I just got my hands on The Vampire Armand and Blood and Gold. But is it important to read Armand’s story before Marius’s? Or should I read Marius’s then Armand’s? What’s your hot take?



Personally, I would always recommend reading them in order of publication, bc that’s the order AR explored the characters and their stories. And some things may be mentioned in B&G that would spoil TVA. 

TVA has a lot more of the problematic stuff re: Amadeo/Marius as a ship, so if you’re not interested in that, you might want to avoid it entirely. 

I admit that I like Armand more as a character than Marius, I enjoy his voice, the framing of that story in terms of what’s happening with the other characters at that point in canon, and TVA obvs has more focus on Armand, and, I think, TVA is a better story overall, so I prefer that book entirely, but that’s just me!

Anyone can add their thoughts on this, too 😀

I’m just gonna hop in here real quick as someone who really enjoyed Blood&Gold, and say that it depends on what you’re looking for.

TVA has a rather contained narrative, and focuses mainly on Venice, everything else gets wrapped up quickly. And that’s totally fine if that’s what you’re interested in. And TVA is definitely written in a more enticing manner than B&G. 

B&G does not go into as much detail about the same events as TVA of course so it is a bit like zooming in on one specific detail in a very large picture. B&G offers the picture, and that can get a bit tedious to work through. But it also brings with it a whole array of characters you didn’t see much of until then, or didn’t know anything about before. You learn more about the history of the covens and the druidic cults, about the Talamasca and just “vampire history” in general. It was very satisfying, for me at least. 

That being said, I would also suggest reading TVA first because what is hinted or implied in that book, gets explained in B&G, so you get a nice “Ohh!” moment out of it. It gives you the perspective that TVA didn’t get, since it was written from Amadeo’s limited point of view.




Comparison I’ve been meaning to do for awhile. I don’t think these shots’ similarity was an accident. 

  • Claudia and Madeleine are both wearing green, signaling youth, envy, (Madeleine’s might also relate to her still being part of nature, as a mortal). 
  • Louis and Lestat are both wearing warm colors (purple & red), being in positions of power.
  • Lighting is reversed; Lestat is back-lit and Louis is front-lit.
  • Louis and Lestat are looming into frame from the upper right, Claudia and Madeleine are pushed back, and react from the lower left. 
  • Claudia and Madeleine’s reactions are different but similar in their initial expression and silence.
  • etc…

Also can I just say I love how Louis and Lestat both express their power differently. With Louis, he doesn’t even have to touch Madeleine to intimidate her. He asserts his dominance with a piercing gaze, and his power rests in his cutting words. Meanwhile, Lestat is explosively violent; all flaring arms and snarling lips. He physically pushes Claudia, even though he’s obviously already stronger than her, which I personally interpret as Lestat being unable to trust the power in his words alone and relying on physical touch to express his emotions instead.

^Good addition @covenofthearticulate ;u; This is another one of those moments that’s easy to miss in the movie (and the book), when ppl say Louis is so weak, it’s more that he shows his strength more subtly, like you’ve described.





“Why do you say such things?”

I think
it’s my favorite scene in the movie, because it’s the one where – when you are
blank of later stories portrayal – you realize that Lestat is not this
one-dimensional villain. This scene is so symptomatic of his attitude:
first he’s all flame and rage, then he casts a bard, and
while fiercely smiling over his “victory”, he already regrets what he just said.
He does have a conscience, whatever kind of nasty or stupid things he can come up with, and he’s genuinely affected and
struggled by what he’s inflicting on his loved ones. He’s without any shadow of a doubt an unbearable brat, but also so much more than that. It’s not that this
dork has no affection for Louis and Claudia – he indubitably does – it’s just
than he doesn’t know how to hold a close/family relationship without being sometimes unfair and/or cruel.

Big shout
out for Kristen Dunst and Tom Cruise here, by the way. They are both amazing.

I always think the look on Lestat’s face here is him realizing is that he genuinely doesn’t have an answer for Claudia’s question. Even he doesn’t know why he acts the way he does. I think he sincerely does want them to be a happy family, and yet he’s continually the one getting in the way of that by treating Louis and Claudia does. Even here, he’s obviously touched and happy at the idea of making peace with Claudia – “We forgive each other, then?” – and yet he instinctively still twists the knife in with what he says to her. He’s making himself miserable almost as much as Louis and Claudia, but he can’t seem to just snap out of it and be a genuinely good father or partner. And deep down, I don’t think he even really understands why he’s doing it.

It’s a question for the audience to think about too, I think – why does he do it? I think when you know his backstory, you have to wonder if on some level he associates love with being hurt, and he’d rather be the one hurting others than getting hurt again. Or maybe he just literally has no idea how to have a healthy relationship or a healthy family, since the family he grew up with was horribly abusive and he hasn’t really had any positive relationships since then. (His mother and Nicki are the two possible exceptions to that, but they both came with some serious complications and ultimately dysfunction.) None of this excuses the way he acts in any way, of course – it just is interesting to think about how he became the way he is.

The fact that you have a tag for the AR lollercoaster makes me so damned happy





I just truly believe this to be the universal experience of all Anne Rice fans, and some of us been up and down the lollercoaster a few times so far, and some of us haven’t had to deal with it yet. AND I PROMSE ALL THE LITTLE SUMMER CHILDREN, IT’S COMING.


She’s a divisive and controversial writer for sure, on a lot of layered meta levels that aren’t just like mainstream casual normies thinking the books are scandalous or something. Tumblr is obviously a place where injustices aren’t ignored and it takes about five minutes of browsing to start finding the deeper readings of her work, the bad topics and sketchy opinions, etc etc. It’s so easy to just enjoy her work on the surface and it’s just such a fucking mess when you look closer. 

AND I MEAN THAT’S THE THING? I know people get suuuuuuper salty about Anne Rice and it’s always kind of crushing when people learn about the fandom history but like YALL I WAS THERE, I’M OVER IT LOL. I had the salty Anne Rice phase already and it took me like 4 years to bring myself to read Blood Canticle cause I was like So Done With Her Shit at that point. 

Are these books good and interesting enough to keep me this occupied on their own? Probably not. But they were really special to me growing up and I found cool fandom people and made genuinely awesome friends here so it’s become a weird hobby to have. I’M STUCK HERE NOW. 

I get the AR hate, I really do. I really, really do. I get the whole “omg I waited for the new book and it was about bird aliens” devastation. I REALLY DO. But we all go through this if you stick around for too long. I went through it already, it’s out of my system. I’m done being pissy about it. (tbh I went through this when I read Merrick the first time and I was like wtf I thought this was gonna be an epic crossover with Rowan getting into some shit and instead we’re reading about David fucking some chick in a cave what IS THIS. And that was like 15 years ago LMAO.)

Some people interact with media by criticizing and dissecting and that’s super awesome, other people want to be brainless and just dick around and make memes. I have a stressful life and I deal with heavy shit pretty often so I’m not here to like sling negativity in any form, that’s just not how I like to use my energy and free time. It doesn’t make it less valuable, it’s just not my thing. I put the time in with salty AR years, I’m done, I’m just here to laugh now. AND LAUGH I DO. 

AND LIKE IF THERE’S ONE THING I CAN SAY? A PIECE OF ADVICE TO THE NEWBS WHO HAVEN’T GONE THROUGH IT? Stop having expectations. Read enough AR to see that she’s fucking whacky af. Read Taltos. Read the werewolf book. When the new VC comes out, go in expecting that writer. Don’t go in expecting QOTD 2. If shredding books is fun for you, by all means! Knock yourself out! There will be plenty to shred! But if you’re here for fun just go in for fun. It’s lulzy as fuck if you don’t take it too seriously. 

did i write this post in my sleep!

#PREACH (Um I think I co-wrote this w/ nightislandofficial and monstersinthecosmos in my sleep, too)

Anne Rice is completely bonkers. And problematic. These are some of the reasons I love her. Lurid, overwrought prose! Preternaturally beautiful, sexually ambiguous vampires! Velvet for miles!

… yes, I’m baffled and (somewhat) amused by SPACE BIRBS, but at least she’s always entertaining.


Some thoughts re: this post, because I’m always so confused as to why these heated discussions always center on Daniel. Anon said:

“for so many years, a goodly bulk of this fandom has only [attributed?] Daniel as having any value to the story when he’s attached to Armand, or made him the butt of crazy jokes.”

Again, I’ve been in this fandom online for a decade now and spent a lot of time on websites from the 90′s (@i-want-my-iwtv’s been here since the late 90′s I believe), and honestly? Yeah, people make train jokes. It’s in the nature of fandom to take one trait in a character that people find funny and make jokes about it that are parodic or caricaturish in nature. Is it kinda dumb? Yes. Is it reductive? Yes. Is it not-really-that-funny-the-fifteenth-time? YES.

But I genuinely, hand on my heart, cannot say that I’ve ever felt like people made train jokes any more often than they made pyro jokes, or, jesus christ, blender jokes. Or Nicki’s hands jokes.

Is there a difference between the seriousness of the things being joked about here? Yes. See above – this is in the nature of fandom, and it’s one of the downsides. Characters frequently get reduced to one trait, sometimes in ways that are insensitive, and always in ways that disregard their inner depth. But this isn’t something that is particular to Daniel or reflects how fandom feels about Daniel in particular. The entirety of my experience in the VC fandom indicates that Daniel has consistently been one of the best loved characters, despite the lack of screentime that Anne has given him (a lack which I’ve seen lamented a lot), and has generally been considered one of the “main four” or “main five”, alongside Louis, Lestat, Armand, and sometimes Marius.

As for fandom only being interested in Daniel when he’s with Armand – the only screentime Daniel has is with Armand. Unless you count the framing narrative in IwtV, and he doesn’t even have a name there. Daniel becomes a fully-fledged character in QotD, in which he’s with Armand. That’s the reason he becomes a vampire. And again – I don’t think this is a Daniel thing. It’s a fanfic thing. 

I could probably count on one hand the number of Louis fics I’ve read that don’t ship him with Lestat or with anyone, or the number of Pandora fics that aren’t about her relationship with Marius, or the number of Gabrielle fics that focus on her solitary travels. Or even Armand fics that aren’t about him and Daniel or him and Marius (which is a whole other topic). A lot of fanfic is focused on romance, it’s one of the main reasons why people write fic. I really don’t think it has anything to do with a lack of fandom interest in Daniel or any of these characters as people.




replied to your post “Speaking to the connotations of race, it’s interesting that people in…”

wait holdup where are all these people who think daniel is a throwaway? WE NEED A WORD.

IKR? Can we get some Daniel love and support on this post, plz? He puts up with SO MUCH.

Honestly I’ve never seen that be a commonly expressed sentiment in this fandom, and I’ve been here on LJ and tumblr since 2008. But tbh fandom drama/wank usually does involve someone going “everybody / you all are always doing or saying X reprehensible thing”, whether or not that’s actually accurate. If OP could provide examples that would have been more helpful.

//Did someone say give Daniel Molloy love and support!! Mission accepted!! 💜💗💜

Abandoned by their writer this is canon, surname misspelt, continuity of narrative ignored or glossed over – sadly yes. But seen as a throwaway character, I haven’t gotten that impression no. As with most problematic favs (read all of vc characters tbh) he’s not always the most popular but that doesn’t mean he has no fans or merits therein, I think as a character he’d rather be limited edition than popular anyway! As a product of the ‘modern era’ he’s a rarity for the readers to identify with, a modernist human – just as easily he could be us – thrust into the vampiric world. Chased no less. A life or death love story. Even as a vampire he’s not old and crusty like some of the ancients and latterly under Marius’ tender loving care *ahem* has blossomed into a dynamic free thinking member of the coven. Anyone who says ‘Hey Marius, all due respect but No! You’re wrong’ has my vote! But I’m biased I guess being a Daniel mun and all.

He was a key figure in Louis, Lestats and Armands lives. Without him blowing the whistle and publishing Iwtv would L&L have reunited, maybe not. Armand would have survived as a ghost of himself in New Orleans without a striking reporter to stalk no doubt – But he wouldn’t have grown, unfurled in himself in the new age. Or rather gone back to a self he may have been if allowed to grow, mature and live as a mortal in Venice – mischevious, generous with a hint of brass impulse with a leaning for cruelty. The dynamic was off, unbalanced as Armand had the supernatural advantage over his eventual mortal beau, but Daniel wasn’t as much of an innocent as some like to paint him. Not that he deserved what happened to him, of course not but he possibly pre Armand had a unhealthy relationship with alcohol, and let’s face it he went back to the guys place who told him he was a vampire? For a story!! This is not a man that had survival instincts primed.

Marius would have gone to ground, buried under a ton of earth and centuries of guilt and self denial without a broken person to heal. His mondus operandi this caretaker urge. He had tenacity in life and I’m glad to see it survives on on death, well from what little has been mentioned of him in PL and Plroa. More of him in the new book as long as that doesn’t make him Canon fodder, literally of course. Right more than enough cheerleading for Mr Molloy.





On the whole pronunciation of Lestat (LestAHt vs Lesaught) my theory is that it’s both. If we accept Lestat’s story from Blackwood Farm that his parents made up his name from the first letters of his brothers’ names, then maybe they never came up with an exact way to pronounce it. Maybe Gabrielle always called him by one, while his father would use the other. This has led to Lestat changing up they way he introduces himself for 250 years.

//or maybe they just called him “you” since their relationship wasn’t too… affective

^Ya, I like all this. I don’t LOVE Blackwood Farm but that explanation is as good as any. I’m sure his family called him all kinds of bad stuff including purposely


his name sound bad, and yes, maybe they never came up with a specific way to pronounce it. I think part of his self-deprecation comes from getting so little affection in his formative years, and not even having a consistently pronounced name is pretty mean ;A;

Anyone can pronounce his name however they want, I think he would be pretty chill about that. Especially considering that people have native accents that affect their pronunciation of words anyway, given how much international travel/business/etc. he does, I don’t think he’d be making an issue with every single person he encounters about the pronunciation of his name.

AR had intended to write his name as “Lestan” after her husband “Stan” + the French word for “the” which is “Le” when preceding masculine words. She’s said that “Lestat” was a typo that she ended up liking. 

ANYWAY, since “Stan” is pronounced like “stand” and not “ton” my preference is to go with the ‘a’ of Lestat as like “stand” or “cat.” I kinda feel like AR’s whole obsession with pronouncing it like “Les-TOT” is another way she divides the “real fans” from the rest of the fans; if you don’t pronounce it her preferred way then you’re not really talking about HER character. But that’s just a theory.

I headcanon that Lestat likes nicknames based on his name, especially “’Stat,” a medical term: “Stat, used as a directive to medical personnel during in an emergency situation, is from the Latin word statim, which means “instantly” or “immediately.”” [X]

I always figured when Anne says “lesTOT” she’s just trying to write/say it in a way that – based on American English vowel pronunciations – approximates European [a], which is much closer to what English has in e.g. “father”, and kinda close to what American English has in “tot”, since that’s the sound it would have been in French. A French person would not say [lestæt] like “cat”.

Personally I like the more French/European pronunciation over the American [lestæt], because I’m not an English speaker, so I’m used to European pronunciation. And I’m not sure he would have Anglified his first name that much. But in the end it just comes down to how much you think he’s “gone native” tbh. But ya after 200 years in the US I doubt he minds people pronouncing his name the English way.



Boy Prisoner #2: Anything can happen when two people share a cell, cuz.

Episode 3×07 “Prison Break-In”

What did happen:

Louis ignored Armand.

They looked at art.

Funny things: I think they looked at “Demon’s Head” by (amazing symbolist painter) Mikhail Vrubel (painted about 1890). 

“…Vrubel started painting sketches and watercolours illustrating the Demon, a long Romantic poem by Mikhail Lermontov. The poem described the carnal passion of “an eternal nihilistic spirit” for a Georgian girl Tamara. “, says wikipedia. 

The painting is nowadays in the collection of The Museum of Russian Art in Kiev, Ukraine. But maybe it was on loan in Louvre? Or maybe they travelled to see Armand’s childhood home country. ; ) Anyway it makes a great addition to the Interview with the Vampire Drinking Game. DRink FoR ranDOM vRUbel!

Yep! Great catch! It’s not identical but it’s very close (painting from the movie below).