“For my characters, I pick my names, really, by instinct and feeling they have to feel right for the character, they have to be pretty to me, and they have to have a sound that I can hear Lestat saying aloud, and Dora was a perfect name. I was also probably influenced by Dora in David Copperfield, by Dickens. I also search passionately for names in many sources. I look through baby name books. I circle the beautiful names when I come across them in history books and art books, and I sometimes write beautiful names on the walls of my room, having come across them in random reading. Names are extremely important to me. I can’t progress with the character until I have the name and can rapidly say the name, and type the name.”
“Lestat’s name doesn’t mean anything. It is a name that I made up. I search hard and long for names that are unique, and Lestat is, in a way, a mistake. There is an old French name in Louisiana, "Lestan”, and my husband’s name is Stan, and I thought I was using the old French name when I wrote Lestat . It was only later that I realized I had added a “t” for an “n”, and created a name that didn’t exist, so you might call it a Freudian slip. Lestat was definitely like Stan. His self confidence, his blonde hair, his blue eyes, his feline grace — all of that was inspired by my husband, Stan. So maybe it means ‘the Stan’.“
I wasn’t even thinking about Lestat when I wrote interview with the vampire I was thinking about Louis. Louis was the hero, everything revolved around Louis. Lestat just sprang to life in the corner of my eye. This character took on all this ferocity. I never sat down and thought “Well, this is based on my husband, Stan,” or “This is what Stan would do.” I had an idea of Lestat as the man of action, the man who could do things that I couldn’t do, that man who could make the decision that I never had the nerve to make; and the person who could go through life joyfully in spite of the questions that torment me — the doubts that torment me, the horror of death that torments me. Of course, that was tied up with the idea that he was an 18th century personality; he was from the age of reason, he was much more rational, much more cynical in some ways than Louis. Louis was more a naïve romantic character, much more I think 19th century. All of that was working in my mind. Not that the Romantic period is limited to the 19th century, certainly not; it starts in the 18th. But still, Lestat represented the Enlightenment. He represented a different view on things. He’s also inherently a comic character, in the sense of always triumphing and always coming back and never being really destroyed. He never really absorbs a tragic definition of himself for very long. He always comes back laughing at everything and just rebounding. It may take him a few years, but he always does it. I really wanted to explore a personality different from my own. He became a kind of dream version of what I’d like to be; he was the man I wanted to be; he was the person I wanted to be. I wanted his strength. And once he became a living character I never had to consciously steer him in any direction. It was just a matter of getting into Lestat and then he’d go, and he’d take me where he wanted in the novel. I never had to worry about his dialogue. My knowledge of him was so complete, and so instinctive, that I could just write. The other characters I might have to think about — where they were coming from, what they had to say. But not him. I know exactly what he thinks about everything. If I walk into a theater and see a play, I know whether he likes it or not. If I watch an opera, I know whether he loves that opera. If I go visit a city, I know what he thinks of that city. I’ll never be away from him; he’ll always be apart of me.
Thanks for the compliments! YES THIS THING IS GLORIOUS ♥u♥
So I’m not sure exactly what you’re getting at, re: an ‘audience book’ vs ‘author’s book’ but it I do know that AR has always advised to “write the book you would want to read.” She just put up two quotes recently that I think are relevant here:
Unfortunately, I think we generally prefer those books coming from negative places for her, and I think it’s because she spun gold from the misery, she fought her demons through those stories and the product was captivating, clawing into the reader and giving us some secondhand catharsis.
Stories that came from a more positive place for her seemed not to produce that kind of engagement for the reader, but it’s important to remember that some ppl may prefer those.
Either way, she’s given us an incredible gift. The stronger works resonate with us to the soul like only our favorite music and art can, the weaker works are humorous and we can lovingly refer to them as “the vampire crackicles,” but even they still have good moments in which AR has tapped into the old veins (pun intended!) to give us that gold we’ve come to expect from her.
I stand by my previous short answer on this subject: I think AR can still capture that old quality we all fell in love with, albeit in slivers. Which is why I can’t disregard any of the books entirely. It’s still hard for me to accept Prince Lestat as canon, I might never, but there are moments and lines of dialogue in it that are SO VERY GOOD. Moments where I’ve had to pause and smile, because it was as if the old Lestat, from IWTV or TVL, actually graced us with his presence, if only for a moment.
MOSTLY tho, surprisingly, their innate curiosity and respect for each other outweighs all the horrible shit they’ve put each other through. Which has been ALOT. Lestat destroyed Armand’s coven dictatorship by being his usual ray of obnoxious sunshine The New and Improved Parisian Vampire 2.0; Armand did help orchestrate the death of one of Lestat’s fledglings and maybe tortured her, too??? before manipulating another of his fledglings into a 100 yr relationship… there’s more than that, but those are big ones.
They seem to be over it all, they’ve made a kind of peace, but they have that contentious kind of rivalry and competition that brothers have.
AR was doing this Fan Questions for Lestat thing awhile back, and Lestat spoke directly about his feelings towards Armand, and I think “he” put it very well:
“Armand’s thoughts are almost impossible for me to penetrate, and his boyish countenance often reveals nothing of his true calculations and feelings. I love him and I respect him — and I know that he loves me — but I never for a moment imagine I’m entirely safe with him.” [X]
And: “I love Armand deeply. My view of Armand has evolved over time. The less I fear him, the more I love him. And the more I suffer, the more I come to understand Armand’s suffering. I have never doubted Armand’s love for me. We are kith and kin, Armand and me.” [X]
I think you have to consider how Armand feels towards Lestat, too.
“I hate him only because I cannot imagine my soul without him.” – Armand about Lestat, The Vampire Armand, [X]
^Footage of Lestat and Armand, they go from smooches to claws in 0.3 seconds. [X]
I don’t really need the IWTV actors to say it, either. Just would have fit on my blog better 😉
For example, some ppl headcanon Gabrielle as transgender. I don’t, personally, but I’m respectful of their opinion. I don’t know what AR would think about that opinion, and I don’t reeeeeally care, bc you don’t need the author’s permission to think whatever you want about canon. Just be respectful of others’ headcanons, too *u*
It’s worth mentioning that in another thread, in another topic, AR is asked about “But as a long time fan, I’ve ( and many other fans, I´m sure..) never understood the whole “Lestat and Louis- thing” and I think in a psychologically way it is also very interesting. Please, can you POFOUNDLY explain this whole relationship?”
^What CAN she really say that would change one single line in any novel about her characters? She’s told us the story, she’s saying it’s up to us to interpret it however we choose. #Your Headcanon May Vary.
Questions like those are the kinds of things that make her want to explicitly spell it out for us (through Lestat’s POV, in PL, here):
““I love you,” I whispered. In a low intimate voice, [Louis] answered: “My heart is yours.””
In writing/storytelling, as in art, there’s the old adage “Show; Don’t Tell.” In this age of social media where we can ask the artist/storyteller anything, should we? Why do we need her Official Confirmation? It doesn’t hurt to ask, but one should take the answers with a grain (or truckload full) of salt.
It seems to me that it’s better to read the story and have your own interpretation, “Read between the lines,” rather than have it broken down and explicitly stated.
I-want-my-IWTV 