“Louis, Louis, always whining Louis…”
A punk jacket suited for a Brat Prince. Hand painted and studded, available here.
#PERFECT JUST PERFECT
Tag Archives: actual quote
Learn to Cook Like ‘Hannibal’ in New Cookbook — Exclusive Recipe
“On the plate, the tarts are menacing, a pastry spear jutting out of it. That is Poon’s design.“I want to create as much fear as possible on the plate,” she says.
“I keep reminding people these plates are made from bone china. It’s
called bone china because it’s bone, ground up. Everything is life and
death.”
My best friend is obsessed with Hannibal so we are going to the Feeding Hannibal dinner in Toronto on 10/25! Anyone else going? THERE WILL BE PICTURES.
[^X by @lesbianvamp]
Learn to Cook Like ‘Hannibal’ in New Cookbook — Exclusive Recipe
I saw about ask about Armand and wanted to put in my input bc why not? I always had a head canon that Armand was agender and androgynous. What are your opinions?
It’s a valid opinion, Armand being agender and androgynous…
[^X so this is IWTV!Denis bc I admit that as much as I adore Antonio’s Armand for my own reasons, Denis looked more like canon Armand right down to the impassive expression.]
We have to look at those words first. “Because the language of gender is still evolving, a lack of consensus on terms and definitions means it is up to the individual person to decide how to define themselves.” [X] My personal understanding of ‘agender’ is someone who is neither masculine nor feminine internally, and, to a variable extent, neither masculine nor feminine externally, either. A lack of the gender binary altogether.
‘Androgynous,’ however, I understand as being “partly male and partly female in appearance.” – more external. I see ‘androgynous’ as someone who may be perceived as both externally, or able to pass for either gender to a variable extent.
In TVA, David tells Armand “You’re sweet, boylike and pretty as a girl.” Mortal Armand is amused that potential buyers thought he was a girl, but then it pisses him off when Allesandra admires his beauty: “ ‘…a fairy’s child planted by moonlight in a milkmaid’s cradle to thrall the
world with his girlish gaze and manly whisper.’ Her flattery enraged me…”
So #your headcanon may vary, but I headcanon Armand as being capable of passing as a girl (and sometimes pushing at that envelope for his own purposes), but he’s very satisfied in his own masculinity. It doesn’t seem to be something he ever addressed or was ever confused about in canon, other than the fact that sometimes it angers him when he’s perceived as feminine, and at other times, he’s used it to his advantage.
^I guess that counts as Armand being androgynous, but not agender.
Hey!!! I was just wondering what do u think lestat means by his quote “I love myself I’m devoted to myself but I don’t like myself” or something like that plsss is just that I didn’t understand that:P
"I don’t like myself, you know. I love myself, of course, I’m
committed to myself till my dying day. But I don’t like myself.“ – Lestat, Memnoch the Devil
In context, Lestat’s saying this to Dora, and she doesn’t really address it. He’ll do this occasionally, verbally toss out some bit of raw self-reflection and it goes dismissed or ignored by whoever is with him at the time, but we as readers grasp it and hold onto it bc we know he’s just given us something valuable!
TL;DR: Lestat is a survivor of a lot of crap which has made him somewhat bitter and underdeveloped in some areas, but he takes all the negativity he experiences and uses it as fuel towards a more productive purpose. This makes life worth living for him, and it’s one of the major reasons why those of us who love him, love him ❤
I think Lestat’s admitting something powerful here, that yes, he’s flawed, to the point of being truly unlikable. His family treated him like crap for most of his childhood, and he had to give himself all the positive attention that they wouldn’t. He parented himself for the most part, so he understandably has issues asking for and accepting affection. He had to build up his ego from the very little positive attention he got. Much of that famous bravado he displays is a performance, but he’s been doing it so long and so well that he’s usually able to convince himself it’s authentic.
He knows he can be a bastard, most of that is a defense mechanism against being hurt further. People have tried to kill him on more than one occasion! It’s one thing for enemies to try to kill you, but it really hurts when the ppl you love try to kill you.
He’s a survivor of child abuse (the beatings from his father and brothers whenever he tried to improve his life), neglect (his mother was not very motherly to say the least), was abandoned as a fledgling vampire (and @vampchronfic suggests in a recent fic that the bond between maker and fledgling is deeper than I had previously considered in the form of a physiological bond) and he had to figure everything out on his own – including whether he could survive making a vampire companion,… I could go on, but it depends on where canon stops for you. He parented himself as a vampire, too.
So why be devoted to himself? Even though he was an innocent victim of all this abuse and neglect, when he was mortal, he became the provider for his family. He was the one who could hunt and he literally put food on the table. He was the one who had to save the village from the wolves. So I think it’s deeply ingrained in him to take all the negativity he experiences and use it as fuel towards a more productive purpose. Hunting was something he was praised for, but more importantly, the act itself gave him pleasure, asserting control over nature in this way. Every kill was something earned.
He carried this through to vampiring immediately, choosing to hunt the evildoer, taking them down brings him the same good feelings that hunting for his family and protecting the village did.
Occasionally he does still kill innocents, and he does hurt those he loves. He has issues with consent and accepting affection. Deep down, he does love ppl and wants love in return. He’s definitely at a better place now than when we first met him in IWTV.
Now, this was a pleasant sensation. I bent my head and kissed her throat. Yes, this was nice also. It was nothing as exciting as closing on a victim, but it was nice. I tried to remember what it had been like two hundred years ago when I was the terror of the village girls. Seems some farmer was always at the castle gates, cursing me and swinging his fist at me and telling me that if his daughter was with child by me, I’d have to do something about it! It had all seemed such wonderful fun at the time. And the girls, oh the lovely girls.
Lestat de Lioncourt, Tale of the Body Thief
So yeah we definitely could have some illegitimate de Lioncourts out there…
“Forget me now, Father,” I said. “Forget me, as if the monks had sent me away. But remember this, on account of you, I shall never be buried in the muddy graves of the Monastery. No, other things may befall me. But that, I won’t suffer. Because of you, that you wouldn’t have it, that you came that day and demanded I ride out with you, that I be your son.”
I turned to go. He shot forward, clasping the bottle by the neck in his left hand and clamping his powerful right hand over my wrist. He pulled me down to him, as if I were a mere mortal, with his old strength and he pressed his lips against my bowed head.
….
"Andrei, my angel child, my gifted and golden son!“
– The Vampire Armand
Cosplays c @chrissydeath @v-e-r-r-e-t-t
LITERATURE MEME
↳ [1/10] FAVORITE CHARACTERS – LESTAT DE LIONCOURT“Ah, come now. I look like an angel, but I’m not. The old rules of nature encompass many creatures like me. We’re beautiful like the diamond-backed snake, or the striped tiger, yet we’re merciless killers”
“Louis, whose
green eyes are soulful, the very mirror of patient misery, soft-voiced, very human,
weak, having lived only two hundred years, unable to read minds, or to levitate, or to
spellbind others except inadvertently, which can be hilarious, an immortal with whom
mortals fall in love…” – the Vampire Armand
I’m reading Armand for the first time, and I’m sorry, but at almost 200 pages in, I have to ask—does it ever become not a porno?
[X] Well there’s fighting, which usually is not part of a porno? There’s a lot of pain and misery on its way to balance out all that smut ;]
After the second journey, [Marius] came home weary and uncommonly sad. He said, as he
had said once before, that “Those Who Must Be Kept” seemed to be at peace.“I hate it what these creatures are!” I said.
“No, never say such a thing to me, Amadeo!” he burst out. In a flash I’d seen him
more angry and uncomposed than ever in our lives. I’m not sure I’d ever seen him
really angry in our lives.He approached me and I shrank back, actually afraid. But by the time he struck me,
hard across the face, he’d recovered himself, and it was just the usual brain-jarring
blow.I accepted it, and then threw him one exasperated searing glance. “You act like a
child,” I said, “a child playing Master, and so I must master my feelings and put up
with this.“Of course it took all my reserves to say this, especially when my head was swimming,
and I made my face such an obdurate mask of contempt that suddenly he burst out
laughing.I started to laugh too.
^Could they have really lasted as a ship if not for what separated them? Idk really but they are like many VC ships, beautiful and
beautifully dysfunctional.
I didn’t know that post was being reblogged and it makes me happy that it is but in the tags I found someone defending Louis’s narrative as truthful and I’m actually really curious about that point of view! Pretty much anyone with whom I discuss the vampire chronicles agree that Lestat is the more reliable narrator like literally no one I have spoken to says they believe Louis’s narrative over Lestat’s and I’d love for someone with that stance to get in my ask box and like, try to convince me to believe Louis over Lestat. That could be super fun!!
ooc; I feel like Louis was very particular about what he talked about and how he spoke of it when he gave his interview. Louis is a very cautious individual who, in canon, is repeatedly stated as valuing his privacy, so for him to give the interview in the first place suggests that he had reasons for doing so. I’ve always surmised one factor was that he wanted Lestat to be angry and come find him. He didn’t really know Lestat’s circumstances re: Lestat going to ground, so for all he was aware, Lestat could have been out there somewhere, conscious and aware.
I think one of the more interesting inconsistencies is the timing of Louis’ encounter with Lestat at the end of Interview with the Vampire. Louis states that it was “just last spring” that he and Armand had encountered Lestat in New Orleans, acting crazy. Lestat verifies in The Vampire Lestat that Louis & Armand did come to New Orleans (although his account of the story is definitely different from Louis’), but he states that their visit occurred in the 1920s, shortly before he went to ground. I think with the timing, Lestat’s definitely more believable due to the whole fact that he did go to ground for YEARS, which then leads me to believe Louis’ whole story regarding their reunion is fictitious (although, at the same time, Lestat WAS kind of losing it, so). I think it was an intentional lie on Louis’ part, probably to put a bullseye on Lestat’s location just to be that douchebag. And suggesting the encounter was more recent would make it seem like Lestat was still there.
Of course, Daniel ended up running into Armand instead of Lestat. 😉I think a lot of how Louis speaks of the past with Lestat was due to him feeling pretty fucking bitter at the time, and honestly, I think he probably didn’t fully understand a lot of Lestat’s motives back then. Louis is good at telling the truth, but not the complete story, and both he and Lestat are great at viewing things exclusively from their own points of view. They’re both very opinionated. Of course, Lestat’s also very good at exaggerating.
To make a long story short–it’s always been my belief that when Louis lies, he lies intentionally. I think Louis and Lestat’s narratives together make the actual true story.
Oh! I absolutely think Louis’s lies are totally intentional! I think he’s dishonest in his narrative, not delusional! That exact inconsistency, Louis’s description of speaking to Lestat in the ruined house, is where I started side-eyeing Louis and second-guessing everything he tells us throughout his narrative. He didn’t just mark Lestat’s location, he made up what was apparently a totally fictitious Vampire trying to get Lestat’s attention just to make the encounter that much more…what? Dramatic? I guess?
“…and honestly, I think he probably didn’t fully understand a lot of Lestat’s motives back then.”
The lack of communication between them is like, THE issue in their relationship honestly. And the major problem is that the thing Louis wants most of all, answers about Vampires and their origin, is the one thing Lestat is literally forbidden to provide. Poor Louis was just wanted some rhyme and reason to his immortal life, the same way Lestat did when he left all of those messages for Marius over the years. They’re very similar in their need for knowledge, imo.
“I think Louis and Lestat’s narratives together make the actual true story.” I like this conclusion a lot! It’s just unfortunate we don’t actually get to hear them both tell two sides of the same story but for a very brief bit, because of course Anne Rice wouldn’t write and publish all of the Claudia years again told form Lestat’s pov. But! I wish we could read that, you know? In Louis’s narrative we get a brief background of his life before Lestat, and then most of the story revolves around his life with and after Lestat. Whereas Lestat’s story is almost completely without Louis until the very end, and their interactions are largely summarized. Like I said, it wouldn’t make sense in the real world to recap everything in Louis’s story form Lestat’s point of view. But I think if we were able to hear ALL of Interview with the Vampire from Lestat’s point of view, we’d end up with the absolute truth by picking through and putting together both narratives. It’d be a wonderful read!!!
Thanks for the response!!!! (:
“Louis is a very cautious individual who, in canon, is repeatedly stated as valuing his privacy, so for him to give the interview in the first place suggests that he had reasons for doing so. I’ve always surmised one factor was that he wanted Lestat to be angry and come find him.”
“I think Louis and Lestat’s narratives together make the actual true story.”
The lack of communication between them is like, THE issue in their relationship honestly
^Yep! Very much agree. AND WE CAN BLAME MARIUS FOR THIS, who forbade Lestat from telling the secrets ;A; This may have been retconned, but one good reason Marius gives for not telling the vampire origin story, etc., is that Lestat’s fledgling(s) might not be able to handle the truth:
[Lestat:] “Yes, ” I said. “But the legends, our origins … What about those
children that I make? Can’t I tell them- "[Marius:] "No. As I told you, tell part and you will end up telling all. Besides,
if these fledglings are children of the Christian god, if they are
poisoned as Nicolas was with the Christian notion of Original Sin and
guilt, they will only be maddened and disappointed by these old tales.
It will all be a horror to them that they cannot accept. Accidents,
pagan gods they don’t believe in, customs they cannot understand.
One has to be ready for this knowledge, meager as it may be. Rather
listen hard to their questions and tell them what you must to make
them contented. And if you find you cannot lie to them, don’t tell
them anything at all. Try to make them strong as godless men today
are strong. But mark my words, the old legends never. Those are
mine and mine alone to tell. "
I-want-my-IWTV 