Tag Archives: iwantmyiwtv has opinions

I just started reading this book series and I want your opinion on something (I hope the topic of sex doesn’t make you uncomfortable). According to Lestat vampires don’t feel sex drive, in The Tale of the Body Thief one of the things he wants to expierence when he has a human body is sex because he says this is something he can’t do with his vampire body. But in his book Armand mentions that he had sex with Marius several times. P.S. I love your blog, you seem really nice and cool!!!

Leave a comment

Thanks for the compliments on my blargh! *u* I try to answer asks thoughtfully and respectfully and expect the same consideration back from whoever reads my answers ^_____^ 

As always, #your headcanon may vary, bc we’re talking about fictional vampires, they are not people. Whether you consider them to be people in their own world is up to you. For me, I see them as ex-people. They share a supernatural parasite that gradually eats away at their mortal parts, replacing it with its own immortal substance, perfecting their host bodies to its own design. So they exist beyond the definitions of sex and gender for me.

I do not believe the vampires are canonically capable of penetrative sex but do I love fanart/fanfic/RP where they have penetrative sex? YES, YES I DO, MORE PLZ. Have I commissioned such fanart of it for myself? Y E S. Will I commission more of it or write my own in the future? YOU’RE GOTDAMN RIGHT I WILL. I love the creativity of the fanon interpretations and I will support these ideas forever.

image

[^Louis + Lestat by @danyanddany

♥♥♥]

According to Lestat vampires don’t feel sex drive, 

I don’t recall anywhere in canon where Lestat says that vampires do not feel a sex drive. He has described himself as a sensualist, and we know he falls in love easily. I think that they do feel a sex drive, just not in the genitally-penetrative sex way (not the most eloquent phrasing there but I can’t think of another way to put it; “PIV/penis-in-vagina” just doesn’t apply to most of our gay ships). 

Turning vampires seems to be their ultimate “sexual” act that they can perform, bc it is equivalent to pregnancy (a fledgling is being “born to darkness”), and it is always described primarily as the sharing of the Blood between maker and fledgling. I headcanon that Lestat loves the act of performing this, and that’s partly why he has had SO MANY FLEDGLINGS. So I believe that they 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 genitally-penetrative sex, some even speculate that their um… output… would be very bloody. There is fanart/fanfics/RP/etc. in which they can have that kind of sex, and ones in which they cannot. 

in The Tale of the Body Thief one of the things he wants to expierence when he has a human body is sex because he says this is something he can’t do with his vampire body. 

^This is up to every reader’s interpretation, and yes, in my opinion, Ricean vampires in canon cannot have penetrative sex. My main evidence for them as being unable to have genitally-penetrative sex comes from [hit the jump for spoilers]. 

AR has written alot of other novels with genitally-penetrative sex being an important factor, so I doubt it was an oversight in denying it to her vampires. If you want to go by her as the authority on her novels, and many ppl do, she posted definitively about it when asked about Daniel and Marius in PL:

image
image

AR does not go into much further detail than that, even in canon, other than the fact that the sharing of blood is more intimate for them than than simple mortal penetrative sex. Part of why she chose this may be to avoid the issue of pregnancy the way mortals do it; a baby cannot grow in undead flesh, y’know?

TL;DR: Personally, I headcanon them as unable to have genitally-penetrative sex. There are human couples who are unable (or do not want) to experience genitally-penetrative sex, and they can still be sexually intimate with each other in other ways. So it’s partly in how you define sex and intimacy. 

For more on this, I have these tags: #asexuality, #asexual, #sex, #sexuality, #lets talk about sex.

Hit the jump for spoilers.

But in his book Armand mentions that he had sex with Marius several times.

Armand was mortal for some of that book, and Marius did sexual things with him, but not genitally-penetrative sex. After Armand is turned, Marius and Armand have an intimate moment with a mortal woman together, but again, it is not genitally-penetrative sex for them. 

My main evidence for them as being unable to have genitally-penetrative sex comes from:

  • Louis’s description of sex in IWTV:

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’s talking about it as occurring in the past, I think he means when he was mortal. Here he says it’s not equivalent to the act of taking blood from a victim, sex is a lesser experience for him.

  • Lestat’s description of his non-functioning Priapus in QOTD:

“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

^This quote has been interpreted over and over again as meaning many things, one of which being that the vampires have a permanent boner, which I disagree with. I highly doubt Louis, someone with a lot of dignity, would be fine with walking around for eternity with a permanent boner. I blame this misunderstanding on the translators who translated “poised” to “erect” in various other languages.

I interpret that quote as meaning that his Priapus is just “waiting.” 

  • and Pandora’s description of Marius’ non-functioning (but very hard) dick in her book. Pandora wants Marius to sex her up on their ‘wedding night’ and he can’t do it, but they try, awkwardly:

He covered me and kissed my cheek. “Drink from me,” he said, “drink until the pain goes away. It’s only the body dying, drink Pandora, you are immortal.“
“Fill me, take me,” I said. I reached down between his legs.
“It doesn’t matter now.”
But it was hard, this organ I sought, the organ forever lost to the god Osiris. I guided it, hard and cold as it was, into my body. Then I drank and drank, and when I felt his teeth again on my neck, when he began to draw from me the new mixture that filled my veins, it was sweet suckling, and I knew him and loved him and knew all his secrets in one flash which meant nothing.  He was right. The lower organs meant nothing. He fed on me. I fed on him. This was our marriage. –Pandora

I think AR is telling us that in order to be immortal, a great sacrifice must be made. Not just outliving your loved ones, food and drink, sunlight, and your appearance being altered. For many people, sex is as necessary to life as eating and breathing. To give that up for eternity is a huge sacrifice, but, you do get super powers an immortality. Fair trade? 

Okay so like, I haven’t read a lot of the series, so I’m really curious about this because I at least think I saw something about it a while ago but I’ve never really been certain. Does Armand have a band, or is it just Lestat??

Leave a comment

i-want-my-iwtv:

Yep, it’s just Lestat, with his band, Satan’s Night Out, not Armand ;]

How Lestat wants to look on stage:

[fanart source unknown]

How he really looks on stage:

[X]

And…

[X]

But also this:

[X]

GUYS, I had thoughts I wanted to share about the upcoming VC adaptation(s):

  • They better have some rockstar!Lestat moments in the new adaptation (like in the gifs above) Very important. 
  • With awesome concert effects/lighting/pyrotechnics.
  • Don’t let Louis be involved in the pyrotechnics.
  • What would be even cooler is to have the movie and then also have the actor go on a real rock tour
    that we could buy tix to go see! 
  • Have him haul fans from the audience on stage and “bite” them (they would be planted actors).
  • Behind-the-scenes tour bus/backstage videos that are posted to YT or Instagram.

…Add to this post things you want to see in my Lestat Really Goes on Tour concept 

(ﾉ^ヮ^)ﾉ*:・ﾟ✧

The last ask inspired me… have you watched, or do you know anyone who has watched, the Japanese vampire movie “Moon Child”? In a way you could dismiss it as just the product of two rock stars (Gackt and Hyde) indulging themselves wanting to be vampires, but I actually really love how they are (like you answered the other person) people first, vampires second. It’s very interpersonal, very political, one character just happens to be a vampire. Have you got an opinion on it?

Leave a comment

I’ve never heard of “Moon Child”

before, so I’ll throw it out to my followers, has anyone seen this? Comment on this post if so. Hey, if I was a rock star, you better believe I would indulge myself in EVERY WAY HUMANLY POSSIBLE and you bet your a$$ that PLAYING A VAMPIRE IN MY OWN DAMNED MOVIE would be BUT ONE OF THE MANY MANY INDULGENCES.

Looks like it’s free on YT:

I skimmed the very lengthy description and hopped around the video. It doesn’t really seem like my kinda thing, tho, sorry :- 

Hopefully in bumping it here I’ve interested ppl to watch it and get into it w/ you!

Update: Good comments on this post so far! Much appreciated, maybe you’ll change my mind about it…

I was wondering what your opinion was of the vampire films “Let the Right One In” and “Let Me In”? Or the book that inspired both films for that matter. They were some of the more recent beautifully done pieces on vampires, and vampire children, and I was just wondering what your take on them was? Good bad or indifferent, I don’t mind. I love hearing others opinions especially yours. Thank you for reading!

Leave a comment

I’m quite flattered that you want my opinion, apparently I had alot of thoughts on this, you’re getting a Wall of Text™,

enjoy!

I haven’t read the book, and I probably should, but I saw both “Let the Right One In” and “Let Me In.” I preferred the original movie to the US remake but they were both very good! I am really picky about the vampire media I like, they have to be characters first and vampires second, and the vampiring has to be compelling in some way, introducing something new and believable to the lore.

I don’t remember it completely so I can’t get into a lot of detail, but browsing gifs reminds me what I loved about it: a dreamy and chilly atmosphere, lots of good vampire physiology woven in seamlessly, and the child actors were all amazingly talented, they all seemed very genuine, their emotions were real with subtle variations, and not mimicry, which can happen with child actors. The whole cast of both movies had great chemistry and I believed in all of them. The basic concept of Eli needing a mortal attendant, and this is the story of how she found a new one!! #MY HEART.

The original actors were better, in my opinion, bc they seemed more like the kind of kids who might live next door to you. As opposed to the trope of the “girl/boy next door” who is attractive and popular, you might not take special notice of these kids, they have their own kind of beauty but weren’t the conventionally attractive kind you see in ads. 

Eli especially had the perfect blend of childlike curiosity and that old soul carried within, not a face you’d use to sell laundry soap, fortunately. Otherworldly w/o being too supernatural. EDIT: Eli’s gender is ambiguous, according to this Wiki post: “The original film ultimately leaves the character’s gender ambiguous, as the scene showing Eli’s scarred genitalia is not explained. In both films, the vampire tells the boy “I’m not a girl”. In the 2010 film it is quite clear that Abby was born female,…” I interpreted that line of dialogue as meaning that Eli is not a mortal girl, but not that it was a statement about her gender, also. As I said, I haven’t read the book, and maybe that will change my headcanon, but for now, I headcanon Eli as female and will use those pronouns.

image

This vampire story also brought back the idea of having to be invited in, and without that permission, the vampire in question would start having physical reactions! Like a severe allergic reaction! We got the blood tears that not many vampire movies want (or are able) to tackle.

image

Then there’s the whole sunlight makes them spontaneously combust, we all expected smtg to happen to this accidentally-turned victim and IT HAPPENED in a HOSPITAL idk that made it really funny to me! Dying dramatically in a place of healing, the orderly opening the blinds bc that’s usually a friendly thing to do BUT NOT TODAY.

image

Then we have Oskar, who was so sweet to Eli. Yes he’s platinum blond with skin as white as leprosy (did you see what I did there??) but this is a kid who gets bullied on a regular basis and hasn’t lost his kind heart.

image

You can tell that he’s intrigued by Eli and cares about her before they’ve even had that much time to get to know eachother, it’s that way for best friends. Sometimes you just know in the first 5 min of meeting someone that you want to be friends with them forever, if possible ^u^ 

I don’t remember when this hug occurs but just look at them, she is so scared of liking him, bc she might hurt him, she’s holding back so hard, just… it’s so good! Such chemistry between them. He wants to teach her about modern things, she wants to have a reason to live, it reminds me very much of Daniel/Armand.

image

Yah so overall, thanks for reminding me of these movies! I think a rewatch is needed… 

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?

Leave a comment

It’s a valid opinion, Armand being agender and androgynous…

image

[^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 what do you think of the movies Byzantium and only lovers left alive they are two of my favorite movies

Leave a comment

Those movies came out within a year of eachother (Byzantium in 2012 and OLLA in 2013) so it makes sense to like them both, they both had good cinematography and they both aimed to make their own mark on the vampiring mythology and physiology.

I didn’t like Byzantium, sadly, and I’d rather not dwell on the reasons why since it’s one of your fave movies.

OLLA, on the other hand, is almost the VC movie we’ve deserved for a long time and I loved it! Definitely one of my faves, too. It’s humorous, sensuous, clever, dramatic, all built on a strong foundation of the characters’ chemistry w/ each other. Not alot actually HAPPENS, plot-wise, but it doesn’t need to. We’re getting a slice of life of these characters. It’s mostly a collection of charming subtle moments, like Adam trying Eve’s new “cuisine” for the first time:

image

^Yes, this moment has a sexiness to it *drool* but more than that, he is almost childlike in both his resistance to *~and his curiosity about~* this New Thing bc he won’t let Eve know she can improve his mood so easily bc Adam is a SERYUS Brooding Musician ffs.

Then of course there are the obvious comparisons to IWTV (and IDK if these were intentional or not but the dynamic works as well here as it does in IWTV), which makes it a little bit of a VC AU:

image
image

^Never in the house you naughty girls!

image

^Little sisters to big bro/sis/makers: “We are going to have S O  M U C H fun” 

So yes, I loooooved OLLA. So many questions about those characters! I want the backstory on all of them. WHAT HAPPENED IN PARIS 87 YRS AGO? 

image

^Some bad shit went down in Paris for our faves, too. 

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

Leave a comment

 "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

image

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. 

So I’ve finally read Interview with the Vampire (for the very first time) and I can’t decide whether Louis’ narration sounds deep and meaningful or like the stuff I wrote when I was 13. Also, I knew from internet jokes that Lestat is a little shit but god, I HAD NO IDEA. Sorry for spamming u like that, I just had to talk to someone about this book and you are the first person I think of when it comes to Anne Rice

Leave a comment

annabellioncourt:

I’m so glad that you thought of me when you read it! There are far worse things to be associated with omg. And yes: I still wonder if Louis is genuinely deep and depressed, and the pretentious tone comes from honest misery–or if he’s putting on some kind of Byronic mask, unable to actually feel for others any more than the average vampire does, and that this flowery writing is his attempt to reconcile with him self “Yes I CAN feel, I do still maintain that aspect of my humanity.”

And Lestat comes across as the villain because Louis wants him to, when you read the section of The Vampire Lestat that focuses on his time with Louis, you start to wonder how much Louis exaggerated to make himself feel like the long wandering philosopher, and that Lestat was little more than a rich European fleeing his troubles. Lestat, despite being just as melancholic and miserable is affected by things much differently, and unlike Louis, who at the end tries to stay detached from the world, Lestat compensates for his pain by falling in love with everything he sees in the world, throwing himself to the mercy of it in a half-death wish and half-euphoric madness.

They’re both such fascinating characters for the way that they handle pain and their own evilness (there’s a running debate under the surface with all of the vampires “are we inherently wicked becuase of what we are, or are we merely something enhanced, no more wicked than before, but everything we do seems louder?”). The cast of the novels are all so flawed but so heartfelt (often despite themselves).

As far as anti-heroes go, these two drama queens are up on my favorites list with the Phantom and Rochester, (though while Rochester’s failing was merely hiding and running away from his issues, pretending that they weren’t there, I’d say he’s lower on the ‘Byronic anti-hero’ level and more simply a Percy Shelley).

Finally, don’t apologize, I love talking about these books so much. Or at least the first three. I’m ride or die with Anne Rice at this point, but I try to take everything after Queen of the Damned with a grain of salt….or a few cups of salt. A lot of salt….

#Eloquent eloquence #Annabellioncourt #on point as always

They’re both such fascinating characters for the way that they handle pain and their own evilness… The cast of the novels are all so flawed but so heartfelt (often despite themselves).

^For me, this is what elevates VC from many other vampire/supernatural/any other series. If I liked them as vampires there’s plenty of other vampire media out there to get into, but these characters are who they are first, and vampires secondarily.

I would add that ppl are allowed to have those kinds of feelings when they’re 13, it’s around that time that we’re grasping the harsh reality of the real world. Disappointments about one’s expectations not meeting reality… it’s a trying time. 

Whether growing pains are as valid as Louis’ issues (the whole “killing people is wrong but feels right now” is a big one), that’s up to individual reader’s judgment, but I think @annabellioncourt put it very well, that Louis is trying to maintain some dignity with the way he tells his story, which may come across as pretentious by our modern standards. The other thing to remember is that that book was written in the 70′s, and the writing style may seem dated for that reason, as well.

Remember that Louis reads A LOT, and he likes this older literature, so some of the language of the writers he loves seeps into his own language and the way he frames his memories. I think that’s partly why we see/hear so little of Louis in later canon, capturing his voice is a challenge.

// Hello Lovely! I’ve been reading Blackwood Farm (I picked it up for 3 dollars at a local second-hand book/clothing store) and I am absolutely LOVING it so far. Lestat is pretty funny in it, and I am only like 5 chapters in. Please don’t tell me that it’s considered a dud book because I am gushing over every word lol. #QuinnClub.

Leave a comment

I love that

second-hand bookstores exist so good ppl like you can rescue a book from the landfill! ❤ IDK if yours is a hardcover but I love snagging those for a tiny fraction of the price originally printed on their jackets. Some of those prices seemed really insane, y’know? Unnecessarily expensive well i’m not in publishing so maybe those were fair prices then but they felt really unnecessarily expensive on my wallet at the time.

image

[^X by @vampiredevelopment]

I skimmed the entirety of BF just now, I’m reminded that it’s one of the first of the “I mean, this family runs into problems and it’s ‘Oh, let’s have Lestat [bleep] our way out of it’ ” VC stories. It’s not Lestat’s problem, he’s chaperoning this adventure, and as much as AR tries to get him invested in it, I never really believed her that he would care, so it feels very AU to me. Even though I don’t like it, I don’t consider BF a “dud book,” bc it’s still a good vampire/ghost/supernatural story as-is ;]

So BF is not one of my faves, I’ve only read it once, but I know there are alot of ppl who enjoyed it, there are ppl clamoring for more Quinn on AR’s FB page! I bet they’d join your #QuinnClub.

I feel that Queen of The Damned would have been so much better if they replaced the actress for Akasha and re-filmed her scenes/finished filming given that Aaliyah died (may her soul rest in peace)

Leave a comment

Aaliyah was one of the only at least halfway decent things about that movie! 

image

[http://i-want-my-iwtv.tumblr.com/post/144355352629/anneboleyns-favorite-fictional-ladies-akasha]

(Can’t do fancy formatting on mobile *grrrr*)

I bet they’d used too much of the budget to re-film her scenes, but really, she was one of the only things they got right (well, maybe not “right” but close enough). I really like that she was a vampire of color who kept her color, despite being described as white (not Caucasian but light-skinned) in canon. I don’t know if ancient Egyptians were in fact light or dark skinned but in a series of alot of white ppl, it was good to see some diversity.

Crew morale was probably very low after she died, they might not have wanted to even try to replace her 😦