#so i think it’s more in the sense of showing as much support as louis does for him

[sheisbeautyweareworldass]

i hate the lack of reciprocity as much as everyone else does but i do giggle whenever i read about “giving it back” because let’s be honest what can liam give it back for louis in terms of support 😭? send crypto and gym bros to his way ?? like i really wanna know 😭

[hotvintagepoll]

Propaganda

Eartha Kitt (Anna Lucasta, St. Louis Blues)—My friend and I have a saying: NOBODY is Eartha Kitt. A thousand have tried, and they've all come up empty and will continue to do so. Everyone knows her for something: from "Santa Baby" to Yzma in Emperor's New Groove to Catwoman to making Lady Bird Johnson cry for the Vietnam War. She was a master of comedy and sex, an extremely vocal activist, and she aged like fine wine... I honestly don't know what I can say about her that hasn't already been said, so I'll stick to linking all my propaganda. Like what else do you want from me. She was iconic at everything she ever did. Literally name another. How can anyone even think of her and not want to absolutely drown?

Audrey Hepburn (My Fair Lady, Sabrina, Roman Holiday)—I know people nowadays are probably sick of seeing her with all the beauty and fashion merch around that depicts her and/or Marilyn Monroe but she is considered a classic Hollywood beauty for a reason. Ironically in her day she was more of the alternative beauty when compared to many of her contemporaries. She always came off with such elegance and grace, and she was so charming. Apparently she was a delight to work with considering how many of her co-stars had wonderful things to say about her. Outside of her beauty and acting ability she was immensely kind. She helped raise funds for the Dutch resistance during WWII by putting on underground dance performances as well as volunteering at hospitals and other small things to help the resistance. During her Hollywood career and later years she worked with UNICEF a lot. Just an all around beautiful person both inside and out.

We are in the quarterfinals of the Hot & Vintage Movie Women Tournament. All other polls in this bracket can be found here. Propaganda is not my own and is on a submission basis. Please reblog with further support of your beloved hot sexy vintage woman.

[additional propaganda submitted under the cut.]

Eartha Kitt:

"A hot vintage woman who was not just known for her voice, beauty, poise, and presence, but also her unapologetic ways of speaking about how she was mistreated in the show business as a girl who grew up on cotton fields in South Carolina in the 1930s through the 1940s coming to Broadway first and then Hollywood."

"Have you watched her sing?? Have you seen her face?? Have you heard her talk?? How could you not fall instantly in love. She makes me incoherent with how hot she is."

"She can ACT she can SING she can speak FOUR LANGUAGES she is a GODDESS!!! Although she is (rightfully) remembered for her singing, TV appearances (Catwoman my beloved), and later film roles, her early appearances in film are no less impressive or noteworthy!! She’s an amazing actress with so much charisma in every role. She was also blacklisted from Hollywood for 10 years for criticizing the Johnson administration/Vietnam War, so. Iconic. Also Orson Welles apparently called her “the most exciting woman in the world.”

"She had such a stunning, remarkable appearance, like she could tear you to shreds with just a glance- but the most undeniable part of her hotness was her voice, and it makes sense that it's what most people nowadays know her for. Nothing encapsulates the sheer magnetism of her singing better than this clip of her and Nat King Cole in St. Louis Blues, she pops in at 2:49. Also I know it's post-1970 but her song that was cut from Emperor's New Groove is likely to make you feel Feelings."

"Even with as racist as Hollywood was in the 1950s and 60s, Eartha Kitt STILL managed to have a thriving career. She also once had a threesome with Paul Newman and James Dean, and called out LBJ over the Vietnam War so hard that it made First Lady Johnson cry. Eartha Kitt was talented, sexy, and a total badass activist."

Audrey Hepburn:

"She may be a wispy, thin little thing, but when you see that girl, you know you're really in the presence of something. In that league there's only ever been Garbo, and the other Hepburn, and maybe Bergman. It's a rare quality, but boy, do you know when you've found it." - Billy Wilder

Raised money for the resistance in nazi occupied Hungary. Became a humanitarian after retiring. Two very sexy things to do! [editor's note: not Hungary; Audrey was involved with the Dutch resistance. Source.]

"It’s as if she dropped out of the sky into the ’50s, half wood-nymph, half princess, and then disappeared in her golden coach, wearing her glass slippers and leaving no footprints." - Molly Haskell

"All I want for Christmas is to make another movie with Audrey Hepburn." - Cary Grant

where to begin......... i wont her so bad. i literally dont know what to say.

My dude. The big doe eyes, the cheekbones, the voice. The flawless way she carried herself. She was never in a movie where she wasn't drop dead gorgeous. Oh, also the fact she raised funds against the Nazis doing BALLET and she won the Presidential Medal of Freedom for her humanitarian work.

Growing up, Audrey Hepburn desperately wanting to be a professional ballerina, but she was starved during WWII and couldn't pursue her dream due to the effects of malnourishment. After she was cast in Roman Holiday, she skyrocketed to fame, and appeared in classics like My Fair Lady and Breakfast at Tiffany's. She's gorgeous, and mixes humor and class in all of her performances. After the majority of her acting career came to close, she became a UNICEF ambassador.

No one could wear clothes in this era like she could. She was every major designer's favorite star and as such her films are time capsules of high fashion at the time. But beyond that, she had such an elegance in her screen presence that belied a broad range of ability. From a naive princess, to a confused widow, to a loving and mischievous daughter, she could play it all.

Look at that woman's neck. Don't you want to bite it?

[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!

[emeryhiro]

My Thoughts on TBOC SDCC Panel & Interviews

First off, I felt like a kid again watching Melissa and Norman on an SDCC panel for the first time and was overwhelmed by so many positive emotions ♡

Regarding what was covered during the panel and what I'll be sharing my thoughts on, in this post, I'm going to try to keep it brief and only talk about things that are new to me compared to what I heard during the Tribeca panel and in my thoughts post on it [here].

~~~~~~

Zabel on his responsibility with the show:

Firstly, Zabel is actually pretty funny, and every time he speaks about the show I find myself trusting him more and more and feeling more confident that he knows what he's doing. I especially loved how he said, and I quote:

"There is a responsibility to live up to the standards of The Walking Dead, the standards that Norman and Melissa had as actors creating these characters. So that's the part where you wanna make sure that you don't let anybody down, you don't let the fans down, you don't let the actors down, you don't let the history of the show down. You have to at least try to maintain the same standard and hopefully maybe even push it forward."

Melissa, on her return to the show:

It was wonderful hearing her speak about how much she missed Carol and how excited she is about, and I quote:

"getting to go forward in France, where [Norman] set the roots, thank you very much. I had some things I had to do"

and how France will be a catalyst for all sorts of changes for Daryl and Carol.

I love how much she said she enjoyed the role of an EP, and I have no doubt she's brilliant in it. My main thought here is that I really hope that, like Lauren and Danai, she also has the chance to direct an episode in season 3, because whatever she touches will end up being Gold.

Norman on Daryl and Carol's bond:

I loved how he described their bond as cosmic and beyond tangible. Carol can sense that there's something wrong with Daryl even from across an ocean and vice versa, which is so true to their characters. They don't need to say a single word for the other to understand everything they're thinking and feeling.

Also, when he said:

"He's starting to lose that feeling cause he's been there so long,"

Melissa's face and reaction had me laughing out loud. What do you mean, Norman? Can you please elaborate on that for us?

If I had to guess what he means, I'd say it links to Daryl's self-esteem and his idea of self-worth. As I've mentioned before, it's obvious to me that the longer Daryl has been away from Carol, the more he's regressing into his old self and habits, and I think this feeds into that. I think he doesn't believe he's worth being loved, searching for, or crossing the Atlantic for. And that sense of security and confidence that he'd built with his family in America is slowly climbing away.

In comparison, Carol has always been one of, if not the strongest, characters on the show. Yes, she is struggling without Daryl, but the moment she's told his life is in danger, she has this overpowering sense of motivation and strength that she'll do anything to save him.

Norman on his favourite scene (The Reunion):

The words he used to describe the reunion scene and how he felt about it really had me in a puddle... especially the comparison he makes at the end, and I quote:

"When we meet, when that finally happens, there's a build to that that happens, and we worked really hard to make that scene what it was, and that kind of was fireworks going off inside me"

This is the sweetest description of the scene, and I don't know if my heart can handle it.

Additional moments I loved:

I love how both Melissa and Norman keep checking on Louis to make sure he's okay.

Norman calling Melissa his partner in crime, describing how excited he was for her to come back, watching her work, and Melissa's reactions to his words 😭❤️‍🩹

Overall, I just love how they appreciate, support, and genuinely love each other so much ♡♡♡

~~~~

Thank you for taking the time to read this. We're so close to having them back on our screens, and I'm so overwhelmed by the excitement for the new season!!

I'd love to read all of your thoughts on the trailer and panel, whether in response to this post or a post of your own; I can't wait to read it ♡♡♡

[my-mt-heart]

Thoughts on TBOC PalyFest

It started out fine. It felt like Melissa and Louis were getting more opportunities to talk and obviously I liked the focus on Daryl's and Carol's reunion because their relationship is (or should be) the show's beating heart.

I strongly disagree with Gimple that the 204 reunion topped Terminus. It was an imitation and it played in a vacuum.

Norman said "When they come together. The sound goes out. They're the only two people on the planet." And this is what I mean about the vacuum. That sentiment does come out during the scene, but it does not hold true after the scene is over, at least not on Daryl's end.

Gimple really said "we wanted to make Daryl not know who he was anymore" like that was smart.

When asked why Isabelle had to die, Zabel said that "It was looking at the sort of grand plan of the show and building to sort of where we felt like it was gonna go, and specifically in terms of kind of getting to a version that was really Daryl and Carol trying to make their way through new territories and new environments. And so that they seem to go together." Naturally his first instinct is to blame Carol/Melissa for another female character's death, but that is so false it's laughable. Isabelle died because he's a misogynist. Frankly, I think he would have killed her off eventually even if Carol didn't come back.

Both Zabel and Gimple suggest that the death makes Caryl's reunion more compelling because it allows Carol to show up for Daryl when he's "at his lowest." Translation: Carol is also there just to be Daryl's support.

According to Zabel, we can expect the idea of Carol being there for Daryl at his lowest to pop back up in S3, which is just further confirmation to me that the season is fucked. Just because the location changes doesn't mean the misogyny will.

It's one thing for Zabel to think a romance between Daryl and a nun he just met made any fucking sense for the character, but what's Norman's excuse? He said Daryl was wondering "why I can't have this" as if the flagship show never fucking happened. Why does this man have so much creative control when he doesn't seem to know or care about who Daryl is?

When asked what Carol thinks about Daryl's relationship with Isabelle and the other characters in France, Melissa said that it was surprising for her and I think she spoke for all of us when she said of Daryl "I don't know you anymore." I cannot emphasize enough how deeply heartbreaking of a story it is for Carol to do everything in her power to find the most important person in her life and after just a few short months, he's already found a new family. Carol deserved a thousand times better. She is not the one who needs to be there for Daryl going forward. He needs to fucking show up for her, but I don't trust the four horsemen to ever do her justice. The leadership on this show needs to fucking change yesterday.

[adamnablelittledevil]

on the subject of vampire polyamory specifically in relation to Lestat, Armand, and Louis, I think people are forgetting that there's a difference between an open relationship and a throuple. All 3 of those vampires are pretty poorly equipped to handle an open relationship with Lestat "I don't like sharing" de Lioncourt probably being the worst equipped, however I do think that the three of them could probably manage with a poly relationship where all members of the relationship are dating all other members of the relationship and the relationship is closed.

Thank you! Speaking of relationship configurations as a whole, this is so true. Polyamorous and open relationships are not necessarily the same and people tend to generalize them so much. It's the same with pan and bisexual people, it's not because you're into every gender that you're into every single person. I'm personally all for freer relationships (polyamorous, open, non-exclusive, any and all of them), I keep the door open and yet never used it because there was never a need for it, but it's still open if that changes one day. It's just about not being controlling for me. I feel really weird about trying to police each other's actions, bodies and feelings. So, I'm like, as long as there is love and respect, we're free to follow our heart wherever it takes us. I don't see having more than one parent, kid or friend as a problem, so I don't know why romantic love would be any different. For me, the problem is that it is hard to fall in love, be lucky enough to be reciprocated and accommodate a romance with all the other aspects of your life in the little time humans have with one person, let alone two or more individuals. Also, the risk of pregnancy, diseases etc. Now, vampires that live forever, can't get sick or pregnant? It makes perfect sense.

About Loumandstat, I can definitely see what you're saying. Specially for what I've read on the books so far. I don't know in depth how the chronicles will end, what Rolin will choose to do and if that's logistically possible on a show with only 7-8 episodes per season (I do believe they work miracles with the little time they have, but it's still not the same as having 13 books), but I think there's enough argument to support giving it a try or at least leaving it open to interpretation if they want, even if they don't do it with the main three (or four) characters.

Not to mention they're vampires and I find the idea of living forever with only person and love narrow-minded, limiting and unrealistic (same goes to gender, sexuality and norms in general). It's way more convincing to me that feelings would evolve and relationships would expand over time. I also believe many of their problems come from having just one person to be the lover, friend, therapist, parent and mentor all at the same time.

Ans you can't have one individual playing all the roles in your life... This usually makes things implode and they end up going from one person to nobody and complete loneliness. It just never work, no matter how compatible they are. You need multiple people to spend eternity with and all the love you can find: platonic, familial and, yes, maybe even romantic.

[nicomoon69]

I’ve made up so much Bernard lore in my head so I’m just going to dump it here

so post Louis Grieve in my head Bernard transferred to an all boys boarding school his junior year (someone suggested Brentwood so I’m gonna go w that). his parents sent him there as a bit of a last ditch effort to straighten him out, get up his grades and push him out of his silly habits. this also included them making him buzz off his hair since they deemed his old hair unprofessional.

all of it was a huge blow to Bernard’s already fragile mental health and self esteem so at Brentwood he was kind of a mess. he wasn’t exactly a bad student but the people around him considered him even more of an outsider than he was before at Louis Grieve.

eventually Bernard did find himself with a small group of friends (might further develop them as ocs??) who were much like him outsiders. one of said friends also being the first time he fooled around with a guy, which led to several more though none of it was ever serious.

there was lots of denial at first but by the time his time at Brentwood ended Bernard had accepted himself as queer.

he applied for a few colleges, some outside of Gotham but he ended up settling for GU bc part of his couldnt handle leaving his city behind. he chose a double major because he thought that would make his parents most proud and bc biology and physics were the only subjects he enjoyed.

despite everything seemingly going well for Bernard he felt an emptiness that nothing could fix, that is until he found the Children of Dionysus. despite knowing the risks of joining a cult he did. he was in the cult for roughly eight months before he got kidnapped to get sacrificed.

that was a rough version of what happened in my head. I have some more details that I couldn’t fit smoothly into that word vomit so here’s some more

Bernard came out to his parents his first semester, which they took pretty badly and led him to getting kicked out and having to couch surf for a bit before landing on the apartment he was living in during TD:R.

to keep himself afloat with no support from his parents Bernard worked two jobs, one at a diner around the corner of his apartment and the other at a coffee shop closer to GU.

at Brentwood Bernard did a lot of experimental stuff with his appearance ranging from spiking his hair after it had grown out a bit to getting his ears pierced multiple times. a tongue piercing came along somewhere in his time at the cult and Bernard genuinely doesn’t remember getting it.

during junior and senior year Bernard joined the basketball team. he was surprisingly good considering he had never showed any interest in the sport and wasn’t particularly athletic before then. basketball somehow also led him to training himself in martial arts.

since I do hc the Children of Dionysus to have some more Dionysian practices I think Bernard developed both a distaste for wine and eating raw meat (omophagia).

Bernard has been refusing to get drastic hair cuts after the buzz cut and is unlikely to get one any time soon. he’s been taking kitchen scissors to his hair and freestyling it if he feels it needs more shape.

though he’s been out for a while Bernard hasn’t actually dated anyone long term before Tim. most people he’s been with were flings or were blocked after a few dates.

the way Bernard got into contact with the cult is through one of his high school classmates, who he’d seen talk about the ways that joining it had improved their life and how they were much more enlightened. he due to his circumstances was an easy victim after his initial skepticism

there’s just a lot of permanent scarring due to the cult, but Bernard doesn’t bother covering them up with make up or clothes. at least not post getting rescued.

Bernard actually goes to therapy after the cult and was also diagnosed with autism (let me project a teeny bit). it helped him make more sense of his life and gave him more direction.

his cooking passion came from his early childhood, being dimmed out in middle school and only returning after high school. he mostly enjoys writing his own recipes and experimenting with taste. there was ofc the added challenge of budget, but it was one of the few things that made him happy.

his conspiracy theorist side mostly calmed down until he was thrust back into it when he started dating Tim. this was due to odd behavior from Tim and until Bernard found out he was RR (which really didn’t take that long) he was balls deep on conspiracy blogs and threads. he didn’t really quite after putting the RR pieces together though, bc he enjoyed being able to subtly help Tim with his cases.

due to the two jobs and double major previously mentioned Bernard has a terrible sleeping schedule. he regularly stays up past three only to have a morning shift that starts at seven.

gonna quite rambling for now lol, might edit this post to add more in the morning but I’m sick of typing. sorry if it’s a lot, I just think abt him a lot……. yea..

[alarrytale]

My struggle with hl and currently with Louis that he doesn’t balance good and bad things off. I know he claims he sees everything but it feels that he actually doesn’t know anymore the dynamics of the fandom and how tired larries are, he def takes us larries for granted. Since the break it was mostly bg content, selfie from la, la trip and Christmas with f, and then of course clubbing twice with taking pics with half of donny and some Italian stalkers. I didn’t find any pics from clubbing cute. And the cherry on the cake he blocked a larrie on the nye. It’s only negative vibe what we are getting from him. And now he probably will go again mia for severel weeks.

What’s your theory/conclusion about covering the face? I saw three different ones: that daisy wants sm engagement, that f looks too much like Brtt, that they are ending bg this or next year.

Hi, anon!

Yeah, he's not exactly contributing to fandom being fun is he? Rewarding and encouraging stalking, blocking a larrie for being a larrie, being a hypocrite by asking for privacy for a kid he's the number one exposer of, denying larry to get attention and sell tour tickets and yelling at and being rude to fans on Twitter. Makes you want to stay on as a fan, stream his albums and support him, right?

I have no theory about the face covering, because i don't care. If Louis asked his sisters not to post pics of F to give him privacy, putting an emoji heart over his face isn't giving him privacy. It's getting him more attention than if she didn’t do it. Also, if she wanted to post a pic of her grandparents, just take one without F in it, to actually respect L's wish for privacy for F? No, this was to get attention and i'm not even sure it's from Christmas and not even sure it's F. Could be Ernest. We only have Daisy's word for it being F.

If they want us to believe F is there and convince us of that, they need to properly show him. I think they believe they'll get away with it, and that fandom is believing he was there, because some fans nowadays don't question things when things aren’t making sense.

We used to be harder to fool as a fandom. I think some fans are so gaslighted and tired of fighting it, that they just go with it. That's enough for L and his team. For us who's still seeing things clearly, it's frustrating as fuck to watch this happen to fandom. I don't think bg is ending until L is allowed to come out. We're pretty far from that point, so it isn't ending any time in the near future.

[nightcolorz]

im a show-only fan (the knowledge i have of the books is based on how much ppl post about it lol) and i was wondering what louis thinks of marius?? both in the books or what your headcanon is?

the only time I remember Louis and Marius interacting in this books is in a scene in queen of the damned where Marius consoles Louis over Lestat being kidnapped by akasha and he offers him support, and then offers to walk him home. Marius likes Louis and he admires that he’s so human in comparison to the other vampires. He definitely sort of pity’s him tho, and considers him weak and in need of help from someone stronger. In Merrick there’s a line where we r told that marius offered Louis a sip of his blood so that he would be physically stronger and Louis declines bcus he doesn’t want to be powerful. (for context in the books Louis is a drastically different character, and a big part of his whole deal is that he is physically very weak in comparison to other vampires bcus of his restrictive diet).

it’s unclear what Louis thinks of Marius in the books. When they interact he’s friendly and polite to him, but in the books Louis is friendly and polite to everyone in a very southern way. He’s kind of a two sided bitch 💀 the way he interacts with ppl is rarely reflective of how he feels about them. So it’s possible that Louis is only polite to Marius out of social responsibility and actually is pissed off by him 💀😭. Which would make sense imo, since a lot of Marius’s feelings about Louis consist of considering him weak and helpless, in a sort of condescending and pitying way.

one thing about show Louis is that he definitely doesn’t like to be condescended too 😭 or treated like he’s lesser then someone else. I assume that show louis will not like Marius 💀 and probably be a little bit more open about it, cuz show louis doesn’t tend to take shit the way book louis does. I also like to think that show Louis has morals that are at least strong enough to be like “this guy had sex with my ex husband of 77 years when he was a child so I don’t like him” 😭😭

[louisisalarrie]

Why do you think some larries like the idea of hl broken up in 2013 or 2016? I joined the fandom in 2017-18 and read back popular bloggers at that moment and everyone was convinced that they have been together, and some even were sure that Harry was very supportive in 2016 and did his best for Louis. Last few years I see more and more bloggers thinking differently. Have you ever changed your mind about hl and break ups?

hellooooo anon! welcome to the show x

a lot of the bigger blogs somewhat gave up hope, and started to fall off tumblr anyway because it wasn’t the platform it once was. The dynamic of this fandom is so different now, and visibly shifted after the band went on hiatus. The closeting got more and more aggressive over time, obviously, and then once the band split it was hard to keep on larrying because we weren’t getting content of them. And that’s the main thing I think has subconsciously or consciously swayed folks from believing they’re still together. It was mainly the hiatus.

Now, the hiatus was important in terms of contracts and stunts and we had so much hope that because they were no longer “one direction”, we’d see a large shift in stunts and the boys hanging out together, and perhaps a bit of optimism for a CO. we tried to make the best out of a very sad situation lol, but it made sense. They could be more free since they were both solo and with different teams.

However, we just didnt get what we hoped for. We didn’t see them reconnecting and we didn’t get to see them both being in the same place staring at each other with the same love in their eyes that they had in 2011, because they weren’t required to be. No band, meant no obligations together. So without the constant proof and subtle looks and brushes of their arms and giddiness, it was hard to keep up supporting them. It felt somewhat pointless because we didn’t see an end to it. It was just hoping they were seen together or we’d get SOMETHING, and we got and are still getting little tidbits, but it’s not the same amount of proof as before so people kind of fell off the wagon.

To be honest, I took a step back after 2017 because Tumblr wasn’t pumping as much as it used to, and my life got in the way. Unless something major happened, I was pretty MIA, unfortunately. But I’ve been back fully for a couple years now, which I’m happy about. But it’s easy to shift ideas when you aren’t getting photo and video evidence of them being loved up, ya know? The stunts didn’t stop after 1d. BBG didn’t end. We all bet so much on at least a couple of stunts dropping when they went on hiatus but it just didn’t happen. We were, and still are, caught in this closeting game of PR moves and bullshit tweets and gift baskets for a kid that isn’t Louis’. ANYWAY

Those are the reasons behind a lot of doubt that larry are still together. So, what do I think?

Well, I think that theorising about their breakups is just entirely unproductive for the cause that we’re fighting for. It feels almost… fanfic-esque, and like, I still see people calling themselves casual larries and believe they were together at one point and that’s why they still fight for their freedom, because of what they went through as kids and even their closeting now, but I just… don’t think it should be a theory that people try and convince others of. That’s not what larries are about. If you think they’ve broken up, cool, don’t come on here and try to prove to everyone why, because that’s just… silly. It’s almost an anti move, which a lot of old larries have shifted to, mind you, because of these theories of break ups and very little proof with a whole lot of reaching (sometimes) on our end at the moment.

It’s an argument a lot of people use, like theorising that they’re in an ethical non monogamous relationship, or aren’t together anymore but fuck casually, or genuinely hate each other, or they aren’t together anymore and they’re dating other people (some examples being stunts, some being completely wild theories), and yeah, it comes down to song lyrics and lack of proof otherwise that they’re still together.

A lot of L and H’s songs do have connotations of breakups, or getting back together, or being separated etc., and I see a lot of Larries say “oh well they must have broken up at some point like any relationship, they’re not perfect, but they’re together now” etc., which is great, fine, and normal because being with someone for like 13 years in those jobs is hard work. But I truly think it’s unproductive to theorise on shit like that, as Larries. It gives antis ammo, and I think it comes out of boredom. Because let’s be honest, us and many solos (except the niall solos rn they living it UP), aren’t getting a whole lot right now, larry or otherwise. Harry’s basically MIA, we saw louis and Harry both at the euros in the same photo, louis is doing a few more festivals before a break (god that’s gonna hurt), and so… idk. We’re all itching for something. We used to get new content every day back in the day, but we just aren’t getting it. Which is fine, I don’t expect that these days, but damn, throw us a bone lol.

Some folks like to believe that larry themselves are choosing to keep their relationship private for now, because they want to. That’s fine. Others believe they are still being heavily closeted. That’s fine. What we’re fighting for is the love between two dudes, regardless of whether they have broken up somewhere in between, because we want justice for them and a change in the industry.

Anyway, my belief is that they’re together now, and that’s all that matters. We could go into deep theories and shit about body language changes and attitudes and fighting in 2015/2016 or whatever, but I just don’t think it’s productive, or that simple.

Listen, if I was in that situation, like… it’d be fucking hard to give up after how hard you fought for this person, that love just doesn’t go away. Being that age as well, it’s deep in your soul when you feel it. So I really do think that it isn’t as simple as that. I think it probably got messy at times, frustrating sure, but I’m not going to theorise on that.

And that’s not me being ignorant about relationships and how they can fluctuate and fights happen and breaks happen and I’m sure those two went through hell, but I just don’t see them giving up on each other that easily.

Anyway, hope this gives you a little insight into my brain and what I think about this. You can check out skepticalarrie’s ‘they never broke up’ tag if you like, and I’ll have this in my pinned post for reference to what I think about breakup rumours etc as #still together still going strong.

Let me know if any other q’s or if this ramble needs some clarifying hehe. Thank you! <3

[nalyra-dreaming]

Regarding future season structure, I do see the show moving away from a narrated format after TVL but I do hope we get some flashbacks of other characters (not full seasons) bc I do hope we get some TVA moments and if they are doing past DM🤞. And Marius.. hate him or love him he is an interesting character.

I know they keep calling S3 TVL and I might be wrong but I got the sense that they are doing TVL/QOTD at the same time with TVL as the focus for S3. Tbh I always thought of both books like a duology bc they go together so well.

I'm torn on TVL being one or two seasons bc I do think there will be some pushback if past Lestat takes up more than 50% of the season. I am not downplaying Lestat's popularity but if Louis is missing for more than 50% of the season? Yeah won't be a good look. I also don't really see the show going back and showing too many previously established scenes from Lestat's pov in Nola.

So imo it makes sense to me to stretch TVL to two seasons but to also do QOTD as the current story going on at the same time.

Either way I'm beyond excited bc I love both books.

Arguably, I think they have already started on QotD (in combination with Amel, imho). Because we have the ever increasing vampire population, the "great conversion". "Those who must be kept" have been named, several times, the importance of the blood of Akasha has been pointed out.

TVL and QotD were always a story that went together, and I am not sure how much episodes they will give us, but I do think TVL will end on the show with the same cliffhanger the book does: namely Akasha coming in and kidnapping Lestat right after the (a) last? concert - and worse here, I think it will be from Louis' arms.

S3 will not contradict or reshow all of S1&2. TVL doesn't do that either. And the season 3 press release has been clear:

“In season three, resentful of the perfunctory portrayal in the trashy bestseller ‘Interview With The Vampire,’ the Vampire Lestat sets his story straight in a way only the Vampire Lestat can—by starting a band and going on tour. Gabrielle. Nicholas. Magnus. Marius. Those Who Must Be Kept. They join Louis, Armand, Molloy, Sam, Raglan, Fareed and others we can’t tell you about yet on a sexy pilgrimage across space, time and trauma.”

There will be Louis. Of course?! The show is built on Loustat. But we are not on IWTV anymore. This has also been stated:

"Sam worked really hard for two years as a supporting actor, and I think Jacob is very excited to do the same thing for him, and put Sam front and center," Jones tells EW. "We've just scratched the surface with Sam, who's an incredible actor."

To repeat in what I said in my recent PSA (reblog): I don't care about actual screentime percentage. Or top billing, or whatever. They said they would keep Jacob and they better(!).

IWTV was Louis' story, narrated by him. TVL, QotD, TtotBT are all narrated by Lestat (for the most part). That will reflect, but I also think that there is no way we will not have a LOT of Louis in the story.

[twopoppies]

Gosh that tweet seems incredibly short sighted, what in the hell was he trying to achieve.

Firstly, if he wants any plausible deniability that he doesn’t know about blue green or singing 7, or that it’s been so long since 1D that he has forgotten…he’s shot himself in the foot by referencing some much more obscure fandom lore in the chicken.

Secondly, I probably wouldn’t call myself a Larrie these days, I took a bit of a conscious step back from it after falling too far into the wormhole! So I wouldn’t say my enjoyment or support of Louis is as tied up in that as it used to be. But I would say my support is tied up in him being a genuine, good person. I’m finding it really hard to reconcile that tweet: it feels so rude and unnecessary, when he is the one who has been actively feeding the very conspiracy theories he wants to mock fans for.

I think there’s possibly a lot of fans like me, and if the thought was that this tweet was only to impact the Larries, I think that’s another massive miscalculation. Sure the anti-Larry accounts will love it, but the middle of the road people like me…yeh, it’s really not a good look, especially when it is so tied into the LGBTQ community and the sense of belonging at his shows.

I completely support his right to privacy, but there’s a way to ask for that without dumping on your fans and this sure as heck ain’t it.

Absolutely. I think the majority of people are upset because it was rude and hurtful and completely unnecessary.

[drivingsideways]

I'm just here to post a terribly earnest rec for AMC's Interview with A Vampire, which, er, you may have noticed, I've become a little insane about in the recent past (has it even been ten days?!)

Side note: You don't have to know the Anne Rice books or the previous movies to enjoy this show. In fact, the show makes some great and fundamental changes to canon which really elevated it , imho.

Ok here goes:

1) It's a really fun gothic melodrama, which really enjoys being all three things, but especially the last. And it's good at being all three, very good, actually. And it's really fun. Did i mention that. FUN.

2) If you like twisty, non linear narratives told by unreliable narrators, this show is near perfect at it. The entire story is structured around multiple layers of performances - stories within stories within stories- but never in a incoherent way that will leave you hanging. It's very clever and has fun being clever without being obnoxious about it, if that makes sense. The theatrical feel isn't a coincidence- the show runner and much of the writer's room are or have been playwrights, and many in the lead and supporting cast have theatre backgrounds, and that makes it incredibly compelling and just- fun.

3) There's so much to nerd about! It's non apologetically literary and artistic, but in such a joyful way. It's costume design- ranging from late eighteenth century to contemporary- is just delightful; and I can't sing enough praises about the set/production design in the way it enriches the storytelling and the characters. Every little detail seems to have been thought about, from a crew that's really just having a blast, I think. In fact, I'm doing an entire rewatch of two seasons just to savor all the stuff I rushed through the first time as I got more and more caught up in the whirlwind pace of the story.

4) The performances are great! Both the leads are charismatic and great performers- and yeah, there's a lot of extraordinarily pretty people in this- but it's the total commitment to their characters that really shines through. There's a casting change for a major character in season 2, but oddly enough, it's a change that fits MARVELLOUSLY into the story itself. Season 2 especially brings in some amazing guest performances, to add to a crew that's already firing on all cylinders.

5) It's queer as hell you guys! Not a single straight couple in it, but its queerness is not just about specific ships or couples, it's just fundamental to the story itself; a point of view rather than sexual orientation.

6) What I very much love about the main romances in the show is that the queerness is essential to their story but it's not everything. There's more to these people and their difficult and often toxic loves than being queer in a homophobic world; they are allowed to be failures at love, to be angry, happy and sad, and most of all: they are all horrible people! They just are. It's GREAT.

7) On a more shippy note: there are so many great canon ships. My personal fave is the problematique "Loustat" ( Lestat/ Louis), which is also the abusive, toxic , dramatically epic love story around which the show revolves, because ngl, " they make each other worse" is where it's at in 2024, but there are other, possibly even more toxic ships to enjoy! 🍾🎊🍹💕

8) Watch it so you can come scream with me about it. To quote show runner Rolin Jones, " It's made to make you insane. Feels first."

[pizza-hats-of-the-world-1882]

since you're the most qualified person i know regarding dumas, i wanted to know your take on the bbc's The Musketeers (2014). i had a weird obsession with it a few years ago. how well (or not) does it hold up in every aspect (except for the main title track which is above any and all reproach)?

hmmm after long reflection this is difficult to answer because even tho i do in fact like the show, the only specific things i have to say ab it are negative, and i feel that doesnt fully reflect my opinion. i think the best way to summarize it is the show doesnt do anything as good as the books, so when i try to analyze it im just thinking "couldve been better" but i do admire their honesty in saying its "inspired by the characters" instead "based on the books" or whatevey. anway ill try to hit some more specific points:

they did my boy rochefort soooooo dirty!!! why did they slander him like that hes a very cool chill guy in the books and him and d'art have such a cute lil friendship in vaa, whyyy did they make him such a horrible little creeper #notmyroachie also what is adaptations repeated fixation on eyepatches? he literally doesnt have one

i dont feel as strongly ab the grimaud slander bc that change is funny as heck. he bears zero resemblence to book!grimaud but if book!grimaud decided to hunt athos for sport i would support him. tho i do think if they wanted to make him a villain they shouldve made it /him/ as a villain, not just some guy w the same name. or even commit to the bit and do an evil lackey squad. also its a tv show they had time to include more of the side charcters from the book [such as the lackeys] but didnt?? like this applies to others but im a lackey stan so i think of them first. its interesting how a lot of modern adaptations tend to minimize or erase servant characters when in some classic lit [particularly these] they are major side characters

ryan gage as louis 13 slayed immensely. he did not have to bring that much to his performance but he did and it was amazing

costume design was mid at best, and made all the worse by louis and the occasional side character wearing stuff thats actually in the vicinity of 1630s so that i see them and think "why not everyone?" i will say that they tended to have internal consistancy with each other so there is that going for it, but i absolutley HATED how the mouskos literally never changed clothes. like they got new fits in s3 but then they never changed out of those? a single cloth doublet im begging d'art got MARRIED in that crusty leather fit even tho his gf is literally a seamstress its horrible

calzone brought up that pretty much every woman in the show gets victimized at some point, which, yeah and it kinda makes the feminist monets feel a lil performative. also they fell into some of my milady adapting pet peeves: massive stat debuffs, made her sad ab athos, over-reliance on pop culture femme fatale tropes rather than her actual canon, etc. that one ep where perdita weeks showed up as a grifter/assassin and i just sat there and thought "that shouldve been milady. also people who think s3 was bad bc theyre butthurt ab milathos are wrong and stupid. s3 was bad bc of spiderman 3 syndrome [too many villains making it unfocused]

very uneven amounts of screentime for the mouskos? i swear half of the episodes were aramis-centric and maybe 2 overall were d'art-centric? make that make sense. actually fr what WAS the shows obsession w aramis, esp when they got rid of his more complicated and interesting book traits. hes barely even catholic in this, much less slutty and evil. all les inseperables were a lil ooc but i expect that in adaptations to an extent [tho i do feel they lost some of the charm of how wildly different they are from eachother in the books] the casting itself was pretty good though and i feel cabrera couldve done a good aramis if they had given him better writing to work with [also: hilarious how aramis spends most of the show in a committed monogamous situationship while /athos/ of all people has the three weed smoking girlfriends]

absolutely comical how much a bbc production went out of its way to avoid any of the england related plots from the novels. what, worried about even the slightest potential of portraying england less than favourably? tbh aside from dumas' funny narratorial comments england gets a pretty fair shake in the books, so excluding buckingham etc. in favour of making up plots ab spain is just silly.

absolutely loved that one time they went to the morgue to investigate a case they shouldve done that more it was funny. i think the show was at its best when it was having silly goofy moods [athos' "funeral"? peak]

uhh i think thats it for specifics, if there was something you had in mind you can ask and i probably do have a thought ab it that i just like forgot lol. anyway solid 6/10 ive seen it multiple times and am open to watching it again, like you said bangin theme song

[goodqueenaly]

To elaborate my ask on Robert D Artois: while a horrible human being, he, at least for me, really worked as a rogue, someone I m still invested in despite all his evil acts. So I thought he might have been an early inspiration for Daemon Targaryen. A character that became someone I sadly couldn t care for in the least, seeing what became of the original idea of a man made up "as much of darkness as of light"..

I think it’s very possible that GRRM was thinking of Robert of Artois as a partial inspiration for Daemon. By the author’s own admission, his fondness for Daemon is a reflection of his “notorious” love of gray characters, and indeed GRRM cheerfully refers to Daemon as “a notorious bad boy, a rogue in every sense of the word”. This description could, I think at least to some extent, be applied to Robert as well. Not only is Maurice Druon even more explicit in his love of Robert of Artois - quite literally saying, at the end of The Lily and the Lion, that having been “compelled by history to kill off his favorite character”, he, Maurice Druon, was “moved to a sorrow comparable to that of King Edward of England”, so much so that Druon had “no desire to continue” - but Druon also was not shy about portraying Robert roguish or less savory qualities (though more in a moment on that portrayal). Throughout the novels, Robert murders people, rapes women, forges documents, and conspires to overthrow both the King of England and the King of France - definitely not an angel, in other words.

Of course, one very important distinction, I think, between Robert and Daemon is in the ultimate ambition and motivations of each character. GRRM stated that he enjoyed the character of Daemon in part because Daemon was “unpredictable”, as “you never know what side he’s going to come down on”. While that is somewhat true for Robert as well - he does, again, ardently support the accession of Philip of Valois to be King of France, only to later fall out with Philip and promote young King Edward III of England as the rightful King of France - Druon is very clear that Robert had one goal above all else - to regain the county of Artois, which had been given to his aunt Mahaut instead of himself. The claim to Artois was at the heart of all Robert’s actions, from denouncing Countess Mahaut’s daughters in the Tour de Nesle Affair to seizing the county by force during Louis X’s reign to fabricating documents showing his right to the county in the reign of Philip VI. If it is not quite clear what Daemon wanted specifically at every given moment, the same cannot be said of Robert of Artois; whatever actions and whatever faction would lead him to Artois is where Robert would take or would support.

Too, it’s important to acknowledge the difference between the works in which these characters are presented. We as readers only experience Daemon in pseudo-historical works, The World of Ice and Fire and Fire and Blood. Because these books are (in-universe) written from the perspective of maesters living more than a century after Daemon’s death, we as readers are kept at arm’s length from Daemon’s thoughts and feelings, and consequently that sort of personal connection more easily made with characters in the main novels. By contrast, Maurice Druon himself is effectively the narrator of (the first six novels of) The Accursed Kings, and so more able to indulge his love of Robert directly (especially, and it has to be noted, given Maurice Druon’s generally misogynistic writing in these novels). We as readers of The Accursed Kings are almost explicitly directed to sympathize with Robert, and even sometimes to see his bad actions as justified or excusable. Druon himself explains in the “Historical Notes” of The Iron King that “the decision in [Mahaut’s] favour [i.e. regarding Artois] was largely influenced by these alliances which brought to the crown notably the County of Burgundy”, while Pope John XXII later thinks in The She-Wolf of France that “Robert of Artois, the rowdy giant, the sower of discord, the assassin even … the black sheep, was nevertheless more worthy perhaps, when all was said and done, than his cruel aunt, and that he possibly had some right on his side in his fight against her”. Even when Robert has his henchman strangle Marguerite of Burgundy (in what I think will be a parallel to Cersei), Maurice Druon praises Robert for telling Marguerite that he had desired her, as in the author’s words “[n]o man is completely bad”, and “the Count of Artois at that moment said one of the only kind things that had ever issued from his lips”.

[eddiediazismyhusband]

Hi Louis, are there any plot points/mentions on 9-1-1 that you wish were expanded further on the show (not just Buddie related)? For myself I'm still a little bitter they never mentioned all Buck did during the tsunami.

And when Buck and Eddie get married, what song do you think will be their first dance to? (I already made 3 playlists for them but Strangers by Maddie & Tae makes me go This is so them every time I listen to it. )

Thank you for making scrolling through the Buddie tag so much fun, Carly

ooohhhh im so gald you brought this up bc ive been dying to talk about it—

but in all seriousness i love this question!!

1. plot points i wish were expanded on more

i have a few but im only going to narrow it down to this one because it is something that has always kind if rubbed me the wrong way… but i really wish they could have spent more time exploring Hen’s relationship with her mom. I might be in the minority here, but to me the whole arc of Toni coming back into Hen’s life felt very quick and almost…. too simple? (not that it was simple at ALL but) As a queer person who has had a rocky relationship with my parents, it is always something i love to see portrayed in media more rather than just automatically jumping to the “supportive ally” trope as a way to make a story more feel-good if that makes sense. And i saw the bones for that in the storyline with Hen and Toni, but because of the state of the show at FOX that season i understand why they didn’t make it a bigger deal….. however i really wish they had!

(also i agree them never mentioning what buck did in the tsunami has always rubbed me the wrong way— i definitely feel like they all should have already gotten medals at this point for other rescues in the past so the fact that they only just now are getting them has annoyed me, but im just glad the firefam is getting recognition for something)

2. Buddie Wedding Song

I am kissing you on the forehead for this question bc i love love love love LOVE talking about stuff like this….

This isn’t for their first dance, but i have always loved the idea of Karen singing “At Last” during the ceremony (a la bones, which wasn’t what inspired it in my head but upon further inspection is actually really similar to what i would want their wedding to look like) bc i think the fact that we haven’t heard tracie thoms’ voice on the show yet is a CRIME.

As as far as a first dance song, i love the idea of them dancing to something softer— a couple that come to mind are Love Like This (Ben Rector) and Love Me Tender (Norah Jones). If they wanna cash in on the Adele hype now, i DEFINITELY wouldn’t be opposed to Make You Feel My Love (maybe even sung by Maddie so that we get JLH’s vocals again??). i also could see You Are The Reason (Calum Scott). If they wanted to go the taylor swift route, i could see You Are In Love, Enchanted, or even Daylight (which daylight would admittedly have me sobbing like a baby).

Also strangers by maddie & tae is SOOOOOO BUDDIE…. this wouldn’t be their first dance song, but Friends Don’t is such a quintessential Buddie song to me 👌👌👌

thank you for the ask, and your sweet note at the end! I really loved getting to answer this ask 💕💕