I've dreamt Lost in winter The cold is my price for freedom

[infinite8revisions]

Have you been watching AMC's adaptation of "Interview With the Vampire?" Have you read the book(s)? If not, you may not know that Anne's vampires are on the Asexual spectrum! You may have also noticed that in the adaptation...them vampires be F***ing! This is one part of the adaptation that I don't mind, but don't necessarily love. You may be thinking "I read the books and those vampires are NOT asexual, they have sex all the time!"

Are you sure about that? Are. You. Sure. About. That?

Like everything in this world, asexuality is a spectrum and there are different orientations that fall under it's umbrella. If you are interested, here is a short introduction on the subject. If you would like to see a list of orientations and micro-labels , you can find it HERE

Above: Lestat Rejecting the sexual advances of groupies before draining them. -Queen Of The Damned (2002)

I am Graysexual.

Sometimes referred to as “gray ace” people who are greysexual are primarily asexual. However, these members of the asexual community may enjoy sexual behavior under very specific circumstances, or they might experience sexual interest on rare occasions.

IMPORTANT: Please Read Below

“Asexuality is different from abstinence, where someone chooses to not have sexual contact regardless of their sexual urges. Someone with an asexual identity is not necessarily someone who has never engaged in sex...(asexuality) is also considered a type of sexual orientation. It is important to clarify that asexuality is not a medical or mental condition or diagnosis. It is a sexual orientation in the same way that homosexuality, bisexuality, and pansexuality are.” – Talkspace therapist Bisma Anwar, LMHC

During the airing of season one I made a post about this in an IWTV fan group, I got a loooot of feedback, so when you see references to people saying something, its from the comments of that post.

Now let's get into it!

When brining up this topic, many people cited intercourse or sexual contact in books to nullify the claim of Asexuality. Specifically in the book "Pandora" when Marius and Pandora have penetrative sex. It surprised me that quite a few people brought it up, because if you read it...it's making my point, not negating it.

"Fill me and hold me". (Said by Pandora) "This is stupid and superstitious" (Said by Marius) "it is symbolic and comforting"...our bodies were one, connected by this sterile organ which was no more to him now than his arm." Pandora: Chapter 22

It makes me realize that (some) people aren't aware that not having sexual desire doesn't mean you can not or do not have sex. I know we've all heard of people having sex when they don't feel like it. Just because you consent and willingly participate does not mean you are aroused or even want to.

Consider too that some asexual people have allosexual partners, they may engage in physical intimacies up to and including intercourse to satisfy their needs. On the flip side of that, others may not enjoy penetrative intercourse but enjoy other forms of physical intimacy that don't include genitalia. Again, it's a spectrum.

Furthermore, it seems many people don't know the difference between sex and romance. Sexual orientation and romantic orientation are two different things. Just because a person is asexual does not mean they're aromantic.

Romantic Orientation: also called affectional orientation, is the classification of person(s) which one experiences romantic attraction towards. -Google

"Romantic orientation is different and separate from sexual orientation...Romantic attraction can exist without the need for sexual attraction as a person can feel romantically attracted to someone without necessarily feeling sexually drawn to them." -Choosing Therapy

Here's a helpful visual from the University Of Warwick

This is another reason people brush off the claim. They will point to the romances between characters not realizing sexuality and romance are not the same thing.

Now, some of the tings I'm about to say have rubbed people the wrong way so uh...

I do not think that relationships are diminished, illegitimate, or otherwise untrue inherently because they are sexual.

However, regularly hearing variations of the following causes a lot of suspicion on my end:

"If you're not having sex then you're not dating, you're just friends."

"if they stop having sex with me (or if the sex isn't good) I'll just leave or cheat."

"If they're not getting it from you, they're getting it from somewhere."

"if you're not having sex with me, you don't love me"

So often movies, books, and TV build the foundation of relationships on sex and sexual attraction. In fact, this is common in real life as well. You see relationships fall apart constantly because of sex (or lack there of). It makes one question their authenticity. Did that person ever really love you to begin with if that's all it takes to for them to leave? The VC were a nice departure from that. I felt there was an extra layer of truth in the characters emotions knowing they weren't forged in lust, but something deeper and less superficial (usually...looking at you Marius). It also enhanced the physical displays of affection that did happen.

In the AMC series, the addition of vampiric sex kind of...cheapened the love between Lestat and Louis (for me). At times it made Lestat's actions seem sexually motivated, which isn't how he operates. Especially when he did the whole "Let's have an open relationship so I can screw who I want, but when you do it I'm going to get jealous and throw a hissy fit" thing. It reduced Lestat to a stereotypical asshole that thinks with his dick. Lestat is a lot of things, good and bad, but never "dickhead"! Get it? Thinks with his dick? Dickhead?...

On that note, It pissed me off something fierce when Claudia was raped. It broke some of the VC fantasy I had built for myself...That there was at least one thing you wouldn't have to worry about with a vampire. Yeh, they might hunt you down, rip out your throat, and kill you, but they would never go there. Plus it's LAZY WRITING. You can have a female character go out into the world and be traumatized without raping her. That's a topic that has been covered many times by many people so I won't go into it here.

Now, someone suggested to me that Claudia was not raped and that I was just making assumptions....so in the spirit of "checking oneself before wrecking oneself" here's confirmation on that.

Others also point out that in "Tale of the Body Thief" one of the first things Lestat does is have sex...He also eats! Lmao! My point is that the whole reason for switching bodies with a mortal was to do things he no longer enjoyed as a vampire. He was (presumably) allosexual as a mortal so it makes sense that he would want to enjoy sex again if given the opportunity.

Now, let's look at some more text.

After drinking Akasha's blood in QOTD Lestat looks himself over and notes the following-

"And the organ, the organ we don't need poised as if ready for what it would never again know how to do, or want to do, marble, a Priapus at a gate." Queen of the Damned: Chapter 5

Which means one of two things to me. Either strong vampires always have an erection 24/7 or it just happens after they feed because of the blood flowing through them. Either way it explains this quote from chapter 2 of The Vampire Armand.

"I put my hand between his legs. Oh, he was so wonderfully hard. That was not uncommon..." -The Vampire Armand: Chapter 2 (about Marius)

Speaking of "The Vampire Armand." I'm rather surprised that none of the quotes people use to refute my claim ever come from this book. This really is the one book with some of grey area. There's also some good conversation around power and sex/sexuality but I promise I'm going to stay on topic.

Here is the full context of the quote above:

"Why do you never . . . Why do you never feel anything! Why do you handle me as if I were a poppet? Why do you never … ?" For the first time ever I saw his face redden; I saw his eyes gloss and narrow and then widen with reddish tears. "Master, you frighten me," I whispered. "What is it you want me to feel, Amadeo?" he said. "You're like an angel, a statue," I said, only now I was chastened and trembling. "Master, you play with me and I'm the toy that feels all things." I drew nearer. I touched his shirt, sought to unlace it. "Let me-." He took my hand. He took my fingers and put them to his lips, and drew my fingers inside his mouth, caressing them with his tongue. His eyes moved so that he was looking up at me. Quite enough, said his eyes. I feel quite enough. "I'd give you anything," I said imploringly. I put my hand between his legs. Oh, he was wonderfully hard. That was not uncommon, but he must let me take him further; he must trust me. -The Vampire Armand: Chapter 2

Marius rejects his advance. However, I FULLY understand Amadeo here. From the moment Marius brought that boy home, he was touching him sexually. Kissing him in sensitive places, playing with his nips, giving him hand jobs....mixed signals much?

I do think a lot of that was power play. Not necessarily something sexual for Marius, but a way of showing his power and authority over over his new boy. He does suggest that it was to make Amadeo happy, and by extension, help restore his memory. Not the sexual contact itself, but that along with showering him in luxuries, blood kisses, and giving him a "good life".

And indeed all of life itself in far-away Russia had been so rigorous that he could not give himself over to the pleasure that awaited him now at every turn. -Blood and Gold: Chapter 19

In chapter 3 of The Vampire Armand, there is a sentence that strongly insinuates sex.

"When would you tolerate innocence? When we bed together, you call that innocence? I am a man..." (Amadeo to Marius)

Typically the word "bed" used as a verb in this context means "to have sex with". This statement would be slightly inconsistent with things said earlier and later in the series (and in this book), however, we are privy to the sexual intimacies that take place between these two and "sex" is a pretty loose word for it, but it's understandable why Amadeo would say this, it is sexual release for him, it is sex to him. Furthermore, later in this chapter Marius says,

"haven't you lain with me enough to know what I can and cannot enjoy?" The Vampire Armand: Chapter 3

I'm struggling to stay on topic while talking about this book because there's a lot of M/s, D/s context. It makes me want to go into how asexual people participate in BDSM, because that's a lot of what's going on here. I've been in this space myself actually and that might be what my next post is about...if I can focus enough to write it. Moving on.

Oddly enough, some people (2 to be exact) have suggested that there hasn't actually been any intercourse in the series and that I'm just assuming based on context. I had to go back and check for myself to make sure I wasn't crazy! It was, in fact, said several times. One example was above then we also have the following:

those comments were made before season 2 came out, but I'll add everybody's favorite anyway!

Lastly, some people stated that blood IS sex for vampires. A few people cited louis from IWTV, however the only thing I could find close to this, was the following:

"You want to know how it happened, how In became a vampire.” “Yes,” said the boy. “How did you change, exactly?” “I can’t tell you exactly,” said the vampire. “I can tell you about it, enclose it with words that will make the value of it to me evident to you. But I can’t tell you exactly, any more than I could tell you exactly what is the experience of sex if you have never had it.”

He is talking about what it is like to be a vampire here, not specifically drinking blood, also, you'll note that he does not compare it to sex, rather that, like sex, it's hard to explain the feeling to someone who has never experienced it.

Now, I do not think that saying that blood is like sex to a vampire is wrong. It is a valid interpretation and metaphor, especially when it relates to an allosexual person.

However, I feel (this is an opinion and my own interpretation.) a lot of thigs can have a strong dopamine release similar to an orgasm, but are not sex themselves. Some of those things can even be used in conjunction with sex to enhance the experience. I think of drinking blood similarly to drugs (Anne also said she used blood drinking as a metaphor for addiction). Drugs give you a high, you have a constant urge and need for it. You can use it as a means of intensifying and deepening a sexual or emotional connection to someone OR you can use it to strengthen yourself when commuting brutalities. You also run the risk of losing some or even all control when indulging. How many times have we see people kill a lover during or after a high. We see vampires accidentally drain someone to death because the ecstasy takes over. Not to mention the withdrawal can be physically and mentally taxing enough to kill you. So, I see blood drinking less as direct replacement for sex, and more like a drug, although its not a 1:1 comparison.

Above: Claudia Accidentally kills Charlie

In conclusion. I'm ace and that's one reason why I loved Anne's vampires so much. I was a little disappointed that they didn't stick with that in the adapted series but whatevs, it doesn't ruin the show for me!

[infinite8revisions]

"Elisabeth" Side by Side:

I suggest watching full screen

Left: Yu Shirota as death and Ikusaburo Yamazaki as Lucheni

Right: Yoshio Inoue as death and Songha as Lucheni