#Its like you can see the moment lestat leaves and sam takes over

[kneelbeforeclefairy]

I have been thinking about the unreliable narrator shit in AMCs iwtv. And yes, maybe, I'm doing the thing I've done with the books where you take what is probably just inconsistent writing on Anne Rice's part at best and deciding it has a meaning because these damn books are so batshit they almost HAVE to have a meaning.

(they don't. It's all savage garden. )

But I was thinking of some of Lestat's scenes in episode 6, particularly the scene where he drags Claudia home.

And I was thinking how if I saw the script those scenes could be read quite a few different ways. The lines themselves are quite blank. The scene with Claudia could be read as quite genuine. "We both love louis. He is miserable without you. You need to come home because Louis needs you, and I know you don't like me but we need to tolerate each other for Louis sake, and if anything HAPPENS to you over there he will die and I can't live without him, so come HOME. "

And to me, that's very Lestat behavior. Not factoring in what Claudia wants or needs. Not caring or realizing that Louis didn't ask for her to be brought home. Not giving Louis the option to TRY to live without her, or understanding the circumstances of this leaving is different then the others--no, we just charge in with that "father knows best " thing Lestat can do, protecting people from themselves from making a mistake from making a decision because it might HURT them and if they're HURT that's BAD, and if they're HURT, then I'll be UPSET and I can't deal with my own EMOTIONS TOWARDS PEOPLE so just...let's avoid all that and just live happily together. We're a happy family and everything is fine. Ans that's Lestat's brand of abuse towards them. It's grounded in immaturity, selfishness and fear, not a desire to control for controls sake, or power for powers sake. It's a very twisted version of love from someone who doesn't really understand how we love people without controlling them. And it's, ultimately redeemable. (I mean, seven books and a lot of bullshit later. )

And the lines themselves do not exclude that interpretation. Just the way Sam Reid delivers them, and how the scene is directed.

So I was thinking.

This is all Louis recollection. And furthermore it's a moment he isn't present for. He has to take Claudia's word for what happened. So what if this scene didn't happen quite that way, Claudia just saw it as abusive Lestat saying youre not allowed to leave because I say so, because she hates him and has demonized him so much so she only sees that side of him, and not that he does care. That's a valid way for Claudia to interpret the scene, and interpret what he says, through a mind that is to some extent 14 forever and doesn't HAVE all that nuance. and one day we see the exact same scene with Lestat narrating it and the delivery changes. What if his version of that night is different? And the audience has to decide who to believe. The same way there's three versions of what happened the night Claudia died in the books, and none of them adds up completly, and everyone has a reason to lie so what happened that night is just up to the audience. THAT would be a fun way of playing with unreliable narrator, and, I think, the only way to redeem Lestat enough to even make audiences want to watch him as the protagonist after what he did and all his abuse.

I don't know, I don't trust these writers to do that, of course. They're probably going to just charge on and decide we forgive Lestat cause idk ....

Its probably just bad writing.

Anyway, that's how I'd solve this going forward.