#list of reasons why i love lestat

[chamaleonsoul]

Lestat de Lioncourt // Memnoch The Devil

[nalyra-dreaming]

Loustat vanilla? Scheduled missionary? Seriously? The very ones who literally ascended right from their first time?

Louis is pretty much like a volcano in terms of emotional intensity he feels. Very reason why Lestat has fallen for him, so deeply. And the very reason why Louis withholds. His affection is something so hot and encompassing that it's absence is icy torture.Remember how broken Lestat was during that 7 years asking for attention,affection. Lestat, a character so full of love that doesn't know what to do, he is consumed by it, perished by it. How can combination of these two be anything but explosive?

I still believe Amc censored Lestat's line from hurricane reunion. "You came here to list all the way we wronged each other and why can't it ever be right bw the monstrous sex." He says. My headcanon.

(Also, vanilla is one of the most complex flavors, but that just as a note.)

Yes. Both their temperaments match each other and can get quite explosive.

But, I mean, also:

Louis compared sex with Lestat to “black tar heroin“ - and the “best he‘s ever had“.

At a point where he had been through the San Francisco cruising and whips and dog bowls varieties with Armand.

Like, he said that after these experiences.

Honestly, to me, that says it all.

[bitchbot3000]

Devil’s Minion: 70s vs Now, What if We Get Both?

Book & show spoilers below, reader beware! ⚠️✌️

I've been seeing a lot of posts of people making their respective cases for why they believe we're getting either 70s Devil's Minion or Modern Devil's Minion in S3, but personally, I'm not entirely convinced it's going to be one or the other. Hear me out.

While this is obviously not to be taken as canon, Jacob Anderson mentioned in an interview that he believes while living in America, Armand and Louis spend long periods of time apart. What if what we're getting is essentially the Devil's Minion chapter split across several decades, with a gap in the middle and a role reversal when things pick back up?

It feels entirely possible that, during an extended period of time spent apart, Armand would go after the fascinating boy who just came very close to blowing up his relationship without even meaning to. I don't imagine the chase would happen on the same scale as it did in the books, but him essentially stalking Daniel, demanding answers from him to all sorts of technical and philosophical questions, getting Daniel to teach him about the 'modern' era? That feels entirely plausible and like a pretty natural escalation of the encounter we already saw, with Armand demanding again and again to know what makes Daniel 'fascinating'.

Will it go as far as the Night Island and declarations of love? More doubtful, but maybe the first seeds of it? Enough for Daniel to ask to be turned, and Armand to care enough to refuse him, perhaps!

Assuming it ends when Louis returns, I think having that part of their past a shared (if unknowing, on Daniel's part) secret from Louis is also a compelling idea, and it explains a bit more of why Armand and Daniel's interactions have felt a bit loaded and at times, even indulgent, from the start. More so than I personally think what we saw in San Francisco would explain.

Moving on to the modern era, what we have now are all the trappings for things to pick back up, full-steam ahead, even messier than before. Daniel has just blown up Armand's life (a pattern that tends to dictate who Armand will gravitate toward next), very intentionally, this time, he's also the only one who sees straight through Armand's bullshit, and the only one whose mind Armand can't read. On top of that, he has a degenerative health condition and he's lived a full human life, which likely would remove some of Armand's previous reluctance to turn him. Especially when paired with the spite we're given as his reason for turning Daniel.

So, Armand turns Daniel, runs for whatever reason (panic, conflict over committed an act he was so revolted by, a search for safety, whatever conniving idea he's got coming up next, the list of potential reasons goes on), and the chase begins anew, with Daniel doing the hunting. This is where I think the bond between them would come into full bloom, and the Night Island, if it's going to be included at all, would come into play.

On top of all the reasoning above, it just seems practical! It gives Armand and Daniel, both of whom are definitely loved by the audience, their own storyline to be followed while the season is focused on Lestat, and it gives them a chance to keep utilizing Luke Brandon Field, because they kind of struck gold in finding an actor who fits SO well as Eric Bogosian's younger counterpart.

Obviously, this is all just speculation, and even within it, I've still got a lot of questions. Would Daniel remember their time together once he was turned (or perhaps even before, while he and Armand were left alone together)? Would Armand have cared enough to give young Daniel a vial of his blood to ward off other vampires (and if so, where is it now)? Will the mess Lestat is about to make be what drives them together, could it make Armand worry for Daniel, with all the older, stronger vampires converging?

Who knows? Not me! But it's fun to think about.

[eyestrain-addict]

I just realized why lestat marked Tom, like the big stupid idiot I am

(I know everyone else probably already figured this out, but this is MY blog and I get to post whatever deranged thought crosses my pea brained mind.)

When I watched that scene in episode 5 where they're at the bar talking to Tom, I was confused as to why exactly. Why does Lestat mark Tom? If he's marked to kill, why does he wait almost 2 decades later? Well I realized, as all realizations come, in the shower.

Lestat has been planning on killing Tom the whole time.

(Warning before you click read more, this post is a lot longer than I first intended holy fuck)

Well not the whole time. Just right when Louis realized that Anderson and Fenwick had screwed him over. Maybe even longer if he knew it was a trick ("ridiculous of you to mix human and vampire business it always ends poorly"). Notice how he's upset with louis when he kills the guy who's microaggressive with him, cus lestat wasn't there (even if he was there I have my doubts Lestat would understand microaggressions, but he would have definitely killed him for touching Louis.) But tells Louis he's proud of him for killing Alderman. I think this has to be because he witnessed the disrespect first hand. He didn't give a fuck about the money, what he DID care about was that those two disrespected not only him, but Louis.

Even with Lestats little understanding of race relations of the time in America, he did understand hierarchys. He's from 1700s France for God's sake. It's no coincidence wanted to be king of mardi gras. Lestat came to New Orleans and saw himself as the king, even if no one knew it. And he wanted Louis to be his queen. Honestly I could make an entire other post about how Lestat almost literally saw himself as if he was a King and Louis his beloved Queen, which is why he thought it was okay for him to sleep with other women (mistresses and playthings of the king should mean nothing compared to the queen in lestats eyes) but that's getting off topic. I only bring that up because I'm trying to paint a picture of how I think Lestat sees disrespect done to Louis. To him that goes beyond disrespect or rudeness, it's irreverence.

You begin to notice if you watch scenes with them together. Because while I wouldn't say lestat is good at controlling his anger, he's definitely great at concealing it until it erupts (props to Sam Reid have to be given here) lestat is always on the verge of fury when talking to Tom. It starts as a distaste then as he begins to fall more in love with Louis and become more protective of him, his anger builds. Claudia was wrong about one thing, it was no petty slight that was the reason Lestat killed Tom first, it was a loooonng time coming.

I could list every detail I think supports this but I'm sure you get the gist by now. My main point is really the layer of complexity this adds to not only the story, the characters, but also lestat and louis' relationship. Consider it for a second, Lestat saw all his violence as justified, everything he did one can see it through the lense of him punishing the disrespectful (take a shot every time I say disrespect in this post jesus christ). "I bring death to those deserving" indeed. Lestat has a god complex out the wazoo, and every attack, torture, and death he caused was righteous to him and thus enjoyable. Louis on the other hand didn't see himself so highly. He may seem confident but if you look through the cracks it's apparent Louis's self worth in near nonexistent and he's horribly insecure. I think lestat thought when Louis was made a vampire he would see himself as Lestat saw himself, and as Lestat saw Louis. But again, another post for another time.

Despite Louis' insecurities (or perhaps because of them) louis revels in the violence lestat commits for his sake. That's probably why louis is so quick to forgive lestat about the priests. For a brief moment Lestat truly said the truth to Louis and Louis could forgive him because of it. As lestat says, he doesn't kill the priests to intimidate Louis, nor does he do it just because he enjoys it. He does it because he sees them as humiliating Louis, charlatans that don't deserve Louis' sorrow. Louis didn't want the priest's to die, but he could understand why lestat killed them, simply because for once in his goddamn life lestat told the truth, and louis loved that truth. That truth being that lestat killed and mutilated and committed such horrors not just because he liked it, but because he did it out of a fucked up sense of protection. Him killing the priests was essentially a knight killing a dragon to earn the princess' hand in marriage.

The worst part is that Lestat doesn't even realize it. Not fully anyway. Let's be honest with ourselves, lestat doesn't understand Louis. Obviously there's the race, background, culture differences that lestat doesn't understand nor seems inclined to try, but there are better posts about that made by smarter people than moi. I'm mostly talking about lestat doesn't understand louis' mind itself (louis' mind in a vacuum I suppose you could say) he understands Louis' desire for violence sure, but he doesn't understand the core of that want. Honestly I'm on the fence of if he ever understood that Louis loved it when lestat was protective in the first place. I guess it can be dumbed down to Louis wants Lestat to kill to protect Louis and to protect the family (and anyone who deeply disrepects them), lestat perhaps understood a little at one point, but since he sees everyone as a threat and everything is a slight to him, he has no trouble and qualms with delighting in the torture of people Louis views as innocent. Louis' heart is a bit dark, but ultimately human, so he's disgusted by lestats violence towards the undeserving. Lestat can no longer read Louis' mind and even if he could, Louis doesn't quite understand the difference himself (that's why he tries to hunt for criminals briefly) so the cracks of miscommunication starts to form, and neither of them even realize there is miscommunication.

Therein lies the importance of Tom Anderson for season 1. Not much of a character, more of a plot device in human skin. Claudia can see that Lestat hates him, but doesn't understand why, nor does she care to get to the depths of that. (*Mr house voice* understandable) I think it's notable that Louis rarely brought him up, he didn't understand the depths of lestats love. Nor did he know about Lestats 3 decade long grudge, all because Tom disrespected Louis.

Now I'm not excusing Lestat's actions, I just think it's interesting how this one throwaway character reveals a whole level of complexity to the relationship between him and Louis, and better sheds light on not only Lestats personal philosophy but louis' as well. Even Claudia to a degree.

Anyway, uh. End of essay. Bye.

[mitzvahmelting]

quick iwtv s2 spoilers question:

could someone please explain to me why armand took louis out of the coffin in the first place?

like if we take for granted that Armand was fully complicit in the trial (which, frankly, i still find a little suspect), what changed that made him want to spend the next 70 years with louis?? what reasoning made him not betray the troupe in advance of the trial, but yes betray the troupe weeks later when the pressure was off? i don't get it.

like, why was he so regretful when he finally met with louis after the killing spree? when did the regret begin??

personally i suspect the truth was more like:

1. louis included armand in his thirst for revenge (evidence: armand's name included in his rambling, frantic list of victims, and the four escapees but only three deaths)

2. upon tracking armand down to kill him, either:

2.A. Louis couldn't bring himself to kill Armand and thus spared him

or 2.B. Before Louis had the chance to kill him, Armand brainwashed him/changed his memories to believe that it was Armand who saved him.

and therefore Armand's newfound regret and promise to spend his whole life making it up to Louis came after all of Armand's coven was already dead and Armand was just desperate to be taken in by Louis, and slip back into the love relationship, so that he wouldn't be alone.

but that doesn't answer why Armand let Louis out of the coffin. I still can't piece together a narrative justification for that betrayal. Unless, like, maybe it was Lestat??? but even then, it would have been done with Armand's consent, because Armand was the one listening to Louis scream and he would've noticed if Louis was not dead but also not screaming anymore.

So I just don't understand what triggered the very belated betrayal of the coven.

what are your thoughts?

[adamnablelittledevil]

Does Magnus rape Lestat? Is that why the transformation is so horrific?

Either way I hope the show handles it with the care and sensitivity such topics need.

Hey!

So, I'm still on the fifth chapter of The Vampire Lestat (it's the first book I'm reading), so I don't know everything about the universe, but I did read that chapter (it's the second chapter).

In short, it's not what happens. But there's a lot of subtext there, it feels like everything that can possibly happen to a person without explicitly getting to that point.

P.S. This mentions major spoilers, (borderline?) rape and heavy topics in general.

Magnus stalks Lestat for a while and eventually breaks into Lestat's bedroom and kidnaps him. Lestat screams and tries to fight him the whole time, and when he doesn't, it's because he's too frozen to move. If I remember it correctly, he bites Lestat, but doesn't turn him yet and takes him to his tower.

Then, he brings him wine and tries tactics to compel Lestat to ask for it, but Lestat doesn't do it. He fights as much as he can, he begs Magnus to free him and I think he even tries to bargain saying he'll forget everything, but Magnus doesn't listen. And then he keeps repeating how he said no, how it was important to make it clear that he said no and that HE WAS WILLING TO *DIE* INSTEAD OF ASKING FOR IT. There's a significant EMPHASIS ON THE *NO*, which is a typical response you get from a lot of victims. I saw it as if Lestat was directly telling the readers "I didn't want this, I never gave that impression, I fought him, I begged him to stop, I cried, I prayed to God and every saint I could remember, I'd rather die, I SWEAR I SAID *NO*, PLEASE, BELIEVE ME!" As if he needed people to know this, a helpless, desperate and very human attempt to keep this piece of his dignity, you know?

And Magnus does it anyway, he spends like a whole day trying to "persuade" him or straight-up torturing him and ultimately forces his blood in his mouth and completes the transformation. It's only when Lestat feels the blood in his mouth that he responds to it, but it was more of an instinct reaction than anything conscious and consensual. It reads as a rape with forced orgasm.

Not to mention Magnus's predatory ways and how he fetishizes Lestat, his white skin, blonde hair and blue eyes. He had a pile with a bunch of men he had killed before and had the same physique, some could even pass for Lestat's brothers. And after it, Lestat realizes he'd even defecated on his own clothes. He even mentions how rats approach him to eat it, but he doesn't care... It's not your explicit assault with penetration, but it's long, heavy, creepy, sinister, ugly, gruesome and all the metaphors are there. And, well, either way, it changed his life, his body, his brain, his entire existence for the whole eternity against his will.

And It didn't even come from a place of care and love, like trying to save someone from death, it was for Magnus's own selfish reasons. And at the end it felt pretty useless and trivial, which made it worse. Not that there is a scenario where this could ever be necessary, useful, important or justified, but there's not even a messed-up type of 'reasoning' from him, Magnus did it for the mere reason that he could. Just like that. It didn't matter. That was the worth of someone's whole life and future for him. It was almost random, even, except for his fetish with his physical attributes. Then, he dropped Lestat like a piece of meat, even when Lestat tried to make some sense out of it and sort of "embrace" it as if it was a good thing. He even tried to show him some physical affection and beg Magnus not to leave him alone. But Magnus just threw himself into the fire in front of him, adding one last trauma to Lestat's list.

In my opinion, it felt just as bad, really. To the point my reaction wasn't any lighter and it didn't bring me any sense relief or comfort that, by non-fictional/human/legal standards, it *technically* wasn't. And I agree, I hope they treat it with sensitivity and care, because however they choose to portray it, it should be triggering. This is a very crucial moment that they can't skip because it would affect the storytelling. And they can't change it too much to make it lighter either, because it wouldn't give you the real picture of what happened. They can alter a few details here and there, but not so much. It has to be awful, unfortunately. And I'm afraid they actually might make it worse, considering it's a week on the show and Lestat was kept in the tower with all the corpses, because on the book it's a day and he only finds out about the bodies later. I believe they might even change it into actual assault and that Claudia and Madeleine were their way of preparing us for something even worse with Lestat (and possibly Armand too).

I personally don't root for it, but I wouldn't be against it, considering all the metaphors are indeed there and they wouldn't be making it up out of blue. As long as they treat it with the care it deserves, that they have trigger warnings at the beginning of the episode, that they have coordinators, consultants, a whole bunch of experts and the actors and only use what EVERYONE is okay with. Everything should be a consensus, period. Specially for the actors, because as much as they love the show and are so incredibly passionate, thankful and dedicated to it, this will require a lot and they should all be taken care of. And not just in this case, but with everyone, everytime, considering this show can get heavy with a certain frequency. So far it feels like they are and I hope it stays that way.

Now, about draining, drinking each other's blood, blood sharing etc I don't fully know how that works, I see people equating it to sex/rape all the time, but I'm not sure I take it that way? But again, I'm still quite early into the books and I've already talked too much, so I'll save that for later... Thanks for the question. :)

[aryastark-valarmorghulis]

I love making lists, so I decided to make an IWTV / VC Fic Rec 🖤(Psa: I tend to avoid Wips unless I trust the author 100% and I usually prefer one shots). 

I’m still fairly new to the fandom, so this will be an odd mix of old and new stories. In no particular order:

AMC IWTV

Loustat: 

Go Fetch God by bluebloodbruise (E): everyone knows and loves this one, and with good reason.

someone buy me roses by indigostohelit (E): catholic guilt and smut and dry humour, what more can you want.

wilting, withering by baberainbow @baberainbowao3 (E) and a simmering pot of resentments by louisredsuit @louisredsuit (E): emotional sex and angst set during ep. 5. On the same theme, also “You just need to put it somewhere” by  Komilk (E)

vein by vein by morian @nonagethimus (M): meditative and artsy, my fav kind of fic.

It must be by his death by undecimber @undecimber-of-joy (M): why Lestat must die + great prose.

Human AUs: pocketsun’s @thefairylights Coffee shop fic (E) and prouvaireafterdark’s @prouvaireafterdark Ethic Professor Louis (E)fic

Armand/Daniel:

Enough to Turn a Body to Stone by Nothing_But_Paisley (E) and platform double suede by inthebelltower (E): sex, drugs and rock’n roll in the 70s 

Perfection by bandedbulbussnarfblat @bandedbulbussnarfblat (E) & I love you like an alcoholic by quensty (E) & all I got left by flowerplots (E) & show you mine by circlegame @appleisms (M): armand seeking out middle-aged daniel to fuck and then making him forget afterwards era (cit. flowerplots)

VC Books

Armand/Daniel:

Literally everything by apoptoses but especially Pale Shelter (E, Devil’s Minion era) and Blood Sanation (E, post Prince Lestat)

The Lotus Eater by monstersinthecosmos (E): Devil’s Minion at its best/worst.

Loustat: A Private Exhibition by Emileesaurus (E): it’s a classic for very good reasons.

Note: I also like Lesmand and Loumand but, like I said, I’m still fairly new and I haven’t read that much. If you have any good recs, please send them to me 🖤

[whatspastisprologue-blr]

Because 2 of my biggest hyperfixations are Interview with the Vampire and The Amazing Devil, here we go....

"Little Miss Why So" is, to me, based on my interpretation of the song, very much applies to Loustat in S1. To me, Madeleine is singing from the perspective of someone who is very depressed and who has a partner who is trying to cure her by, basically, loving her out of it. This is, to me, confirmed by the few lines that Joey sings, as though if he does enough good things for her, if he just shows her how much he loves her, she'll snap out of it. (And it doesn't work and they split up.)

I've been thinking about it a lot but especially in relation to the animation in S2E7 that depicts Lestat constantly doing things to make Louis happy/cure him of depression, while it doesn't work and Rue Royale gets more and more dilapidated until they can't even see each other over the mountain of newspapers, books, and other things. (I am completely sympathetic to Louis, btw, but I also know how scary and helpless it is to love someone and want to help them but you can't.)

Throughout LMWS, Madeleine lists all the things Joey's character has said or done and she sounds so exhausted, and there's this repeated "he said", and then she starts going into a mantra of sorts: "It's so boring, it's so boring, it's so boring....." And she caps it off with "et cetera" like she's just too bored to keep going but she could if she wanted to.

There's a few parts I want to call out specifically:

"I don't know how to reach you when you get like this. I've been waiting for you to come home."

This is Lestat's frustration, basically. He keeps trying to reach Louis and nothing is working. Even when Louis is home, physically, he's not present (I've seen great meta about Louis having a disassociative disorder). Special mention here to the line, "It's daylight again and you look like I've failed you." Lestat is a provider; it's something that he takes pride in and enjoys, whether it's his human family eating food that he hunted, or how he sent money and gifts to his human family after becoming a vampire, or the things he buys for Louis and Claudia.

"If I'm good, will you come back?"/"Stop asking why I'm sad, just know it's enough to know I'm sad." Madeleine and Joey are literally singing over each other here, singing at the same time. Their characters are speaking past each other. They're not listening to each other. Joey's character just wants to know how to fix her, what he has to do to get her to come back for him. Madeleine's character is just exhausted from having to provide reasons why she feels the way she does. Worse, her character continues (as though quoting Joey's), "Yeah, but why?" He's still asking her. He's not leaving her alone about it because he's obsessed with figuring out the problem so he can solve it. And it's driving her away.

"Why don't you just tell them all to fuck off, love, and be mine?" ("Them" probably being "those wankers that you serve all night".) For Lestat, "them"/"those wankers" is probably all of Louis's human connections.

As others have pointed out, "The Rockrose and the Thistle", another of TAD's songs, is a good example of how to love someone through depression instead of trying to love them out of it (too bad Lestat couldn't have heard it back then).

And while I could probably relate several other songs from The Amazing Devil to Interview with the Vampire, I'll just leave ya'll with this line from "Battle Cries": "This isn't a breakup, dear heart, it's a season finale!"

(Also, if you've listened to Little Miss Why So and you think that Joey sounds like Jaskier from Netflix's The Witcher, that's because it is! The Amazing Devil has 3 albums out, in case you want to hear more of his and Madeleine's phenomenal voices. Now, off you go, to be spellbound by these beautiful lovely Fae creatures!)

[lananakay]

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 also may have noticed that in AMC's adaptation...them vampires be F***in on the regs! This is one part of the adaptation that I don't mind, but don't necessarily love. You may be thinking "but Lana! 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 on a spectrum. Different orientations fall under the asexual umbrella. If you are interested, here is a short introduction. If you would like to see a more in-depth list of orientations, you can find it HERE.

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

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

I've gotta work on having long ass intros. Anyway...I've always loved that Anne's vampires were on the spectrum. I loved how the connections, romances, and intimacies weren't predicated on sex.

I find it surprising whenever I run into VC readers who've missed or not picked up on the asexual themes in the series because 1. it's explicitly stated in almost all the books in one form or another, and 2. It makes me realize how many people don't fully understand what Asexuality is as an orientation.

May times people will cite that there is sex in the books and thus negates that the vampires are Asexual. What they are forgetting is that not having sexual desire does not 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.

Some asexual people have allosexual partners and engage in physical intimacies up to and including intercourse to satisfy their partners. On the flip side of that, others may not enjoy intercourse but enjoy other forms of physical intimacy that don't include genitalia. Again, it's a spectrum. I like the idea of sex but don't like engaging in it. I enjoy watching, reading, and listening to porn, and any sexual satisfaction need I'd prefer to address on my own.

It also seems that a lot of 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 that they aromantic. I am Hetero-romantic. Most of the vampires in the books are Bi/Pan-romantic.

Romantic Orientation: also called affectional orientation, is the classification of the sex or gender which a person experiences romantic attraction towards.

Romantic Attraction: attraction that makes people desire romantic contact or interaction with another person or persons.

Going back to people not knowing the difference between sex and romance, this is one of the reasons why I loved the asexuality of the vampires in this world. For me, when reading the books there was an extra layer of truth in their emotions knowing they weren't forged in lust, but something deeper. It made them seem that much more non-human. More, in control. More above a mortal life. It also deeply enhanced the physical displays of affection that did happen.

Also, It really frustrated me soooo much when Claudia was raped by Bruce. It broke some of the fantasy of the VC world in my view...That there was at least one thing you wouldn't have to worry about with a vampire. Yeh, they might kill you, but they would never violate you. Plus it's lazy writing. You can have a female character go out into the world and be traumatize without raping her. It reinforces the whole "you need a man around to stop other men from hurting you" thing and it's kindaicky.

It also kind of...cheapened the love between Lestat and Louis. 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 have a problem with it." thing. It reduced Lestat to a stereotypical asshole that thinks with his dick. Mixing love and sex always leaves you wondering if the love is true.

Now that last statement has gotten me in trouble a in the past so uh...

I do not think that relationships are diminished, illegitimate, or otherwise untrue inherently because they are sexual. I say this from an asexual point of view where I've regularly heard people say/post the following:

"if you're not having sex with them, then why are you with them?"

"If you're not having sex then you're nothing more than friends."

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

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

As a person (specifically a woman) who has very low sexual interest but still has romantic interest, it makes me side-eye people a LOT. Movies/books/TV and even real life put sooo much emphasis on sex in relationships that it makes one question their authenticity. The books were a nice departure from that.

Now some people have suggested that there hasn't actually been any sex in the series thus far and that I'm just assuming there is based on context. But, no. It was said several times. Here are 3 examples:

annnnnd everybody's favorite!

Now, to cite my sources! Here are several references that brought me to my conclusion of asexuality in the books.

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."

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." -(Human Armand about Marius) 

Then in chapter 3: when human Armand tries engaging in intercourse with the vampire Marius, Marius says:

"haven't you lain with me enough to know what I can and cannot enjoy?"

When first brining this up online, several people pointed out that in the book "Pandora", Marius and Pandora have penetrative sex, and thus dispelling the asexual theory. However, Anne Rice is quite consistent, even this novel. During this scene Pandora asks Marius to:

"Fill me and hold me".

Marius responds with

"This is stupid and superstitious"

She then very clearly states that it is not for pleasure but the symbolism of connection.

"it is symbolic and comforting"...our bodies were one, connected by this sterile organ which was no more to him now than his arm.

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 was to be mortal again and do mortal things. Sex for pleasure is a very mortal thing.

In conclusion. I'm ace and I think 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.!

[murfpersonalblog]

FrankFreezy on Loustat & Consent (IWTV 2x1 - 11:40 - 17:16)

Something I wanted to also touch on was this idea of Louis agreeing to [being turned] and we all watched the episode one....

Yes, there was consent, but something I've been trying to get across--especially on YouTube--is there's this blurry area when it comes to consent that is very tricky, that abusers or people who are pushy take advantage of:

If you're asking someone to have sex with you, and they've told you six times "NO" in a row, and just because of the pressure or whatever you're putting on them they finally say "YES, OK," and the deed is done, you can't walk around with your chest high, saying the person consented to have an intercourse with you. Because at that point if it's not an enthusiastic YES, then in my book, that doesn't even count as consent. Yes, the case with Louis and Lestat is very different, but those pressures were there.

The reason why I view that as very questionable circumstances under which Louis said "Yes" is like I said: At this point, Lestat had taken out all his support systems: Miss Lily, the priests--I know he didn't kill [Louis'] brother, but we could argue that the intrusion of Lestat into his brother's head, and his brother being mentally ill and very religious, might have played an indirect role to what his brother did. But his support system was taken out. Louis was in a very depressed state. The man just buried his brother, family has has been cut off--again, that support system left.

I don't think Louis was in the best mental state to make that decision. I mean, I would argue that IF Louis was in a good state of mind without all those things that I just listed, I think he would have at least had a conversation first, before. Like, asked: "Hey what comes with this? What are the downsides of this?" But when someone is beaten down, and so broken, it makes choices like this. You just want to feel something else.

I made example with real life circumstances--I'm like everybody watching this. There has been a point in your life where you have been beaten down SO bad, feeling SO horrible, that you would literally go for anything to take that edge off, or to take that pain away, or just to feel a little bit different. And some of us go into our different vices; some of us go into abuse, some of us even unfortunately going to self-harm, just so we don't feel what we're feeling at the moment.

And if you put your head in Louis' headspace at that moment, and someone that he was essentially in love with at that point, who could also read his mind, and know all the all his struggles, and all the things he wanted to feel different about--like his status the way he was treated in society; he was a closeted gay man at that time where it was darn near taboo not darn near it was taboo, and all these things. And you have this charismatic ass powerful ass man who you've also been vulnerable with who you know like in a sense you can trust or like you know you have rapport with and this person offering you something that can take all that pain away?! I would have said YES! I would have said YES, if I was in that scenario!

So, obviously I'm preaching to the choir, cuz like we all know this. But I'm just trying to elaborate why I felt that way, in that moment, when it comes to this line of "Louis agreed to it."

It's like, was that REALLY consent though? Under those circumstances it's wild, and I think that perfectly leads to the last thing I want to say before we start this episode, and it has to do with victim blaming....

-- Already LOVE season 2 🧡| Interview With The Vampire 2x1 | Reaction & Commentary - FrankFreezy (11:40 - 17:15)

[nalyra-dreaming]

Hi! Do you think Armand was like ''Lestat Lestat Lestart' because he can see Louis hallucinating Lestat by reading his mind. It would be really awkward. Do you also think Louis can read Armand 's mind? As an old vampire he can probably block his thoughts but if I was Louis it would be weird for me to have my companion hiding his thoughts,like, do you have something to hide from me even after 77 years??

Sooooo....

Armand can definitely read Louis' mind, though it is debatable if he always does it. However, we have seen in the scene from August (at the Murder Mansion) that he does indeed do so, because he comments on Louis withholding and Claudia being able to mask her thoughts (contrary to Louis).

The thing about Armand and Lestat is... I mean you've seen the trailer. There's history. Armand... loves Lestat. Wants him. Desires him. Lestat rejected him, for reasons. Good reasons, and actually valid reasons. But... that hurt, of course. It's a complicated relationship.

(In the book Lestat goes to Armand to beg for Louis' life, and tells him about Louis, which makes Armand even more interested in Louis. We'll see how they spin it here.)

So along comes Louis, Lestat's lover (/partner / (arguably) husband) (and fledgling). But lover is way more significant here, because of the history Armand has with Lestat. Louis, and Claudia, who dared to hurt Lestat. (And which is ultimately why Claudia will die. Louis only does not because Armand (luckily) actually falls in love with him.)

Armand... is canonically into kinky shit. Not kidding. Cuck chairs, spanking. I believe "The Vampire Armand" is generally still listed as erotica.

So. With that in mind...

Armand didn't mind Louis envisioning / hallucinating imho. At first. He probably found it funny, stimulating, interesting, fascinating, arousing. Depending on the situation.

(For example here. That is in the bar. The bar we know Lestat "shows up in" as well from the BTS photo.)

He probably ... let's say supported those visions, too, given his gift to spellbind. Conjure illusions.

It must have been very entertaining - for a while. Even while having sex. (Can I have a vision-Lestat/Loumand threesome? Pretty please?!^^)

Eventually though... it must have started to grate. (Understandably so.)

That shot of him doing that "Lestat, Lestat, Lestat, Lestat" rant - that is in that apartment the interview was in. So we KNOW that Louis was still going on about Lestat at that time.

(credit to @virginiaisforvampires, sorry couldn't find it in the search)

Now, in the book there is this speech by Armand, and I can see that happening in the show, too:

"I used to believe you would get over it—that when the pain of all of it left you, you would grow warm again and filled with love, and filled with that wild and insatiable curiosity with which you first came to me, that inveterate conscience, and that hunger for knowledge that brought you all the way to Paris to my cell. I thought it was a part of you that couldn’t die. And I thought that when the pain was gone you would forgive me for what part I played in her death. She never loved you, you know. Not in the way that I loved you, and the way that you loved us both. I knew this! I understood it! And I believed I would gather you to me and hold you. And time would open to us, and we would be the teachers of one another. All the things that gave you happiness would give me happiness; and I would be the protector of your pain. My power would be your power. My strength the same. But you’re dead inside to me, you’re cold and beyond my reach! It is as if I’m not here, beside you. And, not being here with you, I have the dreadful feeling that I don’t exist at all. And you are as cold and distant from me as those strange modern paintings of lines and hard forms that I cannot love or comprehend, as alien as those hard mechanical sculptures of this age which have no human form. I shudder when I’m near you. I look into your eyes and my reflection isn’t there...."

He actually thought Louis would... get over it.

Over Claudia's death. Over what happened with Lestat.

In the books, Louis and Armand part then. We'll see how they spin it here. Louis says they've been together for 77 years, but that might be hyperbole - Jacob said that Louis chose that relationship "again", and that would then fit with canon once more.

(I personally think this is one of the good-byes, if not "the".)

But either way... it probably wasn't awkward at first. But it was beyond annoying eventually.

As per Louis reading Armand's mind: yes, if and when Armand permits. Armand is a very, very powerful mind and spell gift user. Louis would not be able to do so against his will.

[booksandria]

He suffered more than Jesus Christ - a Vampire Armand review

Spoiler alert!

Hi everyone, I finished the book by the second week of january, and I was at a complete loss of words to describe how much I loved it and how much it impacted me, which is why it took me over a month to finally come here to dissect it. Of course I knew I would love it, since Armand is my favorite character from the Vampire Chronicles, but I wasn't at all ready for the absolute banger of a book his memoir is.

Please note I originally wrote this in portuguese and then translated it to english with DeepL, mainly because I could barely form thoughts in my mother language already and just wouldn't be able to rewrite it in english at all. I revised it, but beware it might still have some weird wording and grammar. Sorry for that!

This sixth book in the Vampire Chronicles was a divine gift from Anne Rice to all of us Armand Lovers. "The Vampire Armand" tells, in much more detail, the brief story we had known in "The Vampire Lestat", now through the mouth of Armand himself, who takes us from his childhood abduction to the point where we left him in "Memnoch the Demon". And I have to say, it's no wonder he's like that.

Armand has always been very intriguing to me, ever since, back in Interview with the Vampire, he was just this mysterious, manipulative figure who fell for Louis' charms and was willing to do whatever it took to have him all to himself. But even so, he wasn't much more than that to me, just another vampire trying to use Louis for his own interests.

It was in Vampire Lestat that I fell completely in love with this character and that he earned the title of my favorite of the Chronicles. The contrast between the first time Louis sees Armand in the theater and the first time Lestat sees Armand in the church left me completely confused, after all, how can the guy Louis repeatedly describes as stunning be as wrecked as Lestat describes? What happened to get from one extreme to the other? And of course we find out the answer in the part dedicated to Armand's story in the second book, and of course that chapter solidified him on my list of favorites.

But it's very different to have read Armand's story through Lestat's eyes and now to be reading it through Armand's. In fact, I think that's the great strength of "The Vampire Armand". In all the previous books, all Armand's appearances were described through someone else's eyes (be it Louis, Daniel or Lestat), and that was largely the reason why he remained so mysterious in my eyes. But it's almost impossible to maintain that kind of distance in this sixth book, when everything is told in such a personal, vulnerable way, so close to Armand. He finally speaks for himself and we can finally understand him more deeply.

Of course, this characteristic of the book makes it a story much more linked to the characters than to a plot per se. In other words, the point of this book isn't the crazy twists and turns or headlong adventures we're used to in previous volumes of the Chronicles. The point is Armand and his life story, it's about his relationships over the years, about all the things he's been forced to go through, about his relationship with religion and about what could have led him to do what he did towards the end of Memnoch. There are certain parts that can be tiresome and also some that give the impression of being the same thing in two different places. In addition, this book is the one with the most sexual content of all its predecessors (yes, including The Tale of the Body Thief and Memnoch, trust me!) and also has a strong religious content (but which, in my opinion, has much more of a place than it did in Memnoch. To be honest, I have very strong opinions about Memnoch, but we'll talk about that another time), all of which may put some readers off. But I have to say, and perhaps I'm kinda biased, that all these elements enriched the book for me and are some of the many reasons why I loved it so much.

If I had to summarize this book in two elements, they would be: Christian guilt and the eternal search for love. Assad Zaman, the actor who plays Armand in the AMC series, said in an interview that Armand was simply desperate for love, to love and be loved, and it's the purest truth. Throughout his story, the search for love was defining, and not just any love, but a deep, obsessed, devotional love. Andrei finds this love in Jesus Christ and the Orthodox Church, Amadeo finds this love with Marius and the other apprentices in Venice, Armand is completely tormented precisely because he can't find this love anywhere for most of his life. He needs something to devote himself to completely, which is sad in itself, but is even worse when I remember that, for most of his 500-year long life, he has been lost in this aspect.

As for the question of Christian guilt, I have to say that it actually goes a little further than this concept can illustrate. Vampire Armand's religiosity is central to the plot because it's one of the main dilemmas in his life and, surprisingly, it's one of the most beautiful things in the book for me. I have very strong opinions about Memnoch and Anne Rice's decision to include religiosity like that in the series, but I simply love its place in Vampire Armand. Maybe that's it, after all: that religion has a place in this story, unlike in the previous book.

Andrei grew up as an Orthodox Christian and, as soon as his artistic gifts were discovered, he was taken to live in the monastery, where the concept of religiosity was intrinsically linked to suffering, self-denial, absolute devotion at the expense of one's own well-being. And then he is kidnapped and not only taken to a land full of sin, but forced to live in the very passage to hell. Of course, all this until he is rescued by Marius, at which point Andrei becomes Amadeo and is introduced to a new religious philosophy. It's so obvious that this is a breaking point, on some level, with previous beliefs that in the rescue scene Amadeo believes that Marius is Jesus Christ himself who has come to save him (which is indicative, in a way, of how in this part of his life the god that Amadeo worships is Marius, his master).

As Amadeo, he discovers a life full of love and pleasure, contrary to everything he experienced in the monastery. And I'm not just talking about sexual pleasure, which was a big part of this change, but all the others. The pleasure of dressing luxuriously and buying whatever you want, of being able to eat and drink to your heart's content, of consuming lots and lots of art freely, of being able to study philosophers from the past and a million other things and, of course, eventually, of blood and death.

It's very interesting to see this dichotomy of philosophies in Armand's life, and how he seems to reconcile the two after his visit to Kiev, when he's already a vampire. And my God, what a shattering chapter Kiev was! Definitely my favorite part of the book, I don't think even the iconic "if I'm an angel, paint me with black wings" (yes, go on Edgylord…) can overcome how much I love Kiev. Knowing what happened to Andrei's family, his reunion with his father, the part where he goes back to the monastery, my God, unparalleled!!! But, in fact, the best part of it all is Amadeo finally being able to make peace with this part of his past and finding some balance between everything he learned at the Monastery and everything he learned from Marius.

Unfortunately, theres only so far happiness can go, because then itcomes misfortune. And misfortune comes in the form of the Children of Darkness who literally set fire to everything, including Marius. And then, once again, Amadeo is kidnapped from his home and forced to live against his own principles. He is tortured, forced to starve, forced to watch all the other apprentices being burned alive, forced to feed on Riccardo who was very dear to him and, finally, forced to accept a life so similar to the one he rejected. This is the birth of Armand.

It's also very interesting how the doctrine of the Children of Darkness mirrors the Orthodox doctrine of the Kiev Monastery: self-denial in servitude to the Lord, an extremely rigid doctrine, literally burying oneself alive and living underground. Just another christianity-based cult, right? And, despite having sworn to himself shortly before that he would never surrender to such a life, Armand "converts". Very sad, but not surprising, considering that throughout the book he has been conflicted between these two sides and now one of them is gone forever. Marius is gone, the apprentices are gone, Venice is gone. Armand has nothing left to cling to, only what is forced upon him.

And so we come to the Bridge of Sighs. It's centuries of being brainwashed by this cult, believing that this life was what he deserved, that this was what it meant to be a vampire, until Lestat finally arrives and ends it all. Of course, the cult ending doesn't mean that Armand has finally found himself because, as we know from all the previous books, the poor guy is still in deep shit (and committing atrocities, of course). There's the theater, then Louis, then Daniel, but nothing really seems to fulfill him (even though he loved Louis and Daniel.By the way, poor Daniel oh my god). It's no wonder that, at the first sight of proof of the existence of God in Memnoch, Armand immediately wants to sacrifice himself, after all, even after all this time, religion is still the only thing he "has".

Anyway, after all this, we finally arrive where we left off in the previous book and understand how Armand survived. Benji and Sybelle are perfect, sweethearts, babydarlings and I've never been so happy to see Armand with his little family (and I've never wanted to beat Marius up as much as I did in the last chapter of this book). The scene in the chapel is wonderful and shows me how much Armand and Lestat love each other even though they hate each other, which is also clear from the many times Armand mentions Lestat in the book, always with affection and admiration. Very frenemies of them <3. Btw, just let me say this: it's really funny that people were shocked when Lestat let Armand get close to him and DRINK his blood, when he hadn't let anyone else. That's the thing, I don't even think it was because it was Armand, I honestly think that if any of them (Marius, Louis, Gabrielle) had tried, Lestat would have let them too, but nobody dared after he destroyed a vampire who tried. Maybe he just didn't want a complete stranger trying to take advantage of him while he was in a coma…? Ouch, but anyway, another Lesmand moment for our happiness.

I'm genuinely curious to know what direction Armand will take now, after an obvious rejection from Jesus Christ himself. If this had happened at any other time in his life, I'd be sure that Armand would have completely lost his mind and all meaning in life, but I doubt that this will happen now that he has his children (in whom he has finally found a healthy love). So, I'm left wondering how he's going to cope with everything and I'm waiting for my answers in the next books, even though I know he'll appear again from time to time.

This is definitely my favorite of the Vampire Chronicles and I'm so glad I finally read it!

[saintarmand]

8, 17, 21 & 22 for the iwtv ask thingy! 🤍

8. Who's your favorite actor?

jacob anderson. come on now. they're all great but he is ethereal. second place assad zaman

17. Have you read or watched anything because it was referenced in the show?

oh just a few things

love's coming of age by edward carpenter

chéri by colette

nausea by jean-paul sartre (louis was reading this in ep6 when lestat and claudia are playing chess while talking about nicki. you can't see the full cover but i went detective mode and figured it out)

madame bovary by gustave flaubert

a moveable feast by ernest hemingway (s2 first look "esurient hearts beating as one, the rumbling beast of the moveable feast")

iolanta (tchaikovsky opera)

don pasquale (donizetti opera)

pelléas et mélisande (debussy opera)

a doll's house (henrik ibsen play)

a streetcar named desire (tennessee williams play) + the movie with marlon brando

i didnt read the full text but i did hunt down and read parts of "de masticatione mortuorum, the chewing dead" that claudia mentions, full title "dissertatio historico-philosophica de masticatione mortuorum" by philip rohr (1679) (view the original manuscript here + english translation here)

i havent finished all of emily dickinson's poems yet but im getting there! (some of these i had read before ofc but im reading them all in order now)

ive also previously watched nosferatu (and rewatched it for iwtv) and the trimph of the will (NOT rewatching 💀 that was for a film history class) and ive read dante's inferno which louis mentions ("if i was to join dante's wood of the self-murdered...") and i highly recommend it!!! absolute fav

there's also stuff that wasn't directly referenced in the show but the fandom has drawn parallels to, that i've read and watched for that reason.

anne carson's an oresteia (to better understand all the agamemnon iphigenia clytemnestra electra comparisons people make)

giovanni's room by james baldwin

rebecca (1940 film)

theres def more movies but i cant remember lol

and theres some nonfiction books i've yet to finish bc im slow at nonfiction

the vampire: a casebook by alan dundes (cited by writers as s2 inspo! about irl vampire folklore)

black new orleans 1860-1880 by john w. blassingame for historical context

the theatre of fear and horror by mel gordon, on the grand guignol aka the inspiration for theatre des vampires (i did finish this one except for the summaries of all the plays, i decided to skip that there's so many. very engaging read and gives a lot of insight into the some of the bts stuff we've seen about the theatre)

louis's favorite movies from the tale of the the body thief!

la belle et la bête (1946)

the company of wolves (1984)

the dead (1987)

i may be forgetting some stuff. there's also so much more on my list that i mean to get to. a prayer for owen meany by john irving, of "memory is a monster" quote fame is locked and loaded for example

if anyone's interested to hear my thoughts on any of these feel free to ask i would love to talk about it!!!

all this and i've still only read the first 6 of the actual vampire chronicles. and im still procrastinating starting merrick

21. What was your favorite monologue of season one?

HMM the obvious one is louis's confession. ive watched the whole sequence from the funeral to the end of the episode a truly unhealthy number of times. also claudia's coffin monologue

22. Who's your favorite character? Why?

LOUIS. probably because i relate to him so much. instant connection. tricked into loving myself. also like hes literally louis how could i not love him do i need to even explain this

when i started reading the books i didnt care for book louis that much lol but i did become an armand stan. possibly bc i also relate to him im selfish like that i guess. also just his whole backstory and the way it informs everything he does is so fascinating to me. ppl say hes incomprehensible and hes literally not. everything he does makes sense when you consider his life experiences

iwtv ask game

[thecactifindahome]

Oh, I didn't know about that, I've seen maybe two or three group interviews that had Rolin in it and it still was mostly the actors talking. And since they were talking about IWTV (the last on my reading list), I couldn't really think much. I did feel like all the characters were well-written so far, but the loumand romance was cute for 2 seconds and then it went South super quick. I assumed it was the case on IWTV, so I was a bit frustrated, but didn't complain. Now that I'm reading the books I might have different feelings about it... I'll keep that in mind and not trust so blindly then. But hopefully with all the collaboration with the writers and actors, it will fulfilling. Maybe Rolin is just weird at interviews. But it's good to low expectations a bit, I guess. And YUP about the dishonest comments... It's funny because it comes from the same people saying human morals don't apply to them and they're all monsters, readers should accept that, but then they draw the line of someone loving more than one person? And I'm not even necessarily talking about romantic love (but that too, the idea of vampires being limited by monogamy is ridiculous to me), but love as a whole. They feel love, affection and care for more than just one person. In fact, I believe a lot of their struggle on both show and books is having such a small circle and trying to make one or two people a lover, friend, mentor, therapist and parental figure. You need more people in your life, specially if you live forever, c'mon. 😅 And the love for multiple people and blurred lines are there since the beginning imo, even if they didn't try it. But on Merrick the polycule vibes were totally there for me. And Pandora was so charismatic! It was a great surprise because I don't know what I was expecting, but it wasn't that. I loved Flavius too, even if he wasn't as big. In a way she kind of reminded me of Lestat because she was so vibrant. And I swear I'm not trying to label everyone as autistic, but her lack of filter felt like autism. Reminded me of Armand too in that sense, though Armand is type to tell hard truths with no easing into it or read people for filth while Pandora just hits on people. 😅 there's so much neurodivergent coding on these books, it's crazy. Anyway, I'm still pretty early into B&G, only on chapter 4, but I'm interested in finding more about them all. Also Maharet probably returns? I'm excited to see her again.

The idea that Louis kissing Armand in front of Lestat is the show's version of Armand pushing Lestat off a building is just insane to me 😭 Those are two WILDLY different actions that happen for WILDLY different reasons, and Louis didn't even know about it! If one is their version of the other, I'm bracing myself for Devil's Minion to be Daniel and Sam Barclay joining an ultimate Frisbee league, and also Louis is there for some reason.

And yeah, exactly, that's a great way of putting it - they keep trying to make others fulfill more emotional needs than one person can provide because they just don't have a deep social bench! And their relationships just can't endure that constant pressure forever, especially among such volatile personalities. Taking breaks is better than setting your husband on fire, why on earth is setting him on fire preferable to boning David or Merrick or Armand for a few years?

Pandora is such an icon in her own book. If I moved to a new town and on my first day out I did clown makeup and accidentally walked around in transparent clothes, I too would do whatever it took to become a loathsome creature of the night and never go out in daylight again. Problem causer, problem solver.

Maharet shows up at the end of B&G, but you don't really find out what's going on with her until PL.

[adamnablelittledevil]

hellooo I just saw your post about you agreeing more with vampire chronicles book opinions before you read them vs now, and because I’m messy: what kind of opinions/takes do you mean? care to spill the tea (if you feel like it)?👀👀😂

Hey. 😅 So keep in mind that I have read 8/13 TVC books + Pandora and am currently on Blackwood Farm. Opinions might change later on. This also will contain some spoilers...

So, there are many takes that I disagree with or even agree, but still believe things are way more layered so reducing it to a one-line sentence feels almost dishonest. But here are some:

P.S. I'm not trying to be mean, but whoever disagrees, please just ignore or block me if you want. I don't want this to become a discussion or debate. My only intention here is to answer a mutual, that's all.

I don't think Armand is this stereotyped one-dimensional classical villain. Sure, he's done awful things, but it's important to know the context. He was kidnapped, taken from his family, raped, traumatized to the point he had amnesia and prayed for God to let him die, had a weird grooming relationship with Marius, was attacked, kidnapped by the Roman Coven, saw many of his friends from Marius's palazzo (some were only 7) be killed in front of him, had their ashes thrown at him, was tortured, starved, then they threw his best friend for him to eat and at that point he was so dehumanized that he had dissociated and couldn't fully process what was going and who that was, was fully brainwashed... No wonder Armand was such a dark character, he's been brutalized and brainwashed from such an early age, then turned at 17 as an attempt to save his life (because someone got rejected and tried to murder him), is stuck in puberty which is already a hard time for people who live in privilege and comfort, now imagine how that is for someone that has been traumatized left and right for centuries, even when he was still human? And he's also highly autistic and BPD-coded, so to have all of that exacerbated once you become a vampire, it is no surprise he became a monster at some point (and I haven't even listed everything because this is already long enough). Still, I think he is Anne's most complex character so far and the one with most reasons to explain his actions. And yet he also has the best development, the journey he goes through on TVA is amazing. I've never seen a character grow that much.

Lestat doesn't "fall in love with everybody". Look, I get it's annoying to have Anne making him make out or have sex with basically everyone he meets, but that's just another proof of how he's terrified of being alone. He was abused by his family, even Gabrielle that was the best out of them, neglected him. Loneliness has always been his biggest fear even as a human. And he also isn't the best at separating romantic, platonic and familial love. That's why I believe he has so many "lovers". I get it's exhausting to have that happening on so many books, we could've had three cases and that would've been clear enough... But even with this satured trope, to say he "falls in love with everyone" feels reductive. It's way bigger than that.

That's also how I mostly feel about him and Gabrielle, I don't see it as something romantic or even that sexy, for me it was mostly his need to have someone. At that time, he was completely alone and then he turned Gabrielle and that was the only company he had. Same goes to her. And the whole time there were moments they referred to each other as mother and son... They basically tried to be each other's lover, parent/child, friend, ally etc and it obviously didn't work because you can't have one person playing all the roles in your life.

This isn't exactly something I disagree with, but I think it might be possible that Lestat behaves as a rape victim trying to recreate his trauma sometimes and that maybe another reason for him to 'offer' his body so much in insecurity. Because he was kept illiterate for so long, I'm not sure he considers his personality compelling enough to attract people.

That said, I don't see Nicki and Louis as the only people he had/has romantic feelings for either.

I don't find Gabrielle to be such a bad mother, or at least I don't consider it a bad thing, because it seems like she never wanted to be one to begin with. She did what she could with the reality she was forced into.

And Lestat also had his needs as a child because he didn't ask to be born... I see them both as victims of frustrating circumstances.

Marius is only happy when people agree with him, whenever someone shows a sign of personality he gets irritated, so I don't see this great, noble person he is supposed to be at all. And I'm yet to see him do something truly relevant. Maharet and Mekare are way more relevant, for example. So far he's unnecessary to me.

I don't think Armand is using the Spell Gift as much as people do. I don't even believe he's trying to seduce people without his powers. He is just that handsome and characters are obsessed with him. On TVA, his spirit leaves his body for a moment and he is literally surprised that he is actually as pretty as people say because he genuinely never understood their reactions to him? That's not a seductive person lmao, c'mon. He is just existing most of the time and people drool over Armand even when he's not around and just in their thoughts. The closest he does is masking his autism.

Lestat is the protagonist, yes, but mostly because he is the recurring narrator while others only appear once. On TVL, Part V and Part VII of the book are more about Armand and Marius (respectively) than Lestat, TQOTD had a bunch of characters for us to consider Lestat (the only) lead and for me Akasha and the twins played way bigger roles than him, Memnoch is mostly the devil having a monologue and Lestat just listening, on TVA, Merrick and Blood and Gold he doesn't have a POV and barely/doesn't appear at all, as far as I've been he doesn't have a POV on IWTV and Blackwood Farm either... Before reading the books I expected everything was mostly about him, but it's way more balanced than I'd anticipated.

Lestat wanting Gabrielle to present herself more feminine is more about still wanting her to look like his mother and gender envy than bigotry. But I don't have a problem with other gender nonconforming people seeing it that way either, because we're not a monolith. If some took it that way, it's completely valid and people need to respect that.

However, that's a shit situation for both sides and I wish Anne had fixed it. So far she hasn't and from what I've heard nothing changes in future books either.

The Devil's Minion chapter was really cool and that's not exactly disagreement, but I had the impression that would've stuck and it... didn't. I knew they break up at some point, but Armand barely talking about Daniel on TVA and the few times he did making the whole thing feel so doomed surprised me? Someone told me their endgame was more ambiguous than something crystal clear and now I'm confused?

I don't consider Dora an actual love interest for Lestat. I wouldn't even classify Gretchen as that and he actually slept with her.

David was awful on Merrick, yes, but on TTOBT he was basically the only one Lestat could count on?

Louis was a dick on that book. But so was Lestat so idk.

I don't get the whole "Lestat would never hurt Louis" thing because Lestat did attack other people he loves and burned Louis's house once? He raped a woman? He turned a close friend into a vampire against his will? I've read more than half of TVC and find it possible that he could explode and take it out on Louis tbh.

Nothing sexy about Akasha and Lestat, really. But she was cool for the role she played on the book.

Again, not exactly disagreement, but there are way other cool characters, relationships of all kinds and even interesting topics regarding Louis, Lestat, Armand and Daniel than just loustat and armandiel. It would be nice to see more posts about them too sometimes.

I don't see these books as a love story at all.

I don't even consider Anne Rice to be good at writing romantic moments, actually. When there's indeed good stuff, it feels more of a happy accident than anything.

The iconic backstage kiss was so random? That thing is way overrated. Loustat peaked at that quote of having eternity to nurture their love on TVL.

Anne is throwing some polyamorous subtext for (at least) two books now.

I find it funny when people are okay with a lot of problematic stuff and are like "they're all monsters, get over it!", but draw the line on polyamory, really?

I had to divide these in two because of character limit. :p

I actually find it way more realistic and interesting to have vampires who are above gender, sexuality, laws, religion, every social norm, including monogamy.

I also consider it totally possible for people who live forever to actually fall in love with more than individual as you get to know and understand them better, as well as going through key moments of their lives together? I believe that at some point the things would get too blurry and fluid.

I also don't think exclusivity = superiority, so.

And so far Anne doesn't seem to prioritize anything. When characters list their loved ones, the order of the names change. They refer to people they were/are romantically involved as lover, companion, friend. She plays with the idea of a love that can't be classified and transcends definition sometimes. I never got the impression that it was always character A and B, be that any pairing. And every time she tried to do something more traditional it wasn't as compelling tbh. That's why I believe that her best stuff in that area are happy accidents, when she's just following the vibes rather than trying to check a box. And the best comes from lines than actual kisses.

Drinking each other's blood isn't always something 'sexual'? They do it to heal, gain power, even as a greeting sometimes? It really depends on the situation.

Even with everything, there are stuff that Armand did out of his own choice, not because "Marius taught him", but based on his own values. When he was human or a fresh vampire, he was way more rebellious and he eventually got more submissive because of his traumas or as a way to survive.

Morals do matter in this world. Anne's vampires do forgive easier than on the show, sometimes way too easy, but some do hold grudges. The only difference is that their idea of morals is not the same of humans. They're vampires, so it involves the particularities of their supernatural existence.

Some stuff are crystal clear and Anne confirms it with every single word, but many things are open to interpretation. Sometimes people's own opinions get passed around as the ultimate truth, when they're guess is as good as everybody else's. And that's the same for this post, really. Nobody's opinion is superior and that includes my own. They're different, but equally valid and I believe the fandom would benefit from adopting this approach instead of immediately dismissing an opposite take.

Nobody needs to read those books because God knows they can be problematic (and no, you don't need stuff like plantation owners on book about vampires), but if you want to know the lore, you should read the books. Reading wikia pages and asking mutuals don't give you the full picture. Take me as an example, now that I'm reading them myself, my thoughts diverge a lot of the times. Sometimes, even posting photos of pages plural doesn't provide you enough context. You need to see it for yourself. You can still stick to the show, since it exists as its own thing. But if want to know the lore, you need to get all the information and form your very own conclusions.

/lh/nm

[leslutdepointedulac]

I think saying the only hurt is emotional is down playing down what Lestat actually did:

Kidnapped Claudia from the hospital

Killed her

Turned her into a vampire trapping her aged 5

Treated her as a doll and child for decades

Threatened her (eg when he said he would starve her)

Was insulting and condescending to her

Ignored Claudia's desire to help try find a way to age despite being the reason she's stuck like that

Told her nothing about anything (ik Lestat was told by Marius not to but considering how Lestat treated her it's not surprising she assumed the worst of him).

From Claudia's point of view Lestat was a monster (and Louis). He stole her, murdered her, forced her to live as a child forever, refused to help potentially rectify it, and made her suffering worse by his treatment of her. Like, yeah she couldn't do anything herself (who is at fault for that?), of course she had to get creative if she wanted to get out of a situation she never wanted.

I wasn't downplaying anything that Lestat did to Claudia, I never said that the things he does aren't horrible and sometimes bordering on cruel. And I never said he didn't do any of those things, I'm fully aware that he does. I also never denied how Claudia feels about Lestat and why she felt like the only solution was to kill him. I was merely answering what had previously been asked, which was why Louis didn't do anything to help Lestat.

As for Lestat rectifying the situation, there wasn't anything he could physically do, but what he could do was try to make amends with her and he did. When Claudia comes to him before killing him, she claims it's to stop their fighting and make up (though she's of course lying to trick him), and upon realising this, Lestat's ready to accept that. He wants to stop their fights just as much as he thinks Claudia does. He may not be able to undo everything he's said or done to her, but he can at least try and get them back on civil ground.

Aside from turning her into a vampire which, yes could be classed as physical hurt in one way or another, all of those things you have listed are emotional. None of them mean that Lestat physically hurt Claudia in any way, he doesn't lay a finger on her in any of these circumstances. Even in his threats, it's just words, he never actually touches Claudia in a way that physically harms her. Any hurt she feels from these situations is entirely emotional.

And yes, Lestat was often horrible to Claudia, but that was only after she began to rebel. Up until that point, he doted on her and tried to be a good father to her. He loved her (and still does after everything), even when he started insulting her and acting stand-offish, and even then it was because he was frightened of how she was changing and going against him. I'm not saying that was right, I'm not defending the way he lashed out and took his anger and hurt out on Claudia, I'm just saying he acted on instinct, which was to retaliate against her behaviour.