For the most part, yes, I am grateful for that blessing EVERY DAY. Seriously. Every SJW™ argument that passes my dash, I breathe easier when I see that it’s not for OUR fandom.
Fiction =/= Reality. Fiction has been used for centuries to explore and investigate things we love about Reality, things we don’t understand, even things we find repulsive about Reality. Fiction is in fact Speculative Reality: “What if X happened to Y? How would that improve our understanding of X and Y?”
To investigate the text thoughtfully is one thing, but our fandom veterans -myself included- can see that a lot of this SJW Culture™ seems more about “calling out,” choosing a Problematic™ topic to battle with (there are tons in our canon to choose from!) and using that as an excuse to attack, rather than the desire for a rational discussion. They often do this in the name of Righteousness (for popularity? Or just their own satisfaction?), but there are so many Problematic™ topics that are NOT simply black or white, topics which have been argued about long before the internet, and will continue to be argued about forever! I’ve seen good blogs deactivate (or go on hiatus) for being dogpiled for the slightest headcanon or SJW disagreements, and that’s not what I want to promote in our fandom, regardless of who’s right.
Sometimes, I just want to enjoy something without feeling bad about it. There’s plenty to feel bad about in the world and while in some cases SJWs are useful when they try to attack EVERYTHING, they take the fun out of life.
Life, literature and art have always been problematic. True art provokes. What, do these SJWs want a nanny-state? Or how about a Puritan Revival?
Yes, fight for what’s right, but don’t get in the way of others trying to enjoy stuff.
This is a fun question. I grew to type everything properly in french in my texts so I’m bad at this but here is what I remember or still catch in other people’s texts.
How To (Badly) French Text 101 – The basics
MDR: Mort de rire (Dying of laughter)
SLT: Salut (Hi)
BJR: Bonjour (Hello)
DSL: Désolé(e) (Sorry)
JTM: Je t’aime (I love you)
RPZ: Représente (Represent. It’s some kind of a joke)
OKLM: Au calme (chill)
TKT: T’inquiètes pas (Don’t worry)
DTC: Dans ton cul (in your ass)
VTF: Vas te faire (go fuck yourself)
RAF: Rien à faire/foutre (I don’t care/give a fuck)
SMS: A text/message
And that’s all I could think of
I always loved “plop”, which is a common greeting in French MMOs, basically “salut”. You might enter a battleground on World of Warcraft and see a million people saying “Plop!” “PLOP” in the chat, which sounds ridiculous in English.
I remember asking “Why is everyone saying “plop” and “murder” (MDR)?”
My French friend also taught me some more:
TG: Ta guele (Shut up)
PTN: Putain (F*ck)
STP: S’il te plaît (Please)
Also: BSR: bonsoir (good evening) CAD: c’est-à-dire (that is to say) A+: à plus tard (see you later) EN+: en plus (on top of that)
I didn’t
know some of these, and there’s a lot I don’t use (in fact I only use DSL, DTC,
TG, TG, STP/SVP (s’il vous plait) and @+), but everything is correct, except
for some little mistakes here and there :
“
T’inquiètes pas” ;
“
Vas te faire” (foutre) ; and of course “ta gueule”
I also use :
c for “c’est”
CQFD : ce qu’il fallait démontrer (that which was to be demonstrated)
Qd mm :
quand même (though/still)
And a last
one, not very clever but… meh, I like it : CMB/CTB : comme ma bite/ comme
ta bite (like my dick/ your dick)
@vampchronfic would back me up on this: So I want to say Yes. Louis spends many pleasurable evenings reclining on a plush couch at the Rue Royale, with Lestat’s arm wrapped around his shoulders, a comfy blanket over them both, reading together with their favorite music on, or bingewatching something like Peaky Blinders… we all know Lestat can’t sit perfectly still for very long, so you know he’s petting Louis with his free hand, maybe rearranging the pillows around them, you know… cuddly fidgeting *u*
Louis’ default expression was never a full smile, but it’s closer to a smile now than it ever was in the past. He has the Mona Lisa partial-smile nailed down, and it’s natural. He’s visited Hell and been brought back, found Earth much more pleasant in comparison. He’s got his angel, and they can communicate now in a way that was impossible before. There’s still friction, but any healthy relationship has that and they’re both so in tune with each other that they can diagnose an issue before it spirals too far out of control, “Wait. Are you saying that because you mean it, or are you cranky because you’re hungry?”They’re huge toddlers and it’s usually that.
Who in this world is super smiley all day everyday kind of happy? But yes, Louis is as close to everyday kind of happy that he’s ever been ❤
Okay trying this again (not on the tablet and in the correct blog!)–I’m in full agreement with #i-want-my-iwtv. It’d be odd if Louis had a big ole grin plastered on his face all the time, but as far as contentment and happiness, he’s as close to that as he has ever been in his long life. Lestat knows it and as far as Louis’s concerned, that’s what matters. Because he presents a rather sober appearance you might get the idea he is humorless, but those are the ones you have to watch out for – he’ll slay the room (if you will pardon the expression) with a well-placed one liner. As for smiling–sure he does—but those mega-watt smiles? I’d guess he saves most of those for Lestat.
It’s Armand and it’s actually canonand one of my favorite parts to visualize in QotD(although it’s honky-tonk not ragtime, but their styles are related) I mean, just imagine Daniel waking up to that, looking completely DONE.
Queen of the Damned, page 88
It’s update time! You were right
@i-want-my-iwtv in your assumption that Lestat would love it.
Now go ahead and imagine them dancing to these tunes.
#IT GOT BETTER
Thanks for the update, @luthi69! If anyone is in a bad mood, just TRY and keep that mood with this bouncy happy music on, JUST TRY.
And now I AM imagining Lestat, Daniel, and Armand paying a jazz band to play this all night at a club in NOLA, dancing to it w/ people and having such a good time ❤
//Okay, this needs to be answered OOC, because my Lestat would have to answer with my personal headcanon, b/c I think Mater is full of shit.
According to canon and Anne/Mater, her vampires do not experience sexual pleasure with their genitals. In QotD, Lestat calls his cock useless, claiming that it can no longer do what it was intended to, or some shit like that (I have a migraine and I’m not looking it up, but I’m sure @i-want-my-iwtv could give you the precise quote because she’s amazing).
Anne of course (typically) reneges on this when she wrote PL, creates a bunch of faulty science bullshit so that Lestat can jizz for science and create Viktor.
In fanon, it’s generally accepted that, yes, the vampires can have sex. There is some variation on this depending on what fic you are reading or who you are RPing with–but it’s generally agreed upon that vampire sex is 100% about the blood and sensuality, and that, even if they aren’t going to orgasm in the traditional sense, they are still going to get something pretty intense out of the entire situation.
There are some pretty amazing fics out there that make sense of all this, but since Vampire Chronicles fan fiction doesn’t technically exist, I can’t help you find them.
For my purposes, sure, Lestat has sex. Plenty of it. And it’s primarily about the blood. But there is also fun to be had with their bodies, and that’s more fun to write anyway, so there you have it.
ooc: ALL OF THIS. Also like… you can’t tell me that vampire sensation is 10x that of a human and expect me to believe that sensual touch does nothing for them. Maybe they can’t reach climax but that’s what the blood is for. Doesn’t mean sexual acts don’t work as amazing foreplay.
ooc: I’ve written about this before at some point I believe, but that’s very much my take on it too. Especially this: ‘you can’t tell me that vampire sensation is 10x that of a human and expect me to believe that sensual touch does nothing for them’
Hell yeah.
^Basically agreed with all 3 ppl here. Respect #Your headcanon may vary on this topic.
Canon doesn’t directly take on whether their dicks even work until the 3rd book, when Lestat says:
“I studied my reflection … and the organ, the organ we don’t need, poised as if ready for what it would never again know how to do or want to do, marble, a Priapus at a gate” – Lestat, Queen of the Damned
So I’ve discussed this topic at length in my tags for it: #asexuality, #asexual, #sex, #sexuality, #lets talk about sex. So check those out for more discussion on it. Ricean vampires still do feel sexual lust, it’s channeled through the experience of taking/sharing blood, and other sensually physical things.
In fanon there is a wide spectrum of whether they can have penetrative sex, some even speculate that their um… output… would be very bloody.
TL;DR: It all depends on your idea of what sex is. There are human couples who are unable (or do not want) to experience penetrative sex, and they can still be intimate with each other in other ways.
Claudia asks Louis about sex in IWTV, and he replies that it “‘…was something hurried…And… it was seldom savored… something acute that was quickly lost. I think that it was the pale shadow of killing.’”
He could have been lying a little to downplay it, so that she wouldn’t feel as bad for missing out on smtg she would never be able to experience, or maybe bc he truly felt that the experience of killing supercedes mortal intercourse. We don’t know bc #unreliable narrator.
ALL THAT SAID, if you prefer to take AR’s word as the gospel for canon, she has been definitive about it:
(there is a space here for no good reason thanks Tumblr!)
I think that reproductive obstacle (vampires are undead, they cannot carry a growing baby inside of dead flesh) is why Anne Rice made the choice that they could BE sexual, but not in a reproductive way.
All of that and I want to add my two cents
If we think about it, they are being “sexual” in a reproductive way. Their reproduction it’s done it by means of blood interchange, it’s the vampire’s way to carry on the species, so to speak. So for me, it makes perfect sense that their sexual act it’s precisely blood interchange as well.
Sex is for reproduction after all (from a biological point of view), intercourse is the human way and blood the vampire way. So sexual organs may not be involved for them, but that’s about as far as the difference has to go, I think. All the other aspects of sex that we add to it wouldn’t have to change or be excluded for them.
So I would say vampires do have sex, they just don’t need sexual organs to do it. And I might say that’s also why they don’t seem to mind genders at all.
// Coming in again, because why not? Not as if I added much the first time around.
Excellent points made by everyone so far! I just had some thoughts on sexual preference that occurred to me.
First off, as everything here, there’s no definite answer to any of this, it’s all up to how any individual interprets it or wants to play it out.
We all know that vampires can canonically find literally anyone attractive (how sexual that is is up for debate), especially when they are after their blood or while they are actually feeding from them. It seems to be impossible to drink someone’s blood without being intimate to some degree, even if the only intent is to kill them. Gender, looks, personality, everything seems to not really matter at that point.
So much for feeding. I think with sexual – or maybe romantic is a better word – preferences, vampires can have those same as humans have, they might just on the whole be more open-minded, in part maybe due to the different views and vision granted by the blood. And, obviously, many of them really discover that they don’t mind genders at all, if they haven’t already figured that out before they were turned.
As far as sexual organs go, I could see that while they are obviously not needed for the intended biological reason of reproduction, they are probably still sensitive spots when handled in pleasurable ways. Sex isn’t just about doing things that lead to climax after all, so for vampires every contact other than the actual blood exchange might well just be a kind of foreplay, but, hey. Foreplay is fun!
@perladivenezia: thank u for that addition, I meant “reproductive” in a mortal way, and you brought up a REALLY GREAT POINT, in how “reproductive” can be considered in a vampiric way.
@darknessmolten: “As far as sexual organs go, I could see that while they are obviously not needed for the intended biological reason of reproduction, they are probably still sensitive spots when handled in pleasurable ways.”
YES. That, plus everything else you added, very well-put.
Can we talk about… how Louis repeatedly has visual/auditory/tactile hallucinations, episodes of dissociation and depersonalization, and panic and anxiety attacks all throughout IWTV but these things are never really touched upon again in the series… like these are all possible symptoms of very severe depression, which I guess Rice alludes to Louis having throughout the series, but like honestly Louis was barely functional in IWTV and that’s never really been demonstrated again… in the later books Louis is always described as being calm, quiet, morally exceptional, conveniently kind, and romantically “sad.” I’ve always felt like the others’ perception of Louis was completely different from Louis’s perception of himself in his own account, and I wonder what ever happened to that intensity in his character in IWTV. I think if it’s touched upon later at all, it’s in Merrick? A little? Still though, it feels like Louis was conveniently stabilized and made static in the narrative in order to make him an easier character to sideline lmao
Very much so…..
//Frankly, this is an astute observation. And I think a lot of the changes in Louis’ character came, frankly, from his author no longer wishing to associate with him. Anne made it quite clear that she hated Louis’ voice and never wished to write in it again–and it took her almost forty years (39, to be exact) for her to be able to write in it again (I’m referring to the Epilogue in Prince Lestat).
ooc; I agree with @devilsfool re: Anne. I believe she was actually quoted at one point after writing Merrick saying that she didn’t want to ever write in Louis’ voice again??? Or something like that. She definitely expressed not caring all that much for his character.
But I can agree with what you’re saying too, because ultimately, IwtV was the only first-person narrative from Louis until the last chapter of PL. I’ve always felt Louis to be this intense perfectionist that can’t tolerate his own downfalls, and I definitely agree that he shows numerous symptoms of depression. He’s his biggest critic, and I think that shows a lot in IwtV.
I feel like IwtV would have seemed a lot different if told from Lestat’s perspective? Because while Lestat may get really, really angry with Louis sometimes, his descriptions of Louis are the most glorified in the books. He’ll talk about Louis moping around, but he paints a general picture of Louis being a very strong person that is dedicated to his convictions. Louis is literally his emotional rock, and really, I don’t believe Lestat would actually ever openly write of any breakdowns Louis may or may not have had. And I feel like if Louis was to have a bad bout of depression, Lestat would be the one to know, above anyone else.
Then you have Khayman’s description of Louis, where he flat out says that Louis can’t exist without Lestat. And Armand’s bit about Louis in TVA paint him as very melancholy, imo.
I also look at where Louis was when he gave the interview. He’s a very careful, private person, and he had his reasons for giving the interview in the first place (which can be debated in itself; I’ve always thought it was a cry out for Lestat and/or suicidal recklessness). He’d been alone for years and felt he’d nothing left. He was infuriated that Daniel didn’t see his story as despairingly as he himself viewed it to be. Louis felt down on everything at that point, and I don’t know that he’d really be that open with his experiences and feelings on any other night?
Idk, I’ve always felt that for as emotional as Louis seems to be, he still sucks majorly at actually dealing with his own emotions. Which is how I reason his major breakdown(s) in Merrick.
/writing this at 1am and hopes it makes sense lol
#YES #THIS #this post cannot be improved upon
Gonna add 2 things anyway.
1 – AR wrote IWTV after the loss of her daughter. Louis was pretty much AR herself, dealing with that grief, questioning a God as to why he had to punish her so much. What did Louis do to deserve a life-in-death living hell? What did Claudia do to deserve eternal imprisonment in that little body? What did AR’s daughter do to deserve dying so painfully at such an early age?
In the end, Louis (and the readers) draws his own answers and has to come to some kind of peace in order to move on. Lestat has his Savage Garden, in which peace lies in the fact that there is no explanation, bad things just happen to good people. The most we can do is try to do Good and help eachother survive the slings and arrows, try not to be the slinger of arrows, and if we are, to do it for the sake of Good. We’re all imperfect.
2 – Louis’ voice is pretty damn hard to write, when done well. My guess is that AR didn’t see a need to revisit his POV, especially with the intensity of focus it required. @annabellioncourt had some excellent points on this awhile back:
“Louis is more along the lines of the Oscar Wilde’s era of the very late 19th century, which is what most people think of today when they think “Victorian writing.” Similar in voice (though not subject) would also be Matthew Arnold (read some of his essays, and tell me that’s not how Louis talks), Wilkie Collins, and Henry James.
”…Louis is not so much involved in human goings on, he’s aware of events and films, but still speaks in the language of the century where he spent the most time communicating with others–also he would not have lost his speech patterns over those decades with Armand because Armand was mostly isolated in his language circles. So we can look at all of that as to why Louis talks the way he does.“
“Louis does show a HEAVY influence from the French symbolist poets (the school that Charles Baudelaire was from).”
And of course Louis would express himself in the language of the writers he enjoyed. OF COURSE HE WOULD. We all know he’s basically a big ol’ bookworm w/ fangs.
I’ve discussed Louis with some of my professors as this embodiment for grief and severe depression. I latched onto him tightly when I was, oh sixteen? Seventeen? He is the most living-dead, the most human yet the least human, this liminal being trapped between two states of being, and he balances on that line so well in his melancholy bordering at times on madness. There are some emotions so hard to put into words, and Anne RIce wrote an entire book from the point of view of a character to explain those emotions, they came through not in his words alone, but also his tone–one we often associate with the grim and the dark, this late Victorian, elegant prose–and in his dress, his manners, his moods, the first book is such an exquisite thing.
David, the collector of stories who does not make stories, wants to be like him. If he was living the life that Louis led, he would have stories. How often, perhaps not as often now as in ages past, but how often do people talk or at least thing in terms of wanting a sense of this melancholy to help with their art. That art can only come from suffering. Its not always true, but sometimes it is. Anne Rice felt a grief unlike any that I have ever known in my life and from it she crafted a magnificent novel. There is so much of her own pain filtered into that work, but she’s daring the readers a little, I think, to ask themselves do you really want to feel this? To become this? It isn’t worth the product, it isn’t worth the stories and the ability, it isn’t worth it, this existence that is neither life nor death is too much a price to pay for anything that you think you might gain from it.
“There is so much of her own pain filtered into that work, but she’s daring the readers a little, I think, to ask themselves do you really want to feel this? To become this? It isn’t worth the product, it isn’t worth the stories and the ability, it isn’t worth it, this existence that is neither life nor death is too much a price to pay for anything that you think you might gain from it.”
^I think that’s very astute, and I think it’s pretty much what Louis is saying in this scene when he’s trying to convince Madeleine not to vampire. Since Louis was essentially Anne’s avatar throughout that book.
I really think AR would trade all her success for her daughter (and her husband) back, no hesitation ;A;
“Do you find us beautiful? Magical? Our white skin, our fierce eyes. ‘Drink,’ you ask me. Do you have any idea of the thing you will become?!”