#lestat being more self-aware than his fans.. wild

[dwreader]

Actual incidents in the book that are in dispute btwn Louis and Lestat since you fuckers can't seem to read:

-Lestat wanted Louis for his plantation vs. he is in fact already rich: not really relevant to the show since show Lestat is flaunting the fact that he's extremely wealthy from the start. Louis is not under any illusion that this guy is after his wealth, HE moves into Lestat's house in fact and accepts Lestat's money/gifts/etc. Lestat is a captial p PROVIDER. He said do NOT take that away from me and it's one thing he's 100% right about.

-A cold loveless relationship depicted in IWTV vs. a more loving though still troubled "marriage" according to TVL: again, more or less moot for the show since season 1 depicts Lestat's version of their relationship more so than Louis's. They are clearly in a romantic relationship, had some good times (that were maybe glossed over quickly by Louis but are still clearly depicted through Claudia's diaries) and yet even in TVL, Lestat agrees that Louis's account was an accurate representation of the atomsphere of their decades together and that he deserved all the punishment he got.

-Lestat torturing + killing people for fun according to Louis vs. Lestat's claim that he only killed people who were "bad" and deserved it: kind of already played out on the show when Louis suggests the idea in 1x03, but ultimately it doesn't significantly alter our perception of Lestat cause does anyone actually care that prostitutes stole money from their clients and think that's a valid reason to torture and kill them? Hope not! It's just a good insight into Lestat's mind and how he justifies killing.

-The events after Lestat's murder and Paris: these parts we have to take from Lestat's POV simply because Louis is unaware of things happening when he's not present. Obviously will be a major part of Season 2.

-The scene at the end of IWTV happening or not: the most direct contradiction between the two accounts but this has not happened yet on the show so it has no bearing on anything in season 1.

As you can see, most of these contradictions involve Louis's omissions in IWTV rather than "made up" events. Save for the final scene in NOLA that doesn't actually mean anything to season 1, absolutely nothing about Louis's depiction of events in IWTV is really disputed by Lestat. Louis's turning, Claudia's turning, the "atomsphere" under which they lived leading up to Lestat's murder and Lestat's murder itself are all indisputable. Lestat is revealing more of his motivations and giving us further vampire context/knowledge that Louis didn't have (because Lestat kept it from him btw and he forgives Louis his errors because he knew it was out of enforced ignorance), but that only slightly changes our perception of his actions. It does not throw them into the trash.

It's also very clear that Season 1 is already an amalgamation of the two versions. If they were taking IWTV literally, the show wouldn't even be a romance and it clearly is. It uses Claudia's diaries (a device revealed only much later in the books) to fill in some scenes that Louis may not have been present for like the kidanpping on the train but the two perspectives make the story kind of bulletproof? The reliability or lack thereof of Louis as a narrator is made possible by Claudia's diary being there as a secondary source and when he's at his most unreliable, it's the diary that provides the contradictions. WE see something's off when the diary's pages are excised. BUT you really don't have any basis in the books for a major lifechanging event like episode 5 to be retconned, let alone an event with two people as sources and involved a prolonged recovery period that's also described in painstaking detail by said two people. Like this woman was a lazy writer most of the time but even SHE wouldn't do that cause its like a basic writing tenant not to feed your reader horseshit??