#iwtv tvc metas

[murfpersonalblog]

IWTV Musings - Tentative Timeline (Pt4b: 1700s - 1800s) - TVC Only: TVL & IWTV

This timeline covers The Vampire Lestat & Interview with the Vampire (the TVC books ONLY).

Pt4a (the text breakdown) is here.

Pt5a (text) & Pt5b (graph) will track AMC's S1 & S2 version of dates from 1400s - 1900.

Pt6a (text) & Pt6b (graph) will cover TVC's dates from 1300s - 1600s.

Here is the text breakdown of the timeline:

If y'all notice errors or have different date ranges, don't hesitate to let me know; cuz ISTG I have no idea wtf was going on in these books chronologically.

[murfpersonalblog]

Weaker/smaller people can operate on sheer adrenaline/fear/righteous indignation/anger/protective instincts to try defending themselves and their loved ones. Protecting your "built-like-a-bird" daughter from almost having her neck snapped by her MUCH stronger father is not being abusive, mutually or otherwise--it's being a PARENT.

I bet the show won't pull back at all, not if Lestat's monologue during the Trial is anything to go by; or Loustat's reunion, or what Rolin & Sam have repeatedly said about Claudia's memory haunting Les in S3. Les outright admitted that he tried to kill Louis. Lou already knew that, and still took him back in Ep6--when Les wasn't even (sincerely) apologetic!--and caught hell for it from Claudia & Daniel.

There's PLENTY of abuse victims who go back to their spouses--not just cuz they CAN'T leave, but cuz they don't WANT to leave. Cuz they DO love them, and they DO forgive them--regardless if that forgiveness is earned or not. I already mentioned Ray Rice cauight on camera knocking his wife TF out, and how she was talking big up in his face, just like Lou talked big to Les--right before he DECKED her with EASE and dragged out that elevator; just like Louis when Les dragged him across the courtyard by his effing jawbone & dropped him 1000 miles in the air. And guess what? Ray Rice's wife STILL married him afterwards, and AFAIK they're still married, and his wife keeps telling ppl to mind their effing business cuz she doesn't have to explain/justify her choice.

YES. 😂 Les realized that he'd grossly underestimated Claudia's intelligence, and the lengths Lou'd go to for Claudia--their daughter. Even so far as slitting Les' throat. He's PROUD of Claudia ("I see the best of my vampiric self in her"; "evil of my evil"), and he already said Lou was justified & and that he didn't deserve him (hence: letting Armand take his man).

AMC is developing Les's character--that's the whole point of TVC: watching his progression & redemption from the P.O.S. he was in IWTV, to becoming AR's hero & messianic savior in Blood Communion. We need to see him put in the work--coming to terms with how much of a trash husband he was to Lou, and how much of a deadbeat dad he was to Claudia. His backstory in TVL will show Les' misogyny towards his mother Gabrielle; and his insensitivity towards Nicki--Les taking accountability for everyone he loved but still FAILED. Les can be sympathetic and STILL be a crappy son, boyfriend, husband & father. "To have a think.... Why I do what I do."

Ray Rices got all kinds of therapy & talked thru his issues; and his relationship w/ his wife is apparently STRONGER & BETTER for it.

Eff them being vampires; that was Santiago's cop-out.

AMC is conveying a REAL MESSAGE about REAL LIFE. I've said a billion times that the whole point of GOTHIC HORROR is to hold a mirror to HUMANS so we can see the monster/beast WITHIN US.

Cuz this ish is REAL--people REALLY go through these things--and have to either OVERCOME their past trauma, or SUCCUMB to it and repeat the same vicious cycles of violence & abuse in the future. Loustat is endgame cuz Louis and Lestat OVERCOME. They learn how to be BETTER people--not necessarily "good" people, ofc, but they learn how to treat each other; and by realizing how bad the effed over Claudia (X X X), they try to do right by their next kids, Viktor and especially Rose.

Lestat tried to KILL Claudia, then threatened LOUIS with murder.

Les literally says that if Lou tries to fight him, "it will end in Louis' death"--LESTAT will murder Louis. As I've said 1000 times about Lestat as the Matador (meaning KILLER).

LOUIS' life is the one being threatened here. And he's in VERY serious danger, since Lestat has a century of advanced powers over Louis, plus Louis had been starving himself for the past 7 years. Lestat knew that once he got serious, he'd BREAK Louis for good.

Why on earth would Louis STOP fighting? Lestat was tryna kill their daughter AND him--out of petty spiteful jealousy and domineering Stockholm on steroids wife-in-the-freezer BS: if I can't have him, no one can--till DEATH do us part!

And why is it Lou's responsibility to lay down & take Les's behavior?

Just like I said--Lou's expected to just sit back and take being abused, insulted, harassed, ridiculed, demeaned & gaslit; but the second he stands up for himself (or for his daughter)? Omfg this wild animal's out of control; "disreputable, cold, violent!" He could've (read: should've) stopped at some point! Why didn't he walk away!?

Do y'all honestly believe that Lou "walking away" would've solved ANYTHING that night? Les asked over & over & over if Lou was gonna LEAVE him. Les was tryna keep Lou in that house--and he succeeded, crippling him & shattering every bone in his effing body. He BROKE Louis, cuz he was convinced that he'd already LOST Louis--to Claudia. Hence: Lestat tryna kill her! Hence: the fight! LES started it, and best believe HE ended it! 💀

I'm a Lestat fan, too. I've been reading TVC since the 90s, and AMC's only made me love these books & characters more & more. The whole point of personal journeys and character growth is that it's a PROCESS. Lestat IS a vampiric monster, yes--and he's also an abusive husband & father. He FINALLY apologized during the Trial & reunion; but how will he do BETTER going forward; to become a vampire WORTHY of Louis' love & forgiveness--unworthy in NOLA, unworthy in Paris; disregard!

I treat AMC's adaptation of these characters the way Gothic Horror as a genre treats monsters: as a WARNING; recognizing that they ARE human, reflecting the ugliness within all of US, IRL. In so doing, hopefully we can then do better by ourselves and each other; rather than pretending that things aren't a problem and ignoring/handwaving aside all the things that make us uncomfortable--or ruin the fantasy of the dreamy romantic fun hot guy we're in love with. Cuz he might just be a monster in disguise out to kill you, your kids, or anyone around you.

Seven years of compromise. Denial. It all gave way.

[murfpersonalblog]

IWTV S2 Tentative Timeline (Pt2c) - Unreliable Narrators, Armand & the Trial

Thanks for the response to Pt2b, @usuallydeepalpaca-blog! I really want people to talk to me about the IWTV timelines, cuz this show is SO confusing! 😩😭

"I think if you create the timeline with info the show doesn't provide, i.e. Armand was involved from the start, then you're bound to get it wrong."

Absolutely. I fully expect that I got some stuff wrong, which is why I said it's a TENTATIVE Timeline.

I've in no way said it's THEE CORRECT™ timeline, cuz chile IDKWTF is going on. 😅 I openly say what confuses me, questions I have, and how I come to the conclusions that I draw. I'm being as transparent as possible to let y'all know that I DON'T know. 🤷 The show doesn't provide EVERYthing, so I'm just piecing things together in a way that makes an iota of sense to me, following the logic of what the show HAS provided. The only solid details we have are diehard IRL dates, that gave us a time range when certain events can/can't happen. AFAIK I'm working with the same set of details everyone else has, until AMC gives us more info in S3+. And unfortunately, the 2 biggest unknown variables are Lestat & Armand, and to what extent they were/weren't involved in the Trial that got Claudia killed & Louis buried alive.

"saying Armand messed with Louis' memories re: the trial is also something not supported by the show."

The show obvs. wants us to assume that Armand made Louis hallucinate Sam guarding him in the theatre box (thus painting Armand as a "captive" along with Louis & Claudeleine).

Even if Armand didn't use the Mind Gift on Louis, he lied at least twice:

lies by omission: letting Louis think a hallucination of Sam was real

lies to Louis' (& Daniel's) face: going along with the premise that he was Sam's "captive" & Armand sat there the whole time thinking of a way to rescue Louis

And we KNOW this is a lie, cuz Daniel calls it out explicitly, asking how Sam can be "in two places at once," allegedly "guarding" Armand, but ALSO helping to torture Louis in the Wet Room.

Armand never denied or contradicted Louis saying Sam was in either place. Maybe Louis really did misremember Sam being in the wet room--the ONLY one who can corroborate all this is SAM--whom Armand ALSO lies on, throwing Sam, Daniel & the Talamasca all under the bus by saying the script with his handwriting all over it was forged! No honor amongst thieves I guess! 🤣

(Eff Lestat's POV in S3--when is SAM gonna give HIS POV of the Trial?!)

So I'm operating on patterns of behavior, and the logic that if he's deliberately lying about one thing (a VERY BIG THING, actually), then what else is he lying about? How are you "atoning" for anything, when you're just heaping lies on top of gaslighting on top of manipulation?

Armand has used Louis' obvious confusion to his advantage, just going along with whatever will make him look better & more sympathetic. Which ofc, is the exact same thing he does with the "Banishment" lie. "They gave me a choice...I could not prevent it" is the truth and a lie all rolled into one incredibly manipulative cocktail, cuz if it was just a simple matter of Armand selling Claudia out to save Louis, that would be one thing--but Armand KNEW the script planned LOUIS' death the whole time. The "seismic lie" about "Banishment" effs up Armand's whole defense.

Cuz Sam already wrote the script in April 1949 (and I said this is confusing, cuz if it's the WHOLE script, then this implies Lestat's half was written by then, too, and NOT in September after the Eiffel Tower crime--which means he was ALREADY in Paris & working with the coven; inc. Armand (which would also explain WHY Armand took Louis to the library so much--perhaps anticipating that Loustat would feel e/o's presence if Louis was around the theatre too much? But that doesn't explain Claudia)--omfg I'm confused). Wtvr--we KNOW that at some point b/t April & September 1949, Armand made his edits & directed the entire production--from Santiago to Lestat to Tuan's projections--ALL of it. And we know Tuan's projections started being made in June/July 1949.

Armand KNEW Daniel had been given the OLD script from the archives, WITHOUT Armand's edits & directions, and LET Daniel AND Louis think that was the truth--

--same way he went behind Louis' back and removed extra pages from Claudia's diaries that would reveal MORE of his shenanigans--

--and the same way he lied about Nicki (& Gabrielle) in 2x3.

The show ALSO provides us with quotes like this:

And this:

And this:

Which in retrospect make Armand look even more insidious, esp. when we wonder to what extend Louis' been "driven to form new conclusions about myself" when he doesn't even KNOW himself; let alone WHAT memories he has that are real or false.

It's so effed up, and it makes me side-eye all the insistence that LOUIS is the one mostly at fault, when he's got literal double-hypnosis Brain Scramblies from WWDITS. 😭🤦

Ofc there are unknown-unknowns when dealing with unreliable narration. But there are also known-unknowns, too, that also make Armand sus.

Sure, Loumand was away at the library in July (IF that memory's even real, Mr. "I Had A Hunch")--but how on earth would Armand have NOT known that the coven was working on the Trial right under his nose for MONTHS prior & after July--Luchenbaum sewing new barrister costumes & wigs; Tuan painting projections & testing new lens/film tech; and Sam writing a new script (when we already KNOW Sam can't multitask when his "head's in a hat")?

July is only ONE month in over HALF A YEAR of Trial prep. Louis was never around the coven to know what was going on--but ARMAND was; it's where HE lives.

Whose POV was it that showed the whole coven passing around Claudia's diaries? Whose POV was it that revealed Santiago being called Maitre in every scene that ARMAND was also in?

Armand was in the park with Tuan when Tuan called Santiago Maitre; and Armand was in the theatre with Sam when Sam called Santiago Maitre--so this is clearly either Armand's POV telling on himself; or it's AMC screwing with us.

It's TRUE that Turning Madeleine was the straw that broke the camel's back, as Armand was like I can't keep THAT a secret from the coven, too (and ofc he couldn't--they're VAMPIRES; they'd FEEL a new vamp in their territory). But Loumand's problems PREDATE Madeleine; the same way Loustat's problems predate Claudia. I blame Les for not dealing with Lou's BS, just like I blame Armand, cuz THEY are the Coven Masters, NOT Lou--esp. cuz Armand had 14 other vamps in his coven he SHOULD be prioritizing over Lou. The same way Loustat's guilty of being bad fathers (which they BOTH admitted to), Armand's guilty of being a bad coven leader (which HE admitted to).

IMO, all this makes any & all discussion about Armand's trustworthiness difficult, when his "seismic lie" throws EVERYTHING else he's done into question. Esp. since the show ALSO provides us with the FACT that Armand knew from DAY ONE that Claudia lied about "Bruce"/Lestat; and that Louis was a terrible liar & terrible with the Mind Gift; and that he'd ALREADY planned on killing Louis in 2x3! Armand knew from the get-go that he couldn't do EFF ALL to keep Louis & Claudia out of danger, and TOLD Louis so.

"It also ignores that Louis softens his participation in certain things because he can't live with the guilt of his full participation, e.g. Claudia's turning, which he continued to lie to Claudia about even during the trial and only accepted the extent of his involvement in Dubai"

The Trial Timeline's purpose is to pinpoint when the preparations took place, NOT to hash out how bad of a father Louis was to Claudia. 🤨

And it certainly isn't meant to provide a timeline for the events in S1 wrt Claudia's Turning--we already know the dates for all of that, that she was made in 1917. I focus on the 1940s in S2, and the European dates, NOT the NOLA dates. LOUIS did not participate in the Trial's preparations, ARMAND & LESTAT did. My timeline has ZERO bearings on Louis' guilt for not warning her, etc.

But on the subject of Louis & Claudia, I've cussed Louis out for not telling Claudia about Armand b4 (x x), I don't ignore it at all. I fully understand & even agree with Armand being fed up with dealing with Louis' BS. But HE CHOSE not to kill Louis when he had the chance, and it's obvs that whatever arrangement they made when they had sex in 2x3/2x4 allowed Louis to TRUST that Armand would keep "the secret" & keep Louis & Claudia SAFE from the coven. (Which is a BOGUS claim for him to make, when Santiago'd ALREADY peeped that they were lying about Lestat & being from NOLA, but wtvr). I've called Louis a naive idiot 1000x for overestimating Armand, putting his life in Armand's incapable hands--just like he would AGAIN by trusting him about "Banishment;" and AGAIN by asking Armand to wipe his memories in SanFran (and LIE by omission about Les saying "I love you, Louis").

"Louis remembers the trial, he remembers what was said and what Lestat showed him."

HOW can Lestat have showed Louis ANY memories during the Trial (inc. the Ep4 revisit), when Makers/Fledglings CANNOT read each other's minds???????

I love this show so much, but I effing hate this show--they don't even give us an answer, Daniel just moves right past it, like wtf are we supposed to do with that, AMC? There's plot threads, vs plot HOLES. Louis' TOO unreliable, Armand's a shysty liar, white savior Lestat to the rescue~~~! "BANishMEnT~!" As if Lestat's any less impartial?

Esp. when at least SOME parts of the Ep4 Revisit were OBVIOUSLY Scripted lines written by the coven to implicate Louis in breaking the Great Laws that Lestat allegedly taught him AND Claudia to follow?

Like, Louis HATES himself, and is quick to blame himself for things beyond his control (a la Paul, a la the Ordinances; "Can we be forgiven if we do not forgive others ourselves?"); so if one is determined to see him bad faith then of course one can easily pounce on him Florence DPDL style / Santiago style, and blame him.

(Esp. since in 1x4 we literally SEE Louis admit to begging & emotionally baby-trapping Lestat into turning Claudia--the revisit in 2x7 is more (melo)dramatic & extended, sure, but it does NOT contradict Louis' account in S1. So I get REAL confused when people say he lied about 1x4 or wtvr.)

Louis invalidates his perspective cuz he KNOWS he's an unreliable narrator--he spends 2x1 sobbing about wanting to remember & "get every detail right"--and ARMAND is there constantly tryna STOP the interview; having directly contributed to his already deteriorated (& inherited?) mental illness, by bending Lou's trauma into "a Lestat shaped-effigy" with all that "I will not harm you" bullcrap.

TL;DR: We won't know for sure what the Trial timeline actually looks like, unless S3+ revisits it with more context.

But as things stand at the end of S2, NO, I don't trust Armand as far as I can throw him, cuz there are waaaay too many instances where he's deliberately lied & obfuscated & omitted in ways to deliberately confuse the narrative surrounding the Trial--that go beyond Louis' already confirmed trauma, PTSD, mental illness, repressed/faulty memory, and guilty conscious.

If y'all want a timeline of S1 events, those have already been made by other people in the fandom (this one is goated).

I wanted to know what was going on in S2; so I used every single date and IRL reference possible, and put them in chronological order in a way that makes sense based on how I TENTATIVELY understand things currently; NOT how AMC has confirmed yet--if they ever will.

If anyone has more relevant in-show references & IRL sources we can cite, to help make better sense of S2 than I did, let us all know!

[murfpersonalblog]

IWTV S2 Musings - Tentative Timeline (Pt3b: 1940 - 1950) - ❗REVISIONS❗

These revisions took a minute, y'all, apologies.

HUGE thanks to @usuallydeepalpaca-blog and @alleyskywalker for working with me to make a (hopefully) more precise tentative timeline for S2 -- Pt 1 (1940 - 1948ish: x x) and Pt2 (1949: x x). There's so much unreliable narration from ALL these MCs, so things are very much STILL up in the air wrt chronology, that will likely only be resolved in S3 🙏 (AMC y'all got some explaining to do, cuz this ish REALLY don't make sense!!! 😩). So until then, this is still just a rough guestimate of when events took place in S2, cuz IDFK. 🤦

My actual detailed breakdown of these dates is posted here:

As always, feel free to point things out if y'all have extra context or different calculations--inquiring minds wanna know!

[murfpersonalblog]

IWTV S3 Musings - Armand, Lestat, & Marius

I am SO glad Sam Reid properly contextualized Lesmand's mess, cuz folk keep ignoring the most crucial aspect of Armand's entire psycho-sexual obsession with Lestat: MARIUS.

Autumn Brown went and pulled out the same tired quote people always use from Blood Communion, Armand raving how Les is "it" for him, wigging TF out. But Sam shut that ish down immediately:

Cuz people constantly decontextualize the circumstances under which Armand even said that to Lestat in the first place:

I explained this all the way back when 2x3 aired and Armand gave that BS fanfic about Les "abandoning" him & Nicki & the coven--I knew Armand was lying, cuz that's NOT how Les leaving went down!

In the BC quote, Armand is saying that he loves & hates Lestat, cuz he's JEALOUS of Lestat. Armand was abandoned by Marius (I posted a whole tirade against Marius about this), and resented that Marius had forsaken his "beloved Amadeo" in his hour of need after being indoctrinated by the CoS; meanwhile Marius didn't know Lestat from a stranger in the effing street and still let the man live with him and told him all his deepest darkest secrets that he never told his own Blood Fledgling Spouse Child Amadeo. What makes Lestat so effing special, that Marius--who keeps EVERYONE at arms length--was suddenly welcoming this rando French blonde chaos demon with open arms; doing eff all to Les when he ran blabbing about TWMBK to the entire world?! Amadeo was the one Marius said he loved most, who he then kicked to the curb when Amadeo broke the rules/disappointed Marius, and never heard Boo! from him for the next 500 effing years! Why HIM and not ME, when you were MY everything?

Armand felt abandoned, and more than anything, he was TERRIFIED in BC, cuz just when Marimand were just starting to reconcile and get along again after a good 30+ years of tension post-reunion in QotD, Marius got kidnapped by the Big Bad Rhoshamandes, who'd already kidnapped the other people Lestat loved most: his son Viktor, his mom Gabrielle, & his Blood Spouse Louis. Armand was never kidnapped--Rhosh skipped right over him, and took Lestat's father-figure Marius. Armand was certain that if Lestat went after Rhosh he'd be killed, that he'd "vanish into the same darkness that has swallowed Louis and Marius." Armand panicked, cuz if Marius & Louis & Lestat were all dead, who would Armand have? What "imitation of purpose" would he have?

The Elders were actually SCARED for Armand in BC, afraid that he'd try to kill himself again (a la Memnoch).

Armand was speaking from a place of panic & pain, clinging to Lestat as his last life raft. Cuz Lestat always represented a type of hope & inspiration for Armand. All old AF vamps need someone who can help them "Make Contact With The Age" and learn about the modern world from--cuz vampires are mimics & hungry ghosts who parasitically feed off of others. (Louis is an extremely modern vampire, even in the books, who becomes the Contact for Lestat AND Armand.)

Armand DESPERATELY wanted Lestat to be his Contact, but Lestat ALWAYS rejected him, knowing Armand was just a bottomless pit that could never be fulfilled.

But Armand's a psychopath who loves the chase (a la Devil's Minion), so in a way, Lestat's rejections kept Armand pushing forward. Lestat wanted Armand to learn how to stand on his own 2 feet. Lestat loves Armand like a little brother, and cares about his well-being, and sees the potential in Armand because he IS a powerful coven master with nerves of steel--he has what it takes to lead, but he insists on following Lestat--the "Fool for God."

Amadeo ("Beloved of God") worshipped Marius; if Les had let him, Armand would've worshipped him, too. Cuz they're White Jesus.

God Complex Lestat believed that all vamps are gods in & of themselves; who shouldn't feel the need to worship anyone, God or the Devil. They should all live like him, devil-may-care, middle finger & fist to the sky. He's always been a FIGHTER. And if there's one thing Lestat doesn't like in a companion, it's a simp effing doormat who never does anything to stimulate or excite him; who just lies on their back & takes anything & everything the world throws at them--no challenge or fight whatsoever. Armand never stood a chance; just like Sam said: "they're not really compatible in that way."

Louis had BITE to him--"there's the spark!" but ironically, Lestat's oppressive domineering behavior contributed to all the factors that chipped away at Louis' confidence, till he was literally broken in Ep5. Lou's 2x8 speech that he's ready to reclaim his agency & autonomy is a step in the right direction for Loustat as a couple, as they both learn to respect each other's individualism, without Les tryna force Lou to be the type of vampire HE thought was best; allowing Louis to (re)grow into his skin & not think it's a personal rejection of him if Lou decided to not follow Les's every effing word about vamps (which would become CRUCIAL in PLatRoA)--and Lou learning to not be so condescending & judgemental against Les's hedonistic impulses.

There is no way for Armand to ever ingratiate himself to Lestat, when he's ALWAYS looked to Lestat to tell him how to act & live & dress & behave. Lestat wants a partner/parent to love, NOT a child to raise. Louis was a fledgling whom Les barely even managed to teach how to be a vampire--but Louis never relied on Lestat to teach him how to be his own person. Louis was never looking for Lestat to be his effing father. But Armand's literally an orphan child who's been looking for a father-figure to teach him how to be a person, ever since he was kidnapped & sold into slavery as a human; and Marius left the kind of hole in Armand that no one ever filled--not Louis, not Daniel, not Benji or Sybelle. But Lestat looked into that hole, pointed & laughed, and said fill it yourself, or die.

So thank frikkin god Sam brought all this up: the dynamic b/t Lesmand isn't REALLY about Lestat at all. It's about how deeply Armand's been affected by Marius being GOD to him, and how Armand's suffered from abandonment issues & PTSD--that I'd argue are even WORSE than Lestat's.

[murfpersonalblog]

IWTV Musings - LDPDL & Nosferatu 2024 (Pt3: I Was Seen)

"Now look, with your Vampire Eyes."

--Lestat de Lioncourt, Interview with the Vampire (1994)

[murfpersonalblog]

IWTV S2 Musings - Tentative Timeline (Pt1b: 1940 - 1949) [OLD VERSION]

[The revised version is HERE]

I've been struggling with this for a while, cuz this ish just don't make sense, AMC. (I fully expect S3 to gotcha/retcon/fix stuff, esp. since who knows what Armand's tinkered around with in Louis' head.) I split this timeline in 2 parts: Pt1 has everything from 2x1 - 2x6ish; and then ofc Pt2 will cover as much as I can understand from the Trial's shenanigans.

My actual detailed breakdown of these dates is posted here:

(I'm just one person tryna figure out wtf is going on, so if y'all have any insights, please share!)

[murfpersonalblog]

I wanted to respond to this post & tags by @mdeitrick13, after I saw @fishjellylou's response here.

I HATE book!film!Louis. It's actually a very popular opinion, esp. wrt film!Louis--there's a lot to hate, without ever getting into morality politics--from his plethora of stupid life choices, to his hypocrisy, to his whiny attitude, etc. And wrt to pimps & slavery specifically, we can get into all the ways owning & controlling people's bodies, freedom, & autonomy/agency is effed up. But where exactly does LOUIS exhibit any of that behavior towards Armand--book, film, and esp. on the show??? 🤔

Almighty all-powerful all-gifted uber-privileged vamps can get away with literal murder: Lestat can spitefully beat the hell out of Lou, Armand can sadistically torture HUMAN!Daniel, the coven can gleefully kill Claudia & Madeleine (who literally did nothing), Armand can petulantly drive the mentally ill (Nicki & Louis) to suicide--but disenfranchised weak AF desperate HUMAN!Black Louis is "worse" than all of the vamps, cuz he was a pimp who tried navigating the crap hand he'd been dealt the most effective way he could? 🤨🤨🤨

What did Louis do as a human pimp that makes him so much "worse" as a person than Armand is? Since when does AMC/the show or Lou absolve himself of guilt for being a pimp OR a vampire? In Lou's eyes, evil is evil, and he doesn't give vampires a pass AT ALL--eff all the "biological imperatives" Rashid was simpering about. Since when are demonic serial killing cannibals given a pass in the IWTV Morality Olympics, over prostitution? Cuz prostitution & vampirism BOTH exploit human vulnerability & weakness & bodies, and by the show's logic, one is no better or worse than the other--ALL vampires on this show are COMPLICIT as predators feeding off the lives & miseries of humans. Santiago only used the stupid "vampires are monsters" excuse to justify his personally-motivated vendetta to kill Louis, dismissing Lou's experiences to absolve Lestat's flagrant abuse of power against the man he claimed to love whom he knew was weaker than him and thus intentionally "broke."

The whole point of show!Loumand's dynamic is right here:

ARMAND, the 400+ year old Coven Master, stalked & approached & invited & courted LOUIS. Louis never spoke or utilized his past as a pimp when they met. Armand knew Louis was afraid of him ("I thought he was going to kill me....I sensed his ancient power"), and he promised Louis (who'd suffered from SEVERE PTSD after the last older more powerful vampire broke every bone in his body), that he would never hurt Louis, "and I never have," LOL.

In ANY of Loumand's courtship, where does Louis having formerly been a pimp give him ANY advantage over Armand, or the coven? 🤔

Where does pimp!Louis factor in as the "gross" part of their meeting & courtship--when Lou explicitly told Armand & the whole coven that they were NOT companions, and that he had ZERO interest in Armand tryna RECRUIT Louis to join Armand's coven (*cough* CULT *cough*)? 🤔 Who's pimping whom in this situationship? 🤔

Esp. since Claudia's the one who was actually recruited, to try to lure LOUIS in as the one they REALLY wanted to join, so offended when Lou refused ("[Madeleine] must join or die."). They used the same Charles Manson-style cult tactics on Claudia AND Louis!

Rolin explicitly used Charles Manson music in 1x5, but y'all keep missing the links between Lestat & Armand's treatment of Louis & Claudia to talk about how Armand was groomed & abused--by WHOM?! Certainly not LOUIS! And here the tags go AGAIN tryna link Louis with Marius. 🤦‍♀️ (I cannot WAIT till y'all show-onlies actually see Marius in action, not just picking up crap from hearsay.)

Where is Louis the predator out to harm Armand? How is Armand the one being "grossly" threatened by Lou, pimp or otherwise? When did Louis rape Armand, or pimp him out, or "donate" him to someone else? For all Louis' claims that "he's mine" cuz Lou got to top someone who's not his Maker, how does Louis actually come out on top or benefit, being with Armand? 🤔

For all Armand's simpering about "Are you asking me or making me, Maitre?," where does Louis FORCE Armand to do ANYTHING? Louis states what he wants to do/happen (make Madeleine for Claudia; save Daniel from Armand killing him), and Lou gives Armand the CHOICE to do it it or not. Armand could've had the whole coven descend on Lou the night Lou made Madeleine (as we see in the movie, which clearly noticed the same thing)--instead, we learn that he was actually writing/rehearsing the Trial script the whole time jfc 💀💀💀. He could've snapped Daniel's neck, and what could crispety!Lou have done to stop him, hobbling around all burnt up? But he complies, cuz he'd already sabotaged Loustat's chance to get back together by not telling Lou that Les said he loved him; instead CHOOSING to stay with the man who literally just said he's bored & hates being with Armand & literally just tried to kill himself rather than be with Armand anymore--like WTF???? But ARMAND'S the one who's been in danger from Louis!? 🤣 THIS dude!?

OK, Lou was a pimp, but Armand was running the frikkin vampire MOB in Paris--a literal biker gang of Charles Manson sickos! An effing wet room full of offed "heretics and rule breakers" (inc NICKI, who was NEITHER--SUS!!!) buried in the frikkin walls of his torture-basement, but Lou's "worse" for being a HUMAN!hustler, when Armand's a whole cult-leading mobster his effing self!?

On top of the legit torture we see him do to HUMAN!Daniel, playing with his effing food worse than anything we saw Lestat pull in S1.

(x x x x x)

How does Lou having been a pimp protect him from Armand lying about "Banishment," or having his mind wiped for 77 years, or Armand going behind Lou's back to tear out Claudia's diary pages Lou didn't even know about, or Armand throwing Daniel (& Sam & the Talamasca) under the bus to keep gaslighting Lou about the script?

Where does Louis abuse Armand's trust, lying to control Armand's actions? When has Lou hobbled Armand's bodily autonomy, and the thing Armand can(not) physically do? When did Lou donate Armand to other people? Or act outside of Armand's boundaries/consent?)

The whole point of IWTV is to emphasize LOUIS' vulnerability, and how it's constantly exploited & abused by people more powerful than he is--from humans in NOLA & Romania/Eastern Europe, to vampires in Paris, and especially Lestat.

Armand knew immediately that Louis & Claudia were lying about Bruce being their Maker, cuz he's THE best vampire with the Mind Gift. He knew EVERYTHING, and told Louis to his face in 2x2 that Louis's a terrible liar who can't hide anything or keep secrets from him--just like the last older more powerful vampire read Louis' thoughts & used them to seduce him; "Come to me, Louis."

Armand & the whole coven were Europeans who'd never even met an American vamp before--but they knew Louis was a pimp from New Orleans with a whole failed sugar plantation--cuz they they read his mind; what Claudia explicitly called "invaded their thoughts." Santiago called them BOTH out in 2x3 (more subtly with Claudia but straight up explicitly with Louis, as someone whose mind they could all read way easier than hers).

It especially confuses me when show fans complain all about pimp!Louis being with Armand on the show; but make no noise about slaveowner!Louis being with Armand in the books? (Or they're against pedo!Marius being with Armand, but make no noise about pedo!Lestat being with Armand? Let alone Daniel (who, unlike Marius & Lestat, is NOT an Old World European vamp from a different time period with different morals/ethics), or any adult attracted to a 17 year old's body--including book!Louis?) People have shipped Loumand for decades, yet it's only once Lou's a pimp (amongst other things....) that people suddenly care about poor innocent Armand being abused by the evil thug jezebel who got Armand's daughter killed and lied to Armand about his Maker and allowed Armand to be tortured & humiliated by the public with his ankles slashed open & buried alive for over a MONTH so he couldn't escape? 🙄😒

The Vampire Armand is only ever beaten TWICE: by Santino & the Children of Satan in the books, and by Daniel on the show. That is IT. NO ONE else gets the jump on Armand, or gets the upper hand over him--he's not even one of the ones Rhoshamandes kidnaps! NO ONE effs with TVA, or effs TVA over--HE'S the boogeyman of the vampires preying on his own kind, not the other way around.

The sheer IRONY of Mr. "I Could Not Prevent It" Armand as a character is understanding cycles of violence.

You're missing the whole point of AR/RJ putting the former sex slave Armand in relationships with a slaveowner (book) or a pimp (show). It's about realizing how a former sex slave (kidnapped & trafficked overseas to be tortured so bad that his PTSD gave him amnesia) became a powerful vampire with THEE strongest Mind/Spell Gift powers, leading entire covens/cults purging ALL fledglings in their territories who resisted--thus perpetuating SYSTEMIC & INSTITUTIONALIZED ABUSE.

Armand used & abused Claudia's naivety & Louis' trust in him, cuz he lulls victims into a false sense of security before the trap springs open--"NO PAIN."

AR put Loumand together NOT to make a point about how "gross" it was that slaveowner!Louis was taking advantage of former sex slave Armand. It's about how effing ironic and SAD it is that Armand (the one who IMO experienced THE WORST horrors as a victim of abuse in all of TVC) was now the ONLY one in a position of power to PREVENT things that happened to him from happening to anyone else--and did NOTHING. Or rather: he made already bad situations even WORSE.

Armand weaponizes his past to destroy other peoples' futures, victimizing & harassing & abusing everyone as the Coven Master of that EFFED UP coven. He CLAIMS he cannot prevent bad things from happening, flashing 🥺 all day--only for us to find out that behind the scenes, this mofo was a master manipulator who gaslit & schemed against his lover Louis ("alright, I sold him out"), tricked & abused his frenemy Lestat, mutilated Claudia's body and hid the evidence (I PRAY that ghost!Claudia reveals that the Frankenstein scene from TVA happened), and psychologically tortured his human/fledgling Daniel.

Armand was originally intended to be the main villain of TVC, all the way up until the 3rd book, when AR softened Armand's edges & gave it to Akasha in QotD, and Rhosh in the PL Trilogy. ALL of AR's vamps are sympathetic villains, not cuz one is morally/ethically "better or worse" than the other--arguments have been made even to understand Rhoshamandes & Akasha's perspectives. YES, Armand had horrible things happen to him--but LOUIS is NEVER the one who does those horrible things to him, nor does he EVER benefit from Armand's past. Armand ALWAYS had the advantage over Louis, pimp or no. STOP overestimating the Maitre stupidness! AMC already told y'all what that was about!

But y'all pointedly isolate every other vamp from culpability & accountability under the thinly-veiled guise of caring so much about the freedom/autonomy of people's bodies, when really it only serves to spread hate & vitriol for Louis. All I'm seeing in this fandom is the "GROSS" inequity of how Louis is treated & talked about, versus everyone else, and it's fishy AF.

[nightcolorz]

I hope that whenever amc iwtv introduces Marius and they have the plot line where Marius and Armand reunite, their dynamic isn’t openly hostile or openly loving, or overly intense or dramatized. I rlly want it to be the way it was in the books from queen of the damned to the vampire Armand (hopefully with more depth explored), where Armand is very polite but very distant when he interacts with Marius, and admits that the reason he can’t seem to interact with him in in anyway beyond impersonal but polite small talk is bcus hes scared of him but doesn’t understand why, and he fears that if he tries to rebuild his relationship with Marius he will become subservient and consumed by him again. And like!!! Ugh!!! That awkward politeness masking a history of abuse and those deep seated feelings of betrayal and fear feels so authentic. Usually interacting with a past abuser (especially in cases like Armand’s where said past abuser is functionally a family member to him who he is expected to have a cordial relationship with), doesn’t include big displays of emotion or confrontation. It’s so real that for Armand it’s just, Marius kisses him on the cheek and it makes him uncomfortable, Armand smiles at him and tells him about his day, Marius tries to invite Armand to his house, Armand doesn’t understand why he feels so repulsed by the prospect, etc. under the right writer that dynamic could be so interesting and complex and say sm about like real, complicated abusive dynamics, so I have high high hopes and rlly hope amc doesn’t screw it up by overdramatizing it lol

[murfpersonalblog]

IWTV Musings - Can vampires LEARN new Dark Gifts?

YES.

And NO.

Three things affect a vamp's Gifts: Time, Blood, & Akasha. ALL vampires have the ability to unlock ALL of the Dark Gifts as they age & drink & get stronger & practice. No one vampire is born with the ability to do things no other vampire can do, that's not how it works. Vampires are superhuman, and preternaturally strong & powerful, even at base level as bb!fledglings. For instance: mere minutes after she was Turned, Lestat's mother Gabrielle was able to shatter glass just with her voice (just as we see AMC!Claudia do); it's basic.

However, some vamps CAN be born naturally more adept at using the Gifts from the offset. Gabrielle's vampiric senses & instincts seemed to be naturally sharper than Lestat's:

And she needed ZERO direction figuring out how to scale walls (anti-gravity)--nothing but sheer youth/age kept her from the Cloud Gift.

A BAMF, AMC!Claudia seems to be teaching herself how to use the Cloud Gift--or at least anti-gravity (OG!Superman could only leap tall buildings in a single bound b4 DC said eff it and let him fly).

Ofc she has the potential for the Cloud Gift already, cuz AMC!Lestat already had it. book!Les didn't learn the Cloud Gift until QotD, after he drank copiously from Akasha. But book!Claudia never stood a chance--book!Les didn't have it yet to pass it down to her.

Another good example's Armand, who is THE best vamp with the Spell & Mind Gifts--a naturally talented savant; a child prodigy.

That's not to say that there aren't other skilled & powerful vamps who're really good at the Mind/Spell Gifts. It's just that from very early on, Armand was uncommonly good at it, and he just honed that talent over time, quicker than other vamps do.

But the Mind Gift is also THE default ability of vampires. Even basic AF young bb!fledglings can use it; and with practice, they can all get good at it--but most don't live long enough to get that good.

But several things CAN hold a vampire back from getting stronger/better with the Dark Gifts--I've explained wtf Rhosh was up to b4.

As bad as Magnus was, he had NOTHING on Rhoshamandes (who deliberately didn't WANT his fledglings to know anything about their Gifts). Magnus was suicidal, and in a hurry to to die, so he told Lestat the barest of bones, but nothing more, then offed himself.

Cuz yes, even BEFORE book!Lestat met Armand & Marius/Akasha, he was ALREADY abnormally gifted (10x stronger than a fledgling his age)--cuz Magnus was old & strong AF thanks to having the blood of old AF Rhoshamandes (via Benedict).

But book!Louis was weak AF, and the WORST with the Mind Gift. AMC!Louis' below average with it, as Armand warned him in 2x2 that he's garbage at blocking his thoughts. But book!Louis couldn't use the Mind Gift AT ALL, he's shockingly bad.

But it's not that book!film!Louis could NEVER be taught how to use the Mind Gift--but Lestat certainly didn't know HOW to teach Louis, or connect with him on a level that could ease Louis into vampirism more considerately. He was a pisspoor teacher for Louis (but not for Claudia, who was more similar to Les & thrived under him--at first).

However, the fact that Lou was habitually starving himself meant he'd stunted his own growth--he CAN'T get stronger/better, cuz his body's too frail by design. Vamps need time, practice, and esp. HUMAN BLOOD, to feed the power within them. book!Lou never did; despite how old he got, it was only once he drank Lestat's super!Akasha!blood in Merrick that he finally unlocked all of the Gifts instantly, in one fell swoop, inc. the Fire Gift. Despite how weak & starved he was, the second Lou got access to Akasha's super!blood thru Les, he was off like a shot. (And I'd bet Monopoly money that if book!Claudia had drunk from Akasha, she'd have every Gift, too.) Speaking of--

Conversely, let's look at Akasha. According to Marius, it took her FOREVER to get the Fire Gift--several millennia. As strong as she was in Egypt, she was still young, and still developing, too. Khayman's Akasha =/=Marius' Akasha =/= Lestat's Akasha. She naturally got stronger & stronger with time.

Back in Egypt, Akasha had to use the Mind Gift (telekinesis) to lift oil lamps that were already lit, and throw them at people.

~500yrs later, Marius saw her kill Eudoxia just by lighting the wench on fire from thin air; with the Fire Gift (pyrokinesis). So it took Akasha thousands of years to acquire the Fire Gift.

But Akasha already had it in her--"lain dormant for centuries." Same as it lay dormant in Marius--he didn't even know he had the Fire Gift, or that it was even a thing--the first time he used it was an accident/surprise, when he was already ~500yrs old & fought Eudoxia's goons.

One could argue that mere time had given Marius the Fire Gift--and his Maker Teskhamen was old AF, strong enough to have survived the Great Burnings, so that was another bonus. BUT! Marius had drunk lots of Akasha's blood MORE RECENTLY than ANY of the Elders did. Her blood was aging while he alone had her, so as Marius drank, he gained access to older/better blood than the Elders before him. He was at the best advantage to get stronger quicker. Marius was better at every Dark Gift than the vampires FAR older than he was (Avicus was just as old as Teskhamen).

With the Killing Gift, Marius could make bodies literally explode. But Avicus, the eldest, could only give them a fatal aneurysm to make their brain bleed out. Mael could only cripple bodies, not kill them.

But the Fire Gift was something ONLY Marius could do, that the other vamps couldn't, younger or older.

Drinking Akasha's blood is vamp steroids, crack, Aim Bot, hax mode, deus ex machina, cutting the line, copying off the smart kid in class. But drinking from old AF vamps can also grant significant boosts. The Children of the Millennia begged book!Lou to take their ancient blood, to help him get strong pre-Merrick; but he always declined. We know from the Tulane drafts that he never drank book!Les' blood, or vice versa. And presumably, he never drank Armand's blood either. (I have reservations/doubts abt whether AMC!Loumand drank e/o's blood, but I'll talk about that in a separate post.) As for Lesmand....

We'll have to wait for S3 to confirm if 2x3 was bullsh!te or not. AMC!Lestat drank Armand blood (and presumably gained the power boost needed to get the Fire/Mind Gifts Armand then taught him to use), but this never happened in the books. book!Les already had the Mind Gift--he was able to read Eleni's mind and know she wanted Renaud's Theatre, which he told her take & run with Nicki. And in QotD Les said he used the Mind Gift "in the first few weeks after Magnus had made me" to telekinetically punch Nicki during one of their fights.

book!Armand drank LES' blood when they fought and Les kicked his arse, but he never drank from Armand in TVL, or asked him about the Mind/Fire Gift. It was Armand's strength that surprised Les--

--mostly cuz Les wondered if he was just as strong as Armand. Les had no idea what his powers were. Cuz barring extreme cases like using the Fire Gift while your life's in danger, vamps don't KNOW the Gifts that are out there, to even know to learn/practice with them--just like Everard said: Rhosh never told the de Landen Coven about the Dark Gifts, and he was 1000+ years old when he learned about them by reading TVL. Knowledge is power, and if you don't even know what your baseline is, how can you ever know your limits/potential?

The most valuable thing book!Armand taught Lestat (and Louis) was information. KNOWLEDGE about the past. NOT about Dark Gifts.

Louis took Armand's word that there was no living vamp older than Armand (proof that God didn't exist), but Lestat took Armand's word that Marius was NOT a fake legend, and went looking for proof on his own.

But AMC!Armand teaches Lestat & Louis VERY important Dark Gifts, which changes their dynamics significantly (I'll make a separate post all about that).

So yeah, I just wanted to think out loud & mull over whether dogs really can learn new tricks or not.

[lesbians4armand]

i love the amount of narrative haunting that happens in iwtv. like yeah claudia is haunting the narrative and louis is haunted by the narrative. but i want to talk about how fucked up it is when the ghost is right there in the room because you cant tell me that that narrative isnt being violently haunted by amadeo of venice he is screaming and tearing at the bars of his cage but he cant do anything because armand is stood there like 🫥 the entire time. the ghost is there in the room inside armand but he is haunting like no one’s business, he’s in ever movement and flinch and flash of anger and touch and the painting on the wall and the sun outside. but hes not really there

[ipadhannibal]

Devil's Minion and fears of abandonment after Daniel's turning

I think that the concept script of the Devil's Minion reunion after they've broken up really demonstrates a lot of the issues that led them to this point.

So, Daniel saw vampirism as both a way to live forever with Armand and as proof of his commitment to him. Armand saw it as a curse and as killing Daniel. These differences made them have terrible fights, solidified Daniel's fears that he was a mortal toy that would be abandoned once he died, and solidified Armand's fears that Daniel would abandon and resent him once he got what he wanted. And crucially, these misconceptions were never resolved before Daniel was turned.

When they reunite, Daniel specifically says that "A child made me that refuses to make blooddrinkers, I have no maker". The one person who saw Armand as more than his youthful appearance (a great insect, a thoughtful young man, both handsome and terrible) is now referring to him as a child - because this is Daniel saying that he's no longer a mortal toy, but an immortal equal. This wording is also cutting to both Armand's insecurities about his age and his fears about Daniel becoming disillusioned with him. Plus, it's Daniel lashing out that Armand never wanted to make him a vampire (or in Daniel's mind, never truly loved him as an equal).

"I know. It was as you said. You loved me mortal". The "easy cleft of [Daniel's] mortality" is replaced by Armand's dark blood, making Daniel a man the same as Armand. Daniel can no longer show the joy of sexual desire to Armand through his mortality, nor can he be 'penetrated' through Armand reading his thoughts. Again, by making him his equal, Armand has seemingly lost both desire and interest in Daniel.

Armand then kisses him - he's used to exchanging sexual acts for love and wants to communicate that he does still love Daniel as a vampire. But of course, the sexual desire isn't the actual crux of the issue, but the fear of abandonment, which Armand has actually made worse by leaving Daniel alone.

Daniel tells him to leave and explains how he went with the other vampires instead of to Night Island because Armand "gave it over to mortal hands and left us" . Armand seemingly gave away their love (Night Island) to other mortals once Daniel was turned, and gave Daniel over to other vampires instead of keeping him himself. And! Daniel isn't running away and waiting for Armand to bring him home this time - he's staying put and telling Armand to leave him. The rules of their 'chase', where Daniel runs and Armand follows, have been disrupted now that Daniel is also a vampire.

Daniel was attracted to Armand's immortality just as Armand was attracted to Daniel's mortality. Ironically, now that they are on a more even playing ground, they fear the other has lost interest. Without the dynamic of push and pull or the chase, their relationship becomes stagnated instead of adapting - and eventually fizzles out.

Or, tldr: "I love you." "Are you certain?"

[what-shitfuckery-is-this-ew]

i think there's an interesting contrast between the show Claudias and movie Claudia in terms of age and perspective.

Basically with movie Claudia, Kirsten Dunst is a child, so when she stands next to Madeleine and generally exists, we tend to see her how the world sees her. She is a child doll.

But with the show Claudia, not only did they age her up (from 10 to 14), she's also played by 2 adults. This means that Claudia's costuming effects our perception of her age. A lot of the earlier parts of the show she looked younger because she was wearing children's fashion. When she wore the flapper dress, it looked big on her almost like a child wearing her mothers clothes. But as she grew, her clothing became more mature and well-fitted, and she ages through this (aka when she meets Bruce she's wearing something akin to high schoolers with the varsity style jacket, making her look more like an older teen, then later while scheming she wears clothes expected of a young adult, then later a middle aged woman). We began to see her how she saw herself.

That was until the Coven. She's pushed back into children's clothes with a "baby" or pastel colour scheme. Every now and then she wears a super saturated colour, typically when she's with Madeline but it tends to be paired with quite childish accessories. She's been infantilised once again.

While i think the movie is better able to juxtaposes Claudia's child body with her adult desires to craft audience discomfort and represent her entrapment as a result of having her played by a child, the show better represents Claudia's view of her own entrapment, how she felt like she was so close to escaping and freeing herself only to be pulled back into hell.

[murfpersonalblog]

I have to interject. I don't want to be rude or nasty, I really want to get to the bottom of this.

How is it not gender essentialism to say that men who wear dresses are inherently the female-coded ones? Regardless of their actual behavior, while clothed in and outside of said dress?

Isn't it sexist & homophobic to attack people for insisting that gender is MORE than clothes & hair?

YES, clothes are fundamentally important for signalling one's adherence (or RESISTANCE) to gender norms. But it's funny how y'all hyperfocus on the Mardi Gras outfit Lestat wore in 1x7 when he ate the baby--a public COSTUME Lestat barely even wore once (which was mostly an ANDROGYNOUS gender NEUTRAL skort, not even a full skirt, as he was still wearing his suit--the gender-flexible king/queen of Mardi Gras--a holiday all about flipping social norms upside down!); while never engaging with the Matador/Killer pajamas & wifebeaters Lestat REGULARLY lounged around in AT HOME when he choked his child & "broke" his spouse in 1x5 (X X).

It is sexist & downright misogynist to reduce wearing dresses to embodying femininity & womanhood, when sometimes it is an expression of societal RESISTANCE for men & women to crossdress--a POWER move. As if everything about being a woman (or being female-[coded) solely boils down to the clothes we wear. I'm a cis woman, and I wear pants & sneakers everyday--AIN'T I A WOMAN?

This is ESPECIALLY nefarious when so much on the convo contrasts Lestat's campiness to Louis as a masculine thug/pimp/boss/etc--as if LESTAT didn't own that whorehouse (which Louis bought from HIM & Tom Anderson); as if they weren't BOTH rocking suits all of S1; and as if they weren't BOTH dressed in COSTUMES at Mardi Gras. Even Lestat in the S3 promo/teaser is PERFORMING--y'all know wtf a STAGE PERSONA is; why're people being so effing OBTUSE?

Lestat PLAYS with gender; it's all a GAME to him. He can do what he wants!

Gender's ALSO expressed in BEHAVIOR, SOCIAL DYNAMICS, & HIERARCHICAL POWER. That's FAR more serious than a silly holiday costume.

Yes, Caroll Cutshall said Lestat's Mardi Gras costume exuded both feminine AND masculine energy. But she also talks very candidly about the VISUAL HIERARCHY OF POWER that clothes ALSO represent--particularly for characters with power over LOUIS.

The same way it doesn't matter what roleplays Loumand had in S2 wrt Maitre/Arun ("Maitre only when it's hot or convenient"); we have the same power imbalance between Loustat in S1, as it doesn't matter how many dresses Lestat wears, or how much he bends gender norms--he'll ALWAYS be the one on top of Louis in the pyramidal power structure. "It's not as simple as choosing a new family configuration. Now I'm your cousin; now I'm your aunt--I am your Maker!"

@the-vagabond-angel SAY THAT SHIT RYAN like not only was it sexist bc that implies that only women clean the house but also it’s like trying to make the who’s the man and who’s the woman question seem deep and profound when it’s rlly weird like why are we trying to make their relationship appear hetero they’re gay @nightcolorz EXACTLY ITS SO HOMOPHOBIC

It's not about saying that all women are housewives, or that all housewives are women--it's about the what the GENDER ROLE reflects about the conditions under which Loustat lived together & apart in NOLA--the EXPECTATIONS Lestat put on Louis & their relationship; and the ways Louis either conformed or contradicted those expectations--LEAVING Lestat alone in 1x3, 1x7, and 2x8. It's about LESTAT'S abandonment issues, and creating Louis as an eternal companion to save him from the curse of vampire loneliness.

No one is saying that mothers can't dominate & terrorize their households. But you cant pretend that Lestat represents the problematic mother--the Medea or Clytemnestra--when he's been projecting nothing but Agamemnon & Jason this whole time. XD

Anne Rice said VERY explicitly that she is LOUIS. SHE self-inserted herself as Louis to represent HER EXPERIENCES AS A MOTHER.

Lestat represents the power & autonomy she RECLAIMED once she'd processed her grief & depression over her daughter dying; and the complicated feelings she had about her husband Stan--she originally named Lestat LESTAN--the T was a TYPO that got stuck in post. Lestat was her husband, and she was Louis.

Sure, we can (& SHOULD) discuss AR's complicated/problematic approach to gender, both IRL and in TVL, but it is NOT homophobic/sexist/etc to point out the whys and hows of Louis & Lestat as conceptual frameworks for telling a story about a mother's grief.

@kaleidoscope-vol2 They are still doing this now. It's super weird people want to put these characters into heteronormative boxes and also believe mothers are never abusive in real life. People have lost their damn minds.

It's not about not seeing Lestat as a contradiction of mothers who are never abusive (which is a fundamentally stupid thing to assume, since we literally see the ways that both Florence (& Gabrielle!) emotionally abuse/neglect/manipulate her sons. And then there's Akasha, the MOTHER of ALL vampires, who's the literal worst).

It's about understanding the parallels/cycles of abuse that are perpetuated by BOTH of the characters, both on each other, and on Claudia:

Louis as the "emotionally vacant" parent who neglects his spouse & child to wallow in disassociative misery as the "unhappy housewife--" and appellation which Louis NEVER denies or rejects, mind you. It's not about what Louis IS--it's about what Louis FEELS; about how HE thinks he's being treated by other people; and what he thinks that makes him: "Who are you, Louis? If there were no me, if there was no him?" Cuz Louis "carries him in HERE!," in his heart/mind. Louis even became more & more like Lestat, ultimately chokeholding Claudia EXACTLY THE SAME WAY HIS FATHER/MAKER TREATED HIM AND HIS DAUGHTER.

Lestat as the physically abusive patriarch who treats his spouse & child EXACTLY THE SAME WAY HIS FATHER TREATED HIM AND HIS MOTHER. Even in the books, without the raw brutality of Ep5, we see how Lestat terrorized his fledglings--and the books explicitly put Marquis de Lioncourt IN LOUIS' HOUSE. Lestat's father LIVES with them, front and center, as the physical manifestation of the ways that Lestat literally CARRIED his father with him!

Neither the show nor us as fans are ignorant or ignoring the ways Louis is an abusive spouse & parent, but you're talking apples & oranges to delude yourselves into thinking Loustat's household represents anything BUT a bastardization of the traditional nuclear family they were trying so hard to mimic--pretending to be normal humans, pretending to be a normal family, when they ARE different, and they (gay vampires) CANNOT fit into societal molds & mores--that's the TRAGEDY of The Unholy Family! Cuz Louis DID try to be heteronormative--INTERNALIZED homophobia!

Folk are more interested in hyperfocusing on Lestat, tee-heeing at his c*nty camp yaasification; rather than listening to what Louis the Liar™ has to say about HIS pain & suffering at the hands of the man he loved the most.

Engage with the show past the surface level, and realize that CLOTHES are just PART of the ENSEMBLE of the socially dictated ways that power dynamics & imbalances are expressed on this show--even amongst gay men.

Remember b4 iwtv s2 dropped u would get crucified by the fandom if u said that lestat was gender none confirming bcus apparently abusive ppl can only be masculine? Even tho said embodiment of masculinity and patriarchal gender roles literally cross dresses and does drag like, in canon. What the fuck was that 😭😭. And apparently Louis is the submissive bottom exclusively bcus he cleans the house? And that’s progressive apparently? 😭 to suggest that Louis is “woman coded” bcus he gets beaten by his partner and does house chores?? I’m just glad the fandoms a little better now bcus oh my god 😭😭 what the fuck

[murfpersonalblog]

"I agree that Lestat had nothing to do with [Paul's death] directly. However, if we remember that episode, Paul was like: 'That man is a devil, he got into my head!' And my whole thing was, I mean Lestat did get into his head.... I don't believe Lestat pushed him to do what he did? But obviously Paul was very mentally ill. That, mixed with him being hyper-religious and hyper-Christian, I feel like that intrusion of Lestat into his mind? Maybe it made him feel like his temple was unclean, or it made him feel like the devil got into my head and now I am soiled now I am bad. And it probably pushed him to do that. So I don't believe Lestat did do that to [Louis'] brother. But I think [Lestat's] intrusion into [Paul's] brain probably played a role in him doing that, so I'm glad they spoke on it here."

WOW | Interview With The Vampire 1x6 | Reaction & Commentary - FrankFreezy (23:23 - 24:37)

I LOVE this so much.

Cuz it goes back to what I was saying here: Louis has ALWAYS loved Lestat--beyond reason, religion, family, himself, Claudia AND Paul combined. I HATE when people act like Louis never loved Lestat, or never showed Lestat how much he loved him. Pay attention, y'all!

IWTV S2 Ep8 Musings - LDPDL: Burning Questions (Pt2)

EVERYONE called Lestat the Devil. Louis KNEW what Lestat did to Paul--both at the family dinner, and what Paul said later on the roof. He knew it was all true, cuz he'd seen it with his own eyes, and he'd FELT the same way--Louis felt unclean & soiled & bad, and RAN out of 1132 after they had sex the first time; and RAN to the confessional screaming "HELP ME, Father, he's in my head!" after Paul died.

But the gothic horror/romance is that despite seeing Les at his absolute worst, killing all those priests like an utter demon, LOU CHOSE LESTAT ANYWAY. And it's been (literally) KILLING him ever since. "I run to bad beds!" His 128+ dead men in SanFran are all Les!

It's why I love Ep5, as it's just more of the same: seeing Lestat at his worst and Lou STILL loving the monster AND the man in Ep6 (my fave episode in the whole series so far). Seeing Les try to kill Claudia in 1x7 and STILL mourning him all the way into 2x7.

There's A LOT of Les' trash Lou settles for & accepts, inc. even the suspicion that Les ad something to do with Paul's death; inc. Les abusing both him & Claudia. It's not until Les SPAT on Lou's love before a whole crowd of lynchers with "Come to Me" that the last straw broke how much Louis could forgive, cuz "Come to Me/Viens a moi" was when Les got into LOUIS' head and drove HIM to death (vampirism) too, literally in 1x1 & figuratively in 1x6.

The fandom doesn't talk about the dubcon/noncon/mind-rape of the Come to Me/church scene as much as we should, and how much of a violation it was for Les to be barging all up in Lou's head the way he was, while Lou was literally suffering an entire grief-triggered drunken suicidal mental breakdown. Lou's POV makes it seem more like lethal assault (I'm being mortally hunted; my life/soul's in danger by the white Devil). But Lestat/the script acknowledged the predatory nature of Come to Me during the Trial, when Les flipped it to make it seem like Lou had (sexually) assaulted HIM instead (my purity/chastity's in danger by the Black pimp).

This violation of their relationship is IT for Louis ("those were HIS words! F**k you!"). Their history is sullied, Lou's name & reputation (personhood) is dragged through the mud & soiled. ("I was dead.") With Claudia dead and Les betraying them by participating in the rigged Trial, Lou was able to believe Armand's weak AF lies for 77 years ("bad beds"); and sacrifice his love/marriage, "kill" Les & get divorced (Lou's most non-Catholic move of all, LOL) for good.

Les had ONE chance to be honest about the Trial (the 2x8 Tower Scene) & totally blew it by letting Armand get away with "Banishment." It all comes home (literally, in NOLA), when Lou finally stops running AWAY from uncomfortable truths, and asks the burning questions about Les that REALLY define their relationship.

Cuz it's not really about the Trial, or even Claudia; it's about Paul, the catalyst for Louis' entire arc--she was just the final/ultimate casualty. Everyone important in Lou's life has just been another replacement for Paul, "I loved him more than anyone on earth." All the people he had sit & TALK to him--Lily, Lestat, Claudia, Daniel, even Armand (to an extent), are all just Lou looking for Paul--understanding, acceptance, and love--i.e.: his companion. Someone he can confide all his secrets in, who won't judge/condemn him, and who'll accept & love him for who he is.

Sam said Les is Lou's "soulmate." Even though his heinous antics constantly proved Paul RIGHT, Lou also loved when Les put in the effort to prove Paul WRONG--he CAN behave & act like a human & charm the absolute pants off of Louis by just sitting on a park bench or sofa & TALKING to Louis; CONNECTING with Louis on a deeper level than even sex (which Lou already said is the best he's EVER had--and ya boi got around in the 70s-2000!).

But Les can also match Louis' freak; show his fangs, and be an utter monster Lou ALSO loves; cuz there's something dark in Louis too, that Jacob said "needs friction."

I said before that actual saints like Jonah & Paul are way too nice for Louis; too good & pure for this world. Lou LIKES Bad Boys; he likes men who're effed up & broken, cuz it makes HIM feel like he's not alone--HE'S not so bad after all. Vamps are just crabs in a bucket, and Lou's own hyper-Catholic brain treats it as a form of punishment, that he "deserves" effed up devils like Les & Armand. Beaten down all his life, and hating himself, full of self-loathing, Lou never knew his own worth--"let's meet vampires WORTHY of your love!" In 1x5 Lou stopped putting in the effort to take care of himself & their family/household ("ignoring all other duties of the role Claudia once mocked me for: the unhappy housewife"), and stopped confronting Lestat about his BS ("He treats us like sh*t and you take it! Why is that?!"). He's about to burn Les alive in 2x8, then just visibly gives up (puts the fire out), to "kill" Les by marrying Armand (who he's not even in love with, and who KNOWS Lou's only with him to spite Les) before the ink on Loustat's divorce papers are even dry.

It's only after Daniel FINALLY helps Louis claw his way out of Armand's clutches that he understands what Claudia meant about him having never known or loved himself ("Who are you, Louis?"). Lou's TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION required that he work on bettering himself, and allowing Lestat the chance to better himself too. That "friction" was toxic AF, and they both needed a real CLEANSING, which only started when Lou opened his mouth to ask Les the truth (the false-start in 1x6 about Paul; and the real-start in 2x8 about Armand).

So yeah, I love what Frank said, cuz IMO people in the fandom miss a lot of the horrible things Les does INDIRECTLY, in order to forgive the horrible things Les does DIRECTLY--just like Louis did. But just like Louis, it's possible (& totally valid) to love the man while acknowledging the ways he IS a monster, who needs to come clean & be honest, and start taking accountability for the ways he (in)directly contributed to both Louis & Claudia (& Paul's) demise.

[sizeofyoursoul]

Interesting Vampire Chronicles vampire traits (that are either changed, not clarified, or not yet mentioned in IWTV on AMC)

Vampires enter a "death sleep" uncontrollably at sun rise and wake at sunset. They have no control over when they sleep, and if they are awake when the sun rises, they will fall asleep abruptly even if standing up (as seen in PL: RoA).

What time they wake up depends somewhat on age but also just varies from vampire to vampire: Lestat mentions he has always been a fairly early riser, since he usually gets to see twilight before it is completely dark outside.

Vampires gradually transform over the years from a human corpse to something closer to a pure vampire: a young vampire will die quickly in the sun but will leave a body, a middle aged vampire will turn to dust in the sun, and an ancient vampire can survive sun exposure up to a certain point.

Vampires generally cannot see ghosts, even if they had the ability to see ghosts as humans.

Vampire skin looks profoundly non-human, and is generally the largest obstacle to them passing for human. In the intro to Interview with the Vampire, it is the first thing about Louis that makes Daniel believe he is a vampire. In vampires who had paler skin as humans, it is white. In vampires who had darker skin as humans, it is golden. Some ancient vampires strategically burn themselves in the sun to appear more human.

Vampire blood gets thicker the older the vampire is.

Vampires usually hate the feeling of flying, because it feels unnatural.

When a vampire drinks from a human, they experience a huge amount of the human's memories. This is mentioned in the show, but is a more heavily emphasized aspect in the books.

When vampires drink human blood, it makes them appear more and more human, and overindulging in blood can make them appear almost fully human. Vampires are also physically hot to the touch after drinking human blood, and gradually get cold the longer it has been since they last drank.

Vampire blood, when consumed by humans, is somewhat hallucinogenic and addictive.