Oooh that’s a good question! Idk if phobias count as “irrational,” per se, bc you can have an irrational fear of anything, but phobias at least have categories that are common? Right?
These stories are open enough that you could make an argument for more than one irrational fear or phobia for each character, but for the sake of brevity I’m going to focus on one or a few for each, and keep my support brief.
(TBH I started drafting this and just one character got really lengthy, so I’ll do a series of them.)
1) Louis
A) Claustrophobia –The fear of small spaces like elevators, small rooms and other enclosed spaces.
Canonically, the first one that comes to mind is Louis’ claustrophobia. Idk if Brad was aware of that character trait, but I see it in his face when Lestat closes him up for his first night in a coffin. He has his hand on the lid at first, and then lets it go kind of reluctantly I don’t have that giffed out so you’ll have to believe me on that.
“All my life I’d feared closed places. Born and bred in French houses with lofty ceilings and floorlength windows, I had a dread of being enclosed. I felt uncomfortable even in the confessional in church. It was a normal enough fear. And now I realized as I protested to Lestat, I did not actually feel this anymore. I was simply remembering it. Hanging on to it from habit, from a deficiency of ability to recognize my present and exhilarating freedom.” – Louis, IWTV
^And then post-trial at the Theatre des Vampires, he gets nailed into a coffin and walled up, UPSIDE-DOWN. It’s a bad time. It’s a pretty bad punishment on its own, probably a standard one for the TdV, but I can’t help but think they had some idea that this was one of Louis’ fears specifically that they read in his thoughts and capitalized on.
B) Atychiphobia – fear of failure, specifically re: a fear of confrontation/decisions, because it so often ends in the death or pain of those he loves, particularly Paul and Claudia.
There is a more elaborate meta post out there about this, and I can’t find it, anyone can reblog this and add the link. @wicked-felina and I were discussing Louis and his fear of confrontation/decisions last night, here’s what we came up with:
Louis tends to refuse to engage, except when he physically has to fight people to save Lestat in TVL ❤
Re: Paul, imagine you having a fight with a family member and mocking them (being confrontational) and then they die right in the middle of your argument, and you’re blamed for it, and you blame yourself for it ;A;
Claudia wanted him to choose between her and Lestat, “Now’s time to end it, Louis.” And Lestat ends up dead ;A;
And he has to stand by and watch Lestat (debatable, but I consider Lestat to be his lover at the time) be hurt, lay there suffering as he appears to die on the carpet, then Louis has to help Claudia finish him off.
“The numbness which had protected me since the carriage left the Rue Royale threatened to lift and leave me flayed suddenly, staring, thinking: This is Lestat. This is all of transformation and mystery, dead, gone into eternal darkness.”
^This suggests to me, plus the pull he felt to go down with Lestat, that he absolutely cared for Lestat, more than just for what secrets he took with him in death ;A;
Armand wanted him to choose between him and Claudia for him, and Claudia ends up dead ;A;
People really put Louis in terrible situations and he’s frozen with indecision. Anne Rice has compared him to Hamlet, there’s so much weight on whatever he chooses.
“ …`That passivity in me has been the core of it all, the real evil. That weakness, that refusal to compromise a fractured and stupid morality, that awful pride! For that, I let myself become the thing I am, when I knew it was wrong. For that, I let Claudia become the vampire she became, when I knew it was wrong. For that, I stood by and let her kill Lestat, when I knew that was wrong, the very thing that was her undoing. I lifted not a finger to prevent it. And Madeleine, Madeleine, I let her come to that, when I should never have made her a creature like ourselves. I knew that was wrong! Well, I tell you I am no longer that passive, weak creature that has spun evil from evil till the web is vast and thick while I remain its stultified victim. It’s over! I know now what I must do. And I warn you, for whatever mercy you’ve shown me in digging me out of that grave tonight where I would have died: Do not seek your cell in the Theatre des Vampires again. Do not go near it.’ ” – Louis, IWTV
C) Autophobia –fear of one’s self – Not sure if this is the right type of fear, but I would add that Louis’ fear of his own vampiric nature in IWTV was a thing, too.
I never revealed to him half my powers, and with reason, because he shrank in guilt and self-loathing from using even half of his own. – Lestat, TVL
^It has to do with wanting to remain human, and exerting his vampiry gifts was a glaring reminder that he’s not; having grown up a Christian, he felt that being a vampire was monstrous and evil. This was something he struggled with more during IWTV-era than later, as we see in much later canon he uses his powers without explicit canon complaints about it.
Louis has grown in canon, and he doesn’t seem to have these fears any longer, but we seldom know what’s going on with him as we don’t revisit his POV until the most recent books, and he doesn’t mention these things specifically. There’s probably still traces of them, though.
Hello and welcome to our gift exchange! Not a strange question at all, no need to apologise 😉 Don’t be nervous, it’s all for fun!
I totally get where you’re coming from tho, we are definitely experiencing a surge of talent in the fandom, and it’s been wonderful to see such great response to #InktoberVC!
(^Claudia would totes join if she could, but she wouldn’t draw anything for the Louis/Armand ship lol)
From what I’ve seen over the years, ppl participating in the @vcsecretgifts exchange are happy to get any gift at all that relates to their prompt 😀 Even the best fanartists and writers talk about needing improvement in their work, and they know that we all have to start somewhere ^______^
Personally, I feel like the concept of a fic can make it great even if the writing style needs improvement, and similarly, I feel like great dialogue in a fan comic can elevate a piece even if the drawing itself needs improvement. I actually prefer to buy commissioned fanart in black & white bc I don’t always feel like a more “finished” look with color is necessarily better. There are some beautiful WIPs that stand up without being “finished”!
It’s all subjective, too, what I think is a “good” drawing or fic and what someone else thinks is “good,” but I prefer to think of all of it as being different styles. Some ppl dislike Jackson Pollock bc they see his art as splatter paint only (and therefore, totally unskilled), some ppl dislike Photorealistic painting for being too much like a photograph, despite the fact that it takes an enormous amount of skill.
We have ppl who participate who are unable to write or draw, but they are music buffs and make excellent playlists of songs for the characters/ships, or there are fans who do aesthetic photo sets, etc. Everyone participating is doing it more for the fun of giving a gift and receiving one, rather than one-upmanship.
(While some gifts do get more notes/reblogs/comments than others, well, I feel like the only comments that really matter are from the specific recipient, so it’s very important to show gratitude for the gift you’re given no matter what it is! Bc smne made it for you!)
All the gifts on that blog are for all of us; it’s true for me that I’m more likely to actually MAKE a fanwork when there’s a deadline and someone(s) expecting it, so I think that’s what it’s more about ;D
Btw last chance to join! Sign ups close at 11:59 pm CST!
*grabby hands* JOIN US BRYAN!! WE NEED YOU!! He’s quoting AR, he is clearly one of us or an honorary one of us ok i don’t make the rules
I heard that Bryan left American Gods, and Hannibal S4 isn’t happening yet so like… what is the holdup?
Update, yeah, Bryan is at least a *~casual~* Anne Rice/VC fan:
Ex. A
^“There’s a lot of Lestat and Louis in Hannibal” !!!
Ex. B: This is in 2 parts bc he @’d her and then mentioned her advice:
Ex. C: And how did he get that advice? HE FRICKIN’ COLD-CALLED HER:
Ex. D: He was psyched when the Rices announced that the adaptation was happening ❤
Ex. E: Being supportive of a VC TV series:
Ex. F: Bc reasons…
Ex. G: He’s on the same page with her politically, and politics do play a role and matter in the media, I’m sure it will be incorporated into any adaption:
Thank you for appreciating that [post is here]! It always feels like I’m going out in front of a firing squad when I say that “creating/consuming dark fiction is not endorsement of it in real life” because people who do conflate those will insist that I’m an x,y,z-apologist. No. That’s incorrect.
ANOTHER WALL OF TEXT™ what is happening to me? I just miss you guys a lot, that’s what 😉
“Why did this person say/do this thing?”
I support the creation and consumption of dark content in media, in fic/art/music/etc. as a means of exploring it, as a means of unpacking it, as a means of trying to figure out where it comes from and how to recognize it. Sometimes it’s not so easy to pick out the “bad guy.” Sometimes the “abuser” seems to be a “good” person. Sometimes the “abuser” is reenacting their own trauma. Finding reasons for a behavior are not excuses for that behavior, but it can help provide answers for those of us who want them.
~Story time~
My grandmother was a tough old lady, what we call a “battle-axe.” She was blunt and tactless, and downright MEAN most of the time. She raised her children through terror and bullying, held grudges for decades, was short-tempered with her in-laws and grandchildren.
She was also very smart in her role as a professor in a college, and had a sweetness to her that very few people in my family experienced bc they were so deterred by her tough exterior. I was one of the few who got close to her, and I wanted to know why she behaved the way she did to others.
Seeing movies like Mommie Dearest, in which Joan Crawford was portrayed as somewhat of battle-axe to everyone in her life, too, I could see similarities between her and my grandmother.
Could my grandmother have had the kind of pressure in her life that Joan did, competing with the misogyny in her career? I thought so.
Both of these women set incredibly high expectations for themselves and others, and then reacted badly if reality didn’t meet their expectations. They were not good at handling disappointment and would take it out on others.
In other media, I would see “only” children worshiped by their parents and then these women were dissatisfied, bitter adults, who would never get that kind of attention again. (Not sure about Joan Crawford, but that was my grandmother’s childhood.)
^What I’m saying is that media (fic/movies/books/music/etc.) gave me insights as to why my grandmother behaved the way she did. It provided reasons for the behavior. I didn’t take these as excuses, but it increased my empathy for her and others I met who were like her. Rather than do as the rest of my family did, by writing her off as “a mean old lady,” I could understand her and navigate my way into a better relationship with her. They missed out on her good parts because of her bruises.
^The first time I saw this graphic, I felt that expression in my soul. These are fictional characters. They are not real.
Writers write them. What is “writing” anyway, but speculative reality? We used to call fanfiction “specs,” short for “speculative fiction.” It’s thoughts. Not all writing is for idealized versions of life and/or wish-fulfillment.
I’ve heard from VC fans who are survivors of child abuse, sexual abuse, etc. who said that VC helped them in some way,
whether it was recognizing that the abuse they suffered really was abuse (and not normal!),
or whether they have since made fanworks with VC characters that helped them explore their own past and examine it from a place of safety,
or in consuming other fanworks, they got some closure on their own experiences in some way and were able to heal or begin to do so,
or just in making friends here that have helped them through difficult times,
I could go on and on… there is enormous value in creating/consuming dark fiction.
Whatever Anne Rice’s agenda is/was in writing the Vampire Chronicles, it doesn’t matter to me, because of how much good I have witnessed that has come from it. If some of her inspiration for certain aspects seems relevant to me, I consider it, but it doesn’t really matter as far as I’m concerned.
It all really boils down to the old adage “Live and Let Live.”
(I have a backlog of asks, Real Life has been taking my life, and this is the one I decide to answer, bc I am apparently a glutton for punishment) (My senpais re: the topic of allowing writers to write dark fiction (and readers to read it) are @restoringsanity and @freedom-of-fanfic, among others, check them out).
Welcome to our little corner of Tumblrland!
This became a Wall of Text™, but I felt like articulating these thoughts again, as I do periodically. Sorry, no cut, couldn’t find a good place to do it.
Anon, I hope you come into the light and join us, share with us what you like about VC and make our fandom better for being part of it. You might make some of the best friends of your life with us 🙂 I definitely have, and that’s what fandom is about for me.
I think this question was answered very well by @interview-withthevampirehere, with supporting links. I was honored to be tagged as a Certified Old in the fandom, yes, I was around in the Dark Ages of the Internet, for the Spec Massacre, but am I a Respected Old? That’s debatable, lol. I have my opinions about VC, and everyone’s headcanon may vary on all of it.
No sense reinventing the wheel in answering the same way as they did, but I have thoughts to add. @interview-withthevampire started their answer as follows, and I want to start mine the same way:
“the reason why Anne Rice is a bit quarrelsome (I don’t want to use “cr*zy”) is because, well, the kindest way to put it is that she’s a bit of an ego-maniac.”
^YES. She’s probably a bit of an ego-maniac, but not “cr*zy.” “Crazy” is what we use to “other” someone, to dehumanize them by calling their mental faculties into question. It’s a gentle teasing at best and a bullying tactic at worst.
One thing you’ll find in VC fandom is that every so often, like a cycle, we’ll get another round of bashing Anne Rice. Whether or not she is a “good” or “bad” person with “good” or “bad” thoughts/intentions, that’s not the purpose of my blog and not what I base my love for VC on. My blog is primarily for entertainment and fandom positivity.
As fandom has begun a shift into examining authors and content creators who create problematic content (also known as ”dark fiction,” which I prefer as a term bc the word “problematic” has become kind of a joke in its overuse), there is a tendency to conflate that content with their beliefs, that they write what they would like to see happen in reality. I strongly feel that creation/consumption of dark fiction is not endorsement of it.
In brief, people might think Anne Rice is “cr*zy” bc of (1) her Real Life actions against her fans and other people, and (2) the problematic content in her books.
Again, I think @interview-withthevampire covered point (1). In the end, Anne Rice is just a human being who wrote a set of books that have gathered a wide spectrum of fans. I think it took her years (decades?) to understand the nature of her fanbase, and as the internet grew around her, it became easier for fanworks and reviews/feedback to publish into the real world. There were no longer the filters in place of people like magazine editors; any blogger could write a review of her works in full view of millions of fans, and they were not required to pull any punches.
AR had to acclimate to that and after fighting the ficwriters for long enough, she chose to stop suing, and learn to coexist with it all. I don’t know of many other authors treating their own fanbases the way AR treated us, so I would guess that authors who have published works since the internet really got in gear have probably all embraced their fanbases from the beginning. Therefore, VC fandom’s bad blood (pun intended) with Anne Rice stands out as being downright BIZARRE now 😛
As far as (2) the problematic content.
What we’re really talking about is whether dark fiction (pedophilia, incest, etc.) should be written about at all if they are not condemned in the narrative. Personally, I believe that creation/consumption of dark fiction is not endorsement of it.
*Bruised banana analogy*
VC, like any media, be it books/movies/music/video games/etc., is like a banana. It might have gross bruises, those parts that you find squicky or otherwise distasteful. It’s fine to point them out, so that others can be aware, but you are not required to do so. Some areas on a given banana are less bruised than others, and you can eat them. Maybe you eat around all the bruises, even the smaller ones. Maybe you don’t mind bruises and you can eat the whole banana.
I admit, on a subjective level, that VC books have gotten much bruisier for me over the years, and there are several that I find so bruised that there is much less to enjoy, but that’s how it is. I STILL LIKE THE PARTS I LIKE.
[X Banana from fromthedriversseat.co.uk] ^Red would be those bruises that I can’t accept, so I don’t eat them.
Maybe the whole banana is ruined for you and you can’t stomach it. Maybe you can bake it into banana bread, turn it into something else entirely! That’s a fanworks’ purpose. Like a fanfic where you remove/revise the bruises from canon and write the story the way you would prefer it to be. Fluff would probably be a banana with very few
bruises, if any at all.
I’ve made my own headcanons that have “fixed” canon in a way that greatly improved the stories for me. I’ve read fanfic that was basically providing missing pieces from canon. I’ve seen fanart and cosplay that pretty much illustrated my headcanon of the characters. For me, fandom is about taking inspiration from the canon source material to make your own works, sharing that with other fans, and being supportive of those content creators in whatever way you feel comfortable!
It’s every reader’s prerogative, how much of the “banana” they want to eat, if any at all. No one is forcing you to eat it, and other people enjoying the banana does not trample your choice. Your choice not to eat some/all of the bruises does not supersede other’s choice of eating them.
I’ve said that creating/consuming problematic content is not in itself endorsement of
problematic things in REAL LIFE. As far as I know, Anne Rice has committed no REAL crimes, so while I would love it if she had a trusted editor/beta reader,I don’t condemn her for exploring dark topics in fiction. More thoughts on that in my #dark fiction tag.
As fans in the fandom, we can like what we like, critique her work, choose what canon we accept, toss the rest. She put it out there and in that sense, it doesn’t matter if Anne Rice is “cr*zy” or not, or if she is a “good” or “bad” person with “good” or “bad” thoughts. Personally, I believe that AR was interested in sex before she was the age of consent and was frustrated that she was being prevented from pursuing sexual relationships. Those explorations led to bruises in her bananas. Those are her bones to pick, so to speak.
I’ve made some of my best friends in VC fandom, and if they or I had left because of the bruises in our bananas, I might never have met them at all. I consider VC to be a gift to us from AR, no more, no less.
idk I just love how we Young People Today use ~improper~ punctuation/grammar in actually really defined ways to express tone without having to explicitly state tone like that’s just really fucking cool, like
no = “No,” she said.
no. = "No,” she said sharply.
No = “No,” she
stated
firmly.
No. = “No,” she snapped.
NO = “No!” she shouted.
noooooo = “No,” she moaned.
no~ = “No,” she said with a drawn-out sing-song.
~no~ = “No,” she drawled sarcastically.
NOOOOO = “No!” she screamed dramatically.
no?! = “No,” she said incredulously.
I’ve been calling this “typographical nuance” and I have a few more to add:
*no* = “No,” she said emphatically.
*nopes on out of here* = “No,” she said of herself in the third person, with a touch of humorous emphasis.
~*~noooo~*~ = “No,” she moaned in stylized pseudo-desperation.
#no = “No,” she added as a side comment.
“no” = “No,” she scare-quoted.
wtf are you kidding no = “No,” she said flatly. “And I can’t believe I have to say this.”
no no No No NO NO NO NO = "No,” she repeated over and over again, growing louder and more emphatic.
nooOOOO = “No,” she said, starting out quietly and turning into a scream.
*no = “Oops, I meant ‘no,’” she corrected, “Sorry for the typo in my previous message.”
I cannot express how strongly I absolutely love language and writing and communication but if anyone asks why I will be showing them this post from now on
this is great, but I got to “no no No No NO NO NO NO” and immediately started singing “mamma mia, mamma mia, mamma mia let me go”
no no no nO (no no no)= “No,” she said, sticking to the status quo
[continued] But it rubs at emotional raw points when the agency of a character who is a minor has their agency completely written off. Mostly because it reminds me of the kind of things that were said to keep me repressed. So what I’m saying is’ yeah I can see how someone who has been there would write that’ not that I would, mostly because I live in fear that my weirdness will hurt others.
Hello Anon, thank you for sending me this message. Responding to these kinds of questions is intellectually stimulating for me, and sometimes the research and crowd-sourcing with trusted advisers changes my mind on things I thought I knew! It’s a learning process.
Reminder: This is a fandom blog for a fictional series, for entertainment only.
^Not shouting at you or anyone, Anon. I’m just reminding people that I recognize that I am out of my depth on certain topics, and trying to express myself without hurting anyone, too. I tried to answer that ask as sensitively as possible, as I, too, don’t want to hurt people who were abused, or anyone else. I’m addressing your message because I feel like you were hurt just for your interest in these things, which I feel is unfair.
TL;DR: Anon, I’m sorry that people trampled you to the point that you felt like your interests were harmful to others. Thoughtcrime is not crime.
Being interested in learning about sex, as a minor or as an adult, is not a crime. I don’t know if you create/consume dark fiction, or even specifically the kind of sex you were intrigued about as a minor, but human beings (for the most part) are sexual beings and are interested in it. In Non-fiction:
Books/essays/TED Talks/etc. are written on it,
There are people who devote their careers to it as a scientific study, see Sexology.
There’s at least one Museum for it! The Museum of Sex in NYC, which I still need to check out one of these days.
More than just for the mechanics, there’s the psychological aspect, the power dynamics, the intimacy with another person/people. It’s a unique experience and one that is defined differently by many people. Some relationships involve people who can’t (or don’t want) penetrative sex, but are intimate just the same.
“But it rubs at emotional raw points when the agency of a character who is a minor has their agency completely written off. Mostly because it reminds me of the kind of things that were said to keep me repressed.”
Right. Did Amadeo have agency in his relationship with Marius? That is up to the individual reader to decide. When people trample others, insisting their opinion is fact, and that you must be completely dense or willfully ignorant (or both!) to even suggest otherwise!!! please keep in mind that they are just a person, no matter how strongly they state their opinion, and you have every right to your own opinion and can disagree privately or publicly.
Repression of interest/education/participation/etc. as it relates to sex has long been used as a means of controlling people, and is too big a topic for this blog post. But I absolutely agree that repression is used to control people, for better and for worse.
Before we move on, re: the concept of hurting people: I’ve been thinking about this quote, (which I thought it was a McElroy quote, but I see that it might actually a Louis C.K. quote? I don’t know who said it originally) Here’s the tweet:
“When someone opens up and reveals that they have been hurt by you, they are being vulnerable. It’s not always easy to admit that you’ve been hurt, and if someone tells you that you’ve hurt them, the least you owe them is your respect and acknowledgment of their pain. The worst thing that you can do is make them feel bad for opening up to you, make them feel like they’re the one who did something wrong, or tell them that you didn’t actually hurt them. You don’t know their feelings. If they’re telling you that you hurt them, then you hurt them. Accept this and apologize.” [6 Lessons We Can All Learn from Louis C.K.]
^It’s easy enough to apologize when you’ve physically stepped on someone’s toes because you weren’t looking. I’m grateful when someone tells me that I did that, rather than bottling up their frustration and thinking I’m a clumsy person. It’s easy to apologize in that situation.
It’s much harder to apologize when you wrote/said something that you thought was socially acceptable, in private or in public, and someone tells you that it was hurtful. A sincere apology is still necessary, but harder to do.
I struggle with wanting to be able to speak my mind on these very sensitive topics, like about Anne Rice being interested in sex before the age of consent and how that affected her writing, inspiring socially taboo situations in her works. To even suggest that there is nuance and something worth exploring in dark fiction, that could be taken (even unintentionally on the part of the person creating/consuming/discussing dark fiction) as hurtful to abuse survivors or anyone else. When I create/consume dark fiction, it’s an exploration, not promotion. I am not intending to belittle the experience of survivors of abuse or hurt anyone else. I can’t speak for Anne Rice or any other content creator/consumer, but I can keep saying that in my opinion, creating/consuming/discussing dark fiction is not a crime. Dark thoughts are not a crime.
When someone is hurt by this exploration, it is partly their responsibility to avoid it.If X person tells me that my discussion of dark fiction (specifically incestuous/pedophilic undertones) hurt them, Louie C.K. is correct,I do not get to decide that I didn’t hurt X person. AND I apologize sincerely. I might also change my opinion of something based on this interaction.
But I also remind X person that this is only my blog, with my own unauthorized opinions. Every blog is an opt-in experience, you choose to read it. If discussing these things = endorsement to X person, then I would ask them, respectfully, to Unfollow/Block me and not read my blog. In a social network like this, it may be difficult to avoid a blogger that upsets you, especially when it’s one of the fandom’s more popular blogs like mine is, but that’s why we tag things. I’m tagging this post with #pedophilia mention tw and #incest mention tw for those who don’t want to see even mentions of it.
I hope that helped, Anon, and to anyone else reading this, it was not my intention to hurt anyone for expressing my opinions about learning about sex or about dark fiction.
Hit the jump for more, cut for length.
To get back to your question…
Anon asked:
“What you were saying about Anne being interested in sex before she was the age of consent, and that being part of her motivation in writing sexual stuff with underage characters. It makes a lot of sense to me. I have some.. interesting emotional baggage from being interested in sex when I was a minor.”
*nods* I think many people are interested in sex before the age of consent, if not the psychological implications, then just the mechanics of it. It’s like anything you learn to do, like anything else, there’s a first time, it takes some practice and there’s awkwardness, so of course we’re curious about it!
I was curious about it as a child, my parents never tried to sell me on anything fictional like the stork bringing babies to expectant adults.
The fact that the age of consent varies by country and even states in the US shows that different societies have different ideas about when a person can consent to physical intimacy, and it’s not universally 12:00 am on your 18th birthday.
Anecdote: My ex-roommate lost her virginity to her boyfriend at age 15. She told me she had no regrets about it. Maybe she did and never told me, or never admitted it to herself, but I am sure that there are those who had similar experiences and were not necessarily abused.
“A lot of wounds that tumblr likes to stick it’s fingers in and that I dare not react to for fear of how aggressive this site can be”
You’re absolutely right about that. I have seen people dogpiled for all kinds of reasons. Generally, it’s thrilling to feel righteous. It feels good to be part of a group attacking a common enemy. There are all kinds of reasons for it and you are absolutely not obligated to expose yourself to people who are looking to pick a fight and bully someone off the site. As someone accurately described it to me, some people are predisposed to disagreement, and you do not have to engage in fruitless, unwinnable arguments. They’ll even move the goal posts so if you think you’ve made a valid response to their point, supported by reasons, they’ll say that wasn’t the point in the first place *eyeroll.* For some people it’s more about just winning your submission.
{{ BTW, I don’t think we often address when X person claims that they were hurt in ways (or for reasons) that are hurtful to the one they claim has hurt them, but that absolutely happens. X person might say this is tone-policing or victim-blaming, but I’m sure that some of them are aware that they wield their argument more as a sword than anything else. Both sides can be hurt by call-out posts, for example, which are less about teaching and more about mob mentality and shouting into the void, but I don’t want to delve further into that. }}
Hello Anon, I’m sorry that it took me almost a month to answer this. It’s an extremely sensitive topic, as I’m sure you know, and these are very loaded questions. I took time to reach out to my trusted advisers, talked to them for hours, and considered their responses very carefully.
I’m very sorry to hear that you are a survivor of this kind of trauma in real life. The fact that you are still able to love the Vampire Chronicles despite the fact that they contain parts that are difficult for you to handle means that there must be something good in them for you, and I hope you don’t lose your love for them. Could you come back and tell me some of the things/characters you love about them? Or how you first got into them? I love those kinds of stories!
This has become a very long post, much to my chagrin. I wish that I could simply agree with you and move on, but I can’t do that. The issues you bring up are very nuanced to the point that a blog post on tumblr can’t truly cover it all, but I will do my best to keep this blog post concise and to the point. I have also placed the cut only after most of my response as I have been accused of hiding things under cuts on past controversial topics, so it’s all out, clogging your dash. Sorry.
Before we go any further: My stance on dark fiction (in this case, incest/pedophilia) is that I do not endorse or condone it in REAL LIFE. Period.
TL;DR: No, I don’t think the VC tv series will “dive too much into the incestuous/pedophilic undertones that the books had at times.” Standards & Practices won’t allow it. I’m going to use the term “dark fiction” because I don’t necessarily agree with you that every instance of fictional adult vampires feeding on fictional children is definitely a very erotic experience for the vampire, and therefore carrying incestuous/pedophilic undertones, but it is definitely harm against fictional minors. Harm against minors and incestuous/pedophilic undertones all fall under dark fiction, however.
I’m not asking you to like dark fiction, Anon. There is some that I can’t stomach, either. I’m not saying people who like dark fiction are in any way superior to those who don’t. I’m advocating that some of us do want some dark fiction, and that consuming/creating dark fiction is not necessarily endorsement, whether you are a best-selling author, a fanfic writer, a filmmaker, a fanartist, a popular metal musician, or a cosplayer, or a consumer of the media made by any of these.
(1) The Rices have said that they will try to adapt the books as close to canon-compliance as possible. Whether that means including incestuous/pedophilic undertones and/or harm against fictional minors, the show will very likely have to follow it’s network’s Standards & Practices Dept.:
In the United States, Standards and Practices (also referred to as Broadcast Standards and Practices) is the name traditionally given to the department at a television network which is responsible for the moral, ethical, and legal implications of the program that network airs.[Wiki]
Further:
…the essential responsibilities of the editors [are]… assuring that the programming is acceptable to the bulk of the mass audience. This involves serving as guardians of taste with respect to language, sexual and other materials inappropriate for children,… [More about S&P from the Museum of Broadcast Communications.]
^These are the people who are paid to point out when dark fiction has crossed the line, and together with the showrunners, they decide whether something in a given episode should be revised or must be “taken out completely,” (which is censorship, defined as “the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security.”).
When we talk about censorship, the easy way to deal with dark fiction would be to just “take it out completely.” After all, why do we even need dark fiction? Not everyone wants it. Hannibal is a good example of why those of us who are fascinated by psychology want dark fiction. I foundthis great essay by Warren Ellis. Here’s a quote from it:
“… Fiction is how we both study and de-fang our monsters. To lock violent fiction away, or to close our eyes to it, is to give our monsters and our fears undeserved power and richer hunting grounds.”
“Fiction, like any other form of art, is there to consider aspects of the real world in the ways that simple objective views can’t — from the inside. We cannot Other characters when we are seeing the world from the inside of their skulls. This is the great success of Thomas Harris’s Hannibal Lecter, both in print and as so richly embodied by Mads Mikkelsen in the Hannibal television series:For every three scary, strange things we discover about him, there is one thing that we can relate to. The Other is revealed as a damaged or alienated human, and we learn something about the roots of violence and the traps of horror.”
(2) For movie!IWTV, I don’t know what the writing or editing process was like, but I would assume that there was a S&P Dept. of some kind (or at least similar considerations were taken into account) because there ARE instances of the vampires feeding on children that were changed from how they were presented in the book!!, there’s a few examples that come to mind, and in each instance, and I think it was revised to make it less incestuous/pedophilic. I have examples under the cut so you can avoid them if you need to.
(3) One example of the filmmakers choosing to remove something (almost) entirely from canon: Armand being a teenager around 15 or 16 years old in canon, and he was aged up to the very not-teenage Antonio Banderas, who was 34 yrs old at the time.
^There are still fans today who believe that that change drastically changed the story, and he’s still the butt of jokes about it. Personally, I would say that this change did not drastically change much in IWTV. I don’t think he was described as being that young in book!IWTV, and I don’t think his appearing to be a teenager would have, for example, had enormous impact on Louis’s feelings towards him at that time; that he felt like Armand could be the teacher/mentor Lestat couldn’t be. That’s just my unpopular opinion on that. I have more thoughts on
So yes, I think if some things like that were taken out completely that were not absolutely necessary to their given place in canon, not much would drastically change, but talk to anyone who really dislikes/disliked Antonio!Armand, and you’ll probably get a very different answer.
SO… where does that leave us?
(4) In Fiction, we can explore these things from a place of safety, we can always close the book, or change the channel, or walk out of a movie theatre, as Oprah did during a screening of movie!IWTV in 1994 (my highlights added):
^She walked out because of the gore, which is understandable, there’s alot of blood. That, and the “force of darkness,” which isn’t all that specific. When Tom says, “The movie is not for everyone,” it’s not to say that anyone is lesser for not being able to handle it. I think he was intrigued by the darker aspects, and I think it might be the first truly antagonist/villain role he had taken up until that point. He wanted to explore that.
I don’t believe in just cutting out all the dark fiction, each instance should be considered and handled with nuance. Revision is one option, and total removal might be the better choice in some instances.
I think that’s part of what made movie!IWTV so successful, the enormous amount of care and sensitive handling of dark and light fiction, what they chose to keep, remove, and alter.
(5) The other thing you asked was “Why do you think Anne Rice would go [that] route in particular?”
The question has been raised, many times, whether Anne Rice is, and has been, writing (essentially) propaganda for her own view regarding sexuality, especially as it applies to minors in sexual situations/relationships with adults. Whether Anne Rice endorses sex between minors and adults, it seems pretty clear that she does, as this has been an element of her writing in other series, as well. To my knowledge, she has committed no crimes against minors in real life, and therefore I do not hold her as a criminal of thoughtcrimes. That is definitely an unpopular opinion to other fans, and again, it is why I will not engage in an ultimately fruitless discussion about a crazy lady who writes the books she wants to read. Thoughtcrime is not crime.
Since you asked, I’ll answer why I think AR would pursue that line of thought, under the cut, in case it is upsetting.
I hope that answered your questions in the limited space of a blog post, Anon, and I hope you weren’t offended at any of my response, I tried to be as careful as possible and share my thoughts as respectfully as possible. If any harm was caused, it was not intentional on my part.
Hit the jump for things I said I’d put under a cut.
(2) Instances of the vampires feeding on children that were changed from how they were presented in the book!!:
Louis feeding on Denis (Armand’s mortal “pet”) under the Theatre. In the novel, Louis feels the boy getting a hard-on against his leg. In the movie, their only point of contact is the part of the boy’s hand Louis is biting. Seems to have taken some of the sexuality out of it, and I don’t think it drastically changed that moment.
Movie!Denis himself seemed to be a “peace pipe,” with all those other bites on his hand, and Louis has to feed on him in view of the theatre vampires, making it more about Louis’ discomfort about being watched while feeding which we know from canon he really does not like DUE TO THE INTIMACY of the experience. This, however, is not really clarified in the movie, and it seemed to me to be more about a trust exercise, that he was given this little sip and had to trust that they had not poisoned the blood he was taking. This change worked for me, because the fear of being poisoned was very real in light of how Claudia had poisoned Lestat so easily.
Claudia feeds on Denis in the book, I think she’s even curled up in bed with him. She doesn’t feed on him at all in the movie. I don’t think it drastically changed that moment.
When Lestat turns Claudia in the book, he has Louis drain Claudia a second time, implying that it’s to actually finish her off. This doesn’t happen in the movie, and I was kind of grateful, because it’s more upsetting in the book, when Lestat tears her away from Louis and starts turning her without any discussion about it with Louis first. I’d say that this was a change for the better.
When Claudia offers those boys as a peace offering to Lestat, in the book, he has his hands all in one of their shirts, and as the poison takes effect, his arms are tangled around the dead boy’s body, it’s kind of scarier, this dead body clinging to him and binding him. I would say that this worked for me either way. It’s already a tense and scary moment.
…
(5) “Why do you think Anne Rice would go [that] route in particular?”
From what I understand, she was interested in sex before she was the age of consent, and was frustrated that she was being prevented from pursuing sexual relationships. When she writes these scenes involving underage characters, I think she’s placing herself in the role of the minor, and in some cases, trying to empower that minor with some amount of agency (Amadeo axing Marius’ door down in TVA), but it’s up to each individual reader to interpret the story for themselves and decide for themselves whether that minor was capable of any agency at all or was under duress, or whatever else they might headcanon about that relationship.
Again, I do not think she has committed any actual crimes. Thoughtcrimes are not crimes.
So I was re-watching Interview with the Vampire for the umpeenth time today and I found this little gem I thought I’d share with the fandom.
[Image description: part of the audience at the Théâtre des Vampires.]
Our dear vampirefan stands up, and please look at the reaction of the dark-haired lady in white and red in the right half of the screenshots.
[Images description: the same people, looking embarrased and slightly shocked. A woman in red and white looks bewildered. She gawks around and moves a hand to her cheek.]
Like, all the rest are making their way through second-hand embarrasment for the vampirefan while the lady in white and red is completely freaking out.
And even after Santiago answers, when people are laughing like ‘Yeah, the vampfan’s sooo embarrasing,’
[Images description: the same people. Most laugh or grin. The lady in white and red hasn’t changed her expression.]
the lady in white and red is still freaking out.
And I started laughing and had to replay the same sequence who knows how many times because I found it hilarious.
Seriously, look at her.
[Image descripton: cropped image of the lady’s face, eyes and mouth wide open in shock.]
I love her.
^WELL DONE. YES.
[Image description: gif of the moment the lady in red cries out “I adore you!” with the other lady’s eyes and mouth opening in shock as she turns to the look at the stage for Santiago’s reaction.]
This lady in red (VELVET???) came with binoculars so she could inspect it all closer than she’s allowed, she wants to see if the bites are real, if the blood is real… I think a case could be made that sheknows it’s all real, or hopes it is. The 4th wall may be broken for her.
As always, I can only answer re: Ricean vampires, I’m not aware of any other vampires in other media having tatts… maybe in Twilight they can/do?
Definitively, it’s not addressed in VC canon, I don’t remember any of the vampires having tatts (whether they got them before or after they were turned) so it’s open to interpretation, #Your headcanon may vary.Personally, I have a bunch of thoughts on this mixed into my #tattoo tag, so check that out.
My headcanon is that vampires can get a tatt (and it will look permanent) but it will fade during the deathsleep, which is what @frankenlandinformed us that Anne Rice thinks about it, too:
If we accept the author’s words as canon, we can say definitively:
1) Tattoos that the vampire tries to get AFTER they have been turned: Will vanish in 24 hrs.
2) Tattoos that the vampire has BEFORE they have been turned: Will fade/lighten/change (see comment from @monstersinthecosmos on my post about this, below)
i remember Anne said on FB once that someone’s tattoos would probably go really light and lacey/elegant looking after they’re turned, but remain in a way that looks ~ethereal~ lolol
^I’d have to find the post but I would imagine that AR means that the tattoo will “go really light and lacey/elegant looking” over time, not at the moment of turning, but it could be interpreted either way.
@thebibliosphere added to one of my posts: “I treat vampires as just very long living humans, which means even tattoos fade over time as the skin cells regenerate.” [X] I’m inclined to agree. I also think a tattoo could be removed from vampire flesh “by scraping/cutting/etc. off the tattooed skin and letting it regenerate to its natural state).” as @skeletalroses put it [X].
I-want-my-IWTV 