#withholding

[my-autism-adhd-blog]

Examples of Gaslighting

First Things First

[nalyra-dreaming]

Hey Nalyra, I always see your posts and love how you explain things and I got some questions and wondered if you could help me understand this.

So in 2x06, in that scene where Armand, Louis, Claudia and Madelaine were sitting together, right before Armand sends the coven to kidnap them, do you think this actually happened like we were told? Because it doesn’t really make sense to me. All Armand wanted was to be loved right? And Madelaine told Armand she could feel Louis' love for him so why would he still allow Santiago to take them?

Unless the love Madelaine felt wasn’t actually towards Armand but Lestat (which she couldn’t know because she didn’t even know about him) and Armand could read Louis' mind and knew that he was thinking about Lestat and not him? I know this show is really complex but is this a bit too far fetched or still possible?

Like it just doesn’t make any sense cuz why would Armand want Louis to die if he thought he actually loved him? Claudia wanted to go travel the world with Madeleine so he would even have Louis all for himself. They could have fled and left Paris but instead he set him up to die.

So either Armand didn’t tell the truth about what actually happened in that bar (or idk maybe he just made that part up where Madeleine talks about Louis loving him?) or it did happen but Armand once again realized that Louis will never be completely his and always love Lestat.

I would love to hear your thoughts about this (sorry if you already answered this). Have a great day and Thankss 🩵

Hey!

So.... I think I did talk about this before, but didn't tag it properly, so here goes :)

In real short:

Armand knew Louis didn't really love him. And that the love talked about there was the love Louis felt for Lestat. And that scene was something like the final straw, him standing up and leaving them to the wiles of the coven the final statement.

Let's dig in a bit:

The scene in the café serves a few different narrative purposes.

For one, it (and the scene after Louis turns Madeleine, where he opens his veins) opens up the fledgling-maker-connection further. It establishes that fledglings can feel their makers. The emotions of their makers, and vice versa.

And then, it establishes that there is a love that Louis feels, that he has not voiced - and Madeleine thinks it is his love for Armand.

And finally, it establishes that Armand is not happy about Madeleine commenting on it, on the contrary, it, and the ribbing Louis subjects him to there hurts him.

On top of it all though... it also carries a few hints that it probably did not happen as shown, for example

Claudia thanking Armand for never treating her like a child(?)

Her calling Louis 'Daddy Lou'(?? at this point?)

But let's take it as seen for now.

There are a few additional things to consider:

within the narrative - and at this point Louis and the audience did not know that yet - Lestat had been close for a few weeks, likely months already. Meaning Louis had felt Lestat - and had probably thought he was going mad.

Louis had told Armand he loved him before, in that scene where he mocks himself via his inner DreamStat - so when Madeleine asks Louis why he does not tell Armand how much he loves him... Louis and Armand both know that it's not Armand this reluctance pertains to.

Louis literally stops himself quoting Lestat there when Madeleine says she cannot read Louis mind.

Armand sets them up there, serves the Judas' Kiss even, knowing everything already.

He knows Lestat is near. He knows the love Louis feels is the one he has for Lestat, and likely feels from Lestat. He knows Louis probably does not know what to make of it, which is also when Madeleine pushes why Louis falls to (quite vicious) ribbing: "Okay, well, let's get the hell out of my soul! He gets enough affection. I don't need his head getting too big to get out the door."

(I actually said 'ouch' out loud then.)

Louis is clearly withholding in his relationship with Armand (as well), by his own admission here. The withholding has been stated from the writers as a characteristic, and it fits with book canon.

Armand knows the love Madeleine feels from Louis there is not the one for him, but for Lestat, even if Louis may not know it yet.

If you look at the gifs for the whole scene, then it is clearly in both past and present - the knowledge, the pain, the betrayal, the perceived betrayal (that Armand feels from Louis), the shame.

Armand was the one who froze the whole café so the coven could get them. Armand is the one who turned his back, the discussion just before likely the last straw that broke the proverbial camel's back.

Remember 2x03, Armand's story of how he loved Lestat - there is more to it all, more we will see next season, but this, there, was rejection, on multiple levels - again.

And it broke Armand's heart. And I feel for him! But ... it was never the love either of them wanted it to be - for Louis this was a rebound, and for Armand, it was a need, and then a frantic shaping of Louis, into what he wanted Louis to be. He (later on at least) sees Louis as a vessel for himself, which is, of course, also something that developed from that betrayal.

Because yes - on top of it all, on top of all the facts there, known and yet unknown to the various people... Armand could also read Louis' mind.

He knew.

Ultimately, it won't matter how much of the scene is the truth, or not. The betrayal happened. The reasons for it will still stand. And those reasons have always and will always include Lestat, and the feelings Louis, Lestat and Armand have for each other - or (certain) lack thereof. The next season will make that a lot clearer still.

[hey-its-sybarite]

Every single vampire upon encountering Louis de Pointe du Lac:

[stoicmike]

Examining the stub that comes with your paycheck you observe that once again, you got screwed! -- Michael Lipsey

[howifeltabouthim]

. . . her knowledge of who he was as a person hadn't deepened since their honeymoon. She had expected that they would share everything about their lives, but she was the only one doing the sharing. She had blurted out her entire life story to him . . . and the relief of finally talking to someone had been so great that she hadn't noticed that she was the only one doing the talking. Once she had purged her soul to him she had craved for him to do the same, but he had remained curiously opaque.

Anna Biller, from Bluebeard's Castle

[loveandthepsyche]

What is your orientation to truth?

Let’s be honest, it’s not really peace we’re keeping, is it? It’s an insidious form of codependency: I don’t think you can handle the truth, so I’ll withhold it… or I don’t want to deal with your reaction or upset to the truth, so I'll withhold it… or I don't want to take responsibility for what I’ve done, so I'll withhold… I am afraid of the potential outcome if I speak the truth…

Whatever the reason, this weakness of character ( 🚩) will ultimately contribute to the downfall of the relationship if it's not brought into your conscious awareness for healing. If you are committed to true union, speak the truth and confront what arises as a team, thereby resolving the issue & quite possibly creating an indivisible union. Otherwise, your silence poisons your relationship with the ongoing internal war you fight by squelching your truth, only to come out later as resentment, passive aggression and most times, contempt and sheer rage. Eventually resulting in the utter destruction of your relationship. You will project these pent up internal emotions at "the other" because by now your emotional imbalance is overflowing like a volcano ready to spew hot lava. And, it is 100% your responsibility and could have been prevented had you dealt with the issue at the onset and acknowledged the warning signs (your feelings) along the way.

So let’s be real: avoiding conflict has nothing to do with keeping or creating peace. You are lying to yourself when you tell yourself that. It’s actually avoidance of taking responsibility, simply not wanting to deal with the current reality present. The conflict doesn't disappear because you withhold the truth. It’s simply hidden, and more accurately, postponed in a subtle form of [self] deception. And this character weakness has the power to sabotage every area of your life if you don't hold yourself accountable and develop the tools to communicate with an orientation towards the truth and confronting the issue together, not confronting each other like you're in a war zone.

When the next opportunity arises, you have the power to choose--speak your truth and evolve your relationship and your being, or you can continue to run away and postpone that which is in the ultimate act of self-sabotage and emotional immaturity. The difference is creating the partnership your heart dreams of versus the torture, heartbreak and regret the ego so easily exploits.

~ Monet Euan

[heart-songs]

I speak less and less

these days.

It isn’t so bad.

The less I say, the less I regret saying.

-Cora Finch

[angstics]

[hey-its-sybarite]

Nearing my 3rd decade of asking LdPdL to be less hot, please and thank you. I have things on my To Do list that can’t be delayed by daydreaming about pretty green eyes.

Jacob Anderson as LOUIS DE POINTE DU LAC Interview with the Vampire | 1.07

[lgbtlunaverse]

The world exists in such a baffling state of simultaneous sex-aversion and sex-hegemony. Every social platform on the internet is trying to banish sex workers to the shadow realm but I can't post a tweet without at least two bots replying P U S S Y I N B I O. People are self-censoring sex to seggs and $3× but every other ad you see is still filled with half-naked women. Rightwingers want queer people arrested for so much as existing in the same postal code as a child and are also drumming up a moral panic about how teenage boys aren't getting laid enough. I feel like I'm losing my mind.

[nalyra-dreaming]

WAIT OMG! we never actually hear show louis tell lestat that he loves him?? i know i probably sound stupid but i don’t think that’s something i’ve ever truly picked up on until now. i was rewatching some loustat scenes and got extra sad over lestat constantly feeling like he’s rejected and not loved, then it dawned on me that i don’t think louis said it or even showed it?? do you think that type of declaration will happen in future seasons?

this isn’t louis hate btw, i love them both so much

I love them both, too, and yes, ultimately I think we will get it^^.

…. okay this is a bit of a wasp‘s nest, so... fair warning^^.

Quite a while ago the IWTV writer's room (yes they are, or at least were active on Twitter) answered some questions.

One of them was this:

This... produced quite the backlash and made some huge waves around the fandom.

The thing is, Louis withholding and using that withholding (something the writers called "weaponization of language" here is canon behavior in the books, and something Louis in later books apologizes for.

Of course it is all a bit more difficult than the simplified (tweet)answer here. There is for example the added complexity of Louis losing Paul right after saying these words (something that, given this canon behavior does soften (for lack of a better word) said behavior, and as such was very much done on purpose, imho).

In the clip from the "Murder Mansion" we have already seen Armand commenting on the "withholding" as well, so I fully expect the show (aka the writers here) to keep this canon characterization, as they are obviously building on it.

It is something I also touched on the "intimacy post" a while back. Because for Louis and Lestat, in their good times, when they had sex regularly and bit each other during sex... Louis' inability to say the words probably meant next to nothing. Lestat would have been able to read it in the blood.

Only later, when the eating disorder set that fatal downwards spiral off (again, it bears repeating, this is not assigning blame, but it is an important aspect that started with the choice to not eat human anymore) the lack of the said words started to actually weigh on them.

So yes, eventually, the lack of the words was probably very much grating.

And for Louis it might have actually made it impossible to speak them.

Because, from experience^^, when you mean something it can be very, very hard to say that thing, especially if you know you maybe should have said the words earlier, but didn't - for valid reasons - but now... now they just seem unable to pass your tongue.

I think that is something that happened to Louis there. And Lestat probably didn't really feel rejected at first, but more frustrated, then estranged somewhat, mixed with concern, and then anger, and then and then and then... because he loves Louis.

And Louis loves Lestat.

Very much. Too much, maybe. Too much, maybe, for these words.

(Which is also why he and Lestat were both able to so easily say them during murder night, because then... then they were not meant.)

In the books he eventually does put it into words.

… I love you with my whole soul, and I will always love you, [..] you are my life. I have hated you for that and love you now so much that you’ve been my instructor in loving.

...this is from Blood Communion. Since we already know they are taking from that book.... :)

[hey-its-sybarite]

Lestat is high maintenance and knows it. Louis is high maintenance and thinks he’s low maintenance. Together, they’re insufferable (affectionate).

Ideally they’d find themselves a low maintenance third but Anne Rice only wrote The Most Extra Characters of all time so…

[northern-passage]

we go through this every hurricane season but the way people will find any excuse to point the finger at the victims of natural disasters and say cruel shit like "fuck around and find out" like it's not horrifying having to leave behind your home and all your belongings and potentially your pets with the full knowledge that there might not be anything to come back to after... ignoring that there are people that don't have a car or the money to evacuate, ignoring disabled people who have no way to get out, ignoring people that can't find places for their pets to shelter, ignoring people that have medical equipment that can't be moved or replaced, etc... and even if someone stays behind solely because they want to, they still don't deserve to suffer.

as someone who worked extensively in disaster response previously, it is not easy to "just" evacuate, and the relief that comes afterwards is intentionally difficult to obtain. and already the forces that be are trying to spin this narrative that the victims are at fault, to put the blame on them so that if (probably when) people are forced to resort to looting (because the aid never comes) everyone will nod and agree that they're all bad people and deserved it... rather than acknowledging the fact that there was no attempt to make the evacuation accessible and safe for everyone, no guarantee that aid will be waiting for them when they return to a home that has been swept away... no empathy for the fact that these people's entire lives are potentially destroyed with no safety net to catch them.

[howifeltabouthim]

She had cried herself to sleep countless times as a child, promising to be better the next day in order to finally win her mother's love. That love had never come, but she had never stopped striving for it.

Anna Biller, from Bluebeard's Castle

[mikimagdalena]

I feel a lot about what we have been through. I sit wrapped up in the impossibility of that ever mattering. I am paralyzed by the thought of navigating the practicalities, and I chastise myself for having been so encompassed in emotion to not move. Sometimes {and sometimes often} it just does not matter how one feels. Maybe it's circumstance, relativity, oppression, timing...

I wish I could say that it's worst of all, that how I feel doesn't matter to you but that's not true. On the contrary, it is those moments when you show that it matters to you when I wish I could take back every plea I have ever made about being the forefront of concern even for a moment.

When I find you to be concerned about me, it feels like a taunt. Straining to conclude whether or not there are faults of your own that keep this from working is not enough. so it is not; then I am to carefully examine the ways that I reject your concern.

so it is; then I am to carefully examine the ways that I reject your concern. I'm playing songs that talk about being misunderstood and I think of you and I wonder if you do it on purpose. I chastise myself for the lack of trust. I filter through all considerations again. I am confused. I don't want to see you. Not seeing you feels cruel. Which of us is withholding? Will I ever know?

[thatrandomblogsays]

I’m so happy for them

[Image Description: Castiel from Supernatural is saying I love you, underneath is an image of Dean Winchester with the caption: “After four months of striking the WGA has a reached a tentative agreement & finalizing the contract. If all goes well writers will get to return to work with better pay and protections. They did it. Go unions”]

(Source)