Hey anon! I’m sorry that this took so long, but I’m very passionate about my boy Daniel
Favorite thing about them: Daniel is the most real out of the entire cast of characters in the series, to me. He is the one with the most real thoughts, the most real concerns, the most real emotions, and the most real motivations. It makes him the most down-to-earth being out of the entire coven, yes, even with his flaws. The other vampires have motivations to either suppress internal conflicts (David, Gabrielle, Louis), or to live up to expectations of who they think they should be (Armand, Marius, LESTAT especially). Daniel, at his core, is honest, for better or for worse, and that makes him very compelling in a literary series where both of the central narrators have their authenticity questioned by fans.
Least favorite thing about them: More like, my least favorite thing Anne did to him which was to complete push the easily most interesting character and the most narratively USEFUL character to the side. Daniel, not Louis or Lestat, is the audience’s window to the vampire world. He’s the one that is eased into his transition and our experience of that transition is open for our comprehension needs (which also is the reason why his “insanity” later makes NO sense). David cannot be argued the same as he is not as invested in the vampire world as Daniel was, and his transition was sudden and “unwanted.” It is also because of Daniel’s honesty that we can trust his vision into this world the most. And none of this was utilized.
“there is a very black and white viewpoint on him, especially when it comes to his mental illness, his addictive habits, and his queerness. i don’t think daniel leans feminine or masculine in his queer expression. i don’t think the fans have to 100% sympathize with daniel’s substance addiction, and refuse to condemn it or look at it objectively, in order to have compassion for him as a character and for his struggles that lead to said addiction. i don’t think daniel needs to be painted so tragically–he has a degree of ownership in his decisions and recognizes and even loves the weight of them, but these decisions should be considered open-mindedly by us as well. daniel is not evil, but daniel loves the dark, and we should not forget this.“
Anon, your message sat in my inbox for over a week because I don’t remember enough about their relationship to answer this question.
I’ll open it up to anyone to answer!
I love Marius & Pandora together, they give me life and when they’re getting along it’s like the closest thing to a healthy relationship Marius has ever had in this series. Anne said she based their penchant for bickering with each other on how she and her husband Stan used to be, so I think it’s really easy to read Pandora as Marius being a Complete Dick as usual but it’s another situation where you have to take AR context into it a little bit and I think in a lot of ways she was making the point about how sometimes people can genuinely love each other while clashing during everyday domestic life.
For me personally there’s an IDEA of Marius/Pandora that has never really had a chance to happen, because they were still relatively young (in comparison to how old they are now) when they were together, and I think they were still very volatile and emotional as baby vampires at the time, and I think there’s a lot of potential for them to have a really fulfilling relationship now if they decide to. But Pandora has a really important role in Marius’s life because he’s a person who like HATES BEING DISOBEYED and one of the reasons they clash so much is that she AINT ABOUT MARIUS’S BULLSHIT and she’s always been able to call him on his garbage and refuse him and argue with him and challenge him.
And like, despite the mountain of evidence that points to Marius being a Complete Dick, I do think that within the Riceverse he truly loves the people he involves himself with, even though his version of love is often unhealthy and dangerous. And I think it’s important that even though they got on each other’s nerves and she was a pain in his ass, he loved her so desperately and pined after her for centuries.
I think in the scope of VC (and this is speaking towards like a hypothetical eternity that none of us will ever see because it would hypothetically stretch past any our lives haha) that if Marius can ever redeem himself as a person, Pandora might be the one to challenge him and drive him to change. She’s sort of a key to Marius’s past that no one else in this world can be and I think that would be invaluable when it comes to knocking him off his pedestal.
I have a lot of headcanon fantasy about how good they could maybe be for each other and it would be really satisfying for me if Marius could like, stop being a douche because I really like so much else about him as a character. And it would also be satisfying for Anne to utilize Pandora as a character because I think she has a lot of potential but she’s turned into like a ~sad vampire lady~ background accessory and I’m not a fan. And knowing AR and how these books go, she’s not gonna take advantage of this because she doesn’t seem to feel the need to challenge Marius anyway.
VC PROTIP: I know a lot of people skip Pandora but HONESTLY LIKE THERE’S SO MUCH DIRT ON MARIUS IN IT LOL like he’s such an asshole in it and I think it’s really good contextual evidence about him that’s worth reading. It’s enjoyable as a Marius fan but I imagine it’s also validating to get more material on hating him, too, if you’re on that side.
Because the Lestat I love isn’t the one Anne’s interested in writing. The Lestat I love isn’t an infallible, untouchable prince whom everyone falls in love with at first sight. He’s a fuckup who never stops trying.
I love the Lestat who came out of an abusive home and still wanted desperately that there was good in the world, and that he could be a good person. Who wanted to make people happy and who was desperately in love with his depressed as fuck proto-hipster boyfriend. Who lived as a queer man without shame.
I love the Lestat who had panic attacks about death and the unknowable enormity of the universe.
I love the Lestat who was a victim and a survivor, who was moved not to exert his power over others but make sure they didn’t suffer like he had.
I love the Lestat who tried to take care of his loved ones even when he was spectacularly bad at it, who wore his heart sincerely on his sleeve and lived in terror of his loved ones throwing him away because they didn’t need him anymore.
I rooted for the Lestat who realized the enormity of the wrongs he did to Louis by keeping him ignorant and by indulging his need to be needed. I loved the Lestat who was willing to show all of his fears and his fuckups in print, when his whole life had been dedicated to pretending he was untouchable, just to apologize to the man he loved.
I loved a Lestat who was allowed to be wrong, to be punished, to be humbled and rejected and keep going. Whose bravado and bluster was a cover for a sincere heart, not a hard and empty shell. The Lestat I love isn’t a rapist, an autocrat, a power hungry monster. He had countless flaws, but he was meant to fix them, not wait around for the universe to concoct a reason why his bad behavior and disregard for others’ agency is okay.
I don’t know where that Lestat went. But I miss him.
I always used to roll my eyes at people stanning villains and falling in love with them and saying “they’re just misunderstood! they just need love!”
but then guillermo del toro gave me Lucille Sharpe from Crimson Peak, whose name means light but who was locked away in darkness for so long that she was twisted into a monster
who suffered horrendous abuse as a child and as a teenager, caged at home and then in an institution where she was further neglected and assaulted
who clung obsessively to the only source of love she ever knew, her one comfort, which she ended up hurting, confining and killing in her selfish, yet understandable, need to keep it close
who is constantly stitched into rigid and painful clothing
who could not escape her demons, even in death
whom jessica chastain described as being like an abused animal that desperately wants to be touched and loved, but which will bite the instant it is touched
who has committed horrendous, unforgivable crimes, but who is still, at her core, an abused child
who might have been good, once, but who underwent a terrible metamorphosis and hatched out of her cocoon as a carnivorous black moth instead of a butterfly
who will, for eternity, remain that monster, because there is no undoing such a transformation fed by pain, misery and mistreatment
and I went
fuck
anyway good job on the sympathetic villain guillermo she wrecks me every time and I just want to hold her and love her and write meta and 1000 crappy redemption fics for her I hope you’re happy
such delish *u* altho Lestat was pretty much comatose… and it did end in Armand getting…
Ohh yes I do hope for more A/L stuff in PL since that last we saw if them two together was heartbreakingly sweet and tbh I wanna see more of how their relationship has built. You know i was talking with monsieur-le-rockstar
over the phone a week ago about how Armand, having never been properly taught by Marius or the Children of Darkness how to approach the scene in Palais Royale, really had no clue Lestat would reject his gesture of ‘vampire romance’ —for lack of a better word. That and Lestat himself had NO clue how that kind of thing happened because he still was confused about how to vampire and like—that whole scene would have gone entirely different I think if they had communicated more (also if Armand stopped with that glamouring). But ye…I could ramble about the palais royale scene bc it is just—another part of tvl that really set up and defined Lestat and Armand’s relationship….)
ABSOLUTELY AGREED. The first time I read that scene I was all “Ooooh Armand you lil monster! Beating earned.” But yeah, after all the subsequent VC information, I see that scene very differently now, more like: “Lestat you dumbass, he wasn’t attacking, that was leurve/making-out vampire style omg”
Well it may have been some of both but still.
I came across this old thread digging for smtg else, and there’s a good point here. Armand had some mixed feelings about fledgling!Lestat, both wanting to crush him into submission, but also, he might have been attracted to him.
@faceofabotticelliangel makes a good suggestion that Armand might have been trying to seduce Lestat in the vampiry way, which he hadn’t really been taught, and Lestat was a fresh vampire and didn’t know that’s what it was, so of course, when Lestat rejected him, of course Armand’s going to react badly:
And as he struggled, as he sought to resurrect himself with a burst of force, he shot his declaration at me that he would kill me because he had my strength now. He’d drunk it out of me and coupled with his own strength it would make him impossible to defeat.
^I don’t know whether Armand really believed what he was saying but it must have really hurt to be rejected. Whether or not Armand really was trying to seduce, @faceofabotticelliangel makes a good point, “that whole scene would have gone entirely different I think if they had communicated more (also if Armand stopped with that glamouring)… another part of tvl that really set up and defined Lestat and Armand’s relationship….)”
Agent Peacock: Lestat spends much of his unlife wearing and surrounding himself with incredible finery, enjoys theater, and exhibits wild mood swings, but he’ll fight anyone and anything.
And:
Unreliable Narrator: The Lestat that appeared in Interview with the Vampire was not merely the antagonist; he was a stupid, cruel and petty villain. The (vastly different) Lestat of the later books claims he was spitefully misrepresented by Louis.
– Although it can be debated whether Vampire Chronicles fits this trope at all, as we’re not talking about one narrator who is inconsistent, we’re talking about two completely different narrators within the series (not counting the multiple points of view of The Queen of the Damned). Of course a depiction of Lestat from the perspective of Louis (who resents him) is going to be more harsh and critical, and a depiction of Lestat from his own point of view is going to be more forgiving. No one sees themselves as being “stupid, cruel and petty.” Lestat knows and fully understands the motivations behind his own action and Louis doesn’t, which would account for any seeming inconsistencies in Lestat’s characterization.
– The simplest explanation is that Lestat went through a lot of personal change as the series progressed, which explains why he became a very different character in the later books than he was in the early ones (toward the end he even starts to believe in God.)
– It is worth noting that Louis is self-absorbed to the point where, unlike most vampires, he almost never seems to exhibit any significant telepathic ability. Thus his point of view is entirely his own. Lestat, in contrast, makes extensive use of telepathy, particularly as his powers grow, and many of the observations in the stories he narrates came directly from the thoughts and memories of other characters. Thus he is to some extent an omniscient narrator.
IKR?! It makes my heart hurt so YOU HAVE TO HURT, TOO. I am aware that Lestat is one of the biggest antagonistic monsters in canon, but that’s not all he is, and when he’s cut down like this, you can’t help but feel bad for the poor guy.
Let me torture y’all a little more…
^HE THINKS SHE FLAVORED THEM FOR HIM. He’s being slightly cute here with the way he’s gesturing theatrically to her, don’t think about all the times he and Louis “acted Shakespeare together for Claudia’s amusement…” He thinks she went to EXTRA EFFORT to make this peace offering special for him! Well, she did, but not the way he thinks ;A;
^(Just a still of Claudia bc of reasons) Then she basically tells him it was dead blood* she gave him, which, in the context of movie!IWTV, is apparently dangerous to them. On her first kill he told her that they always have to “stop before the heart stops,” but he doesn’t say why. So now he knows she poisoned him, and the laudanum is working, bc look how incapacitated he is:
^It’s probably no accident that his right hand is in his crotch there, he’s been emasculated, brought down by his own daughter *cries*
^That whole right arm is just not functional, he tries to put weight on it, and it just collapses ;A;
Even if he COULD grab her at this point, he’s in no shape to try to fight her physically. He can barely even talk!
In the context of the scene, there’s no going back for her at this point, she poisoned him intentionally and there would have been no way to regain his trust. All the sadness.
Asterisked stuff under the cut.
*In the film, it’s implied that the deadness of the blood is what’s incapacitating him, and that’s fine, for the film. He taught her this in her first kill. But in the books, it’s about the laudanum** that actually would have a strong effect on him. If Louis had been able to put Lestat in his coffin, Lestat could have slept off this opiate dose and been fine the next night.
**Laudanum is not just any drug, it’s a BAMF (Wiki):
“Reddish-brown and extremely bitter, laudanum contains almost all of the opium alkaloids, including morphine and codeine, and its high morphine concentration makes it a potent narcotic. Laudanum was historically used to treat a variety of ailments, but its principal use was as an analgesic and cough suppressant.”
One more note on the dead blood – if those boys were truly dead, Lestat would have known just with his own senses. Vampires can’t stand to be around their dead. But we’ll have to just ignore that ;]
A little breakdown of this scene, re: why I loved Tom’s Lestat so much in this scene, since we’re talking about it.
^Claudia leads him in, and he’s so trusting. When he sees the boys there, he is not immediately very pleased. He actually looks a little disappointed. The house rule is not to bring victims into the house, and she brought them in, is he going to have to lay down the law again? Bad timing for it, since he’s trying to make peace with her.
She glances up at him to gauge his reaction but looks away before he can meet her gaze. She’s thrilled with what she’s about to do and doesn’t want him derailing her from her mission.
^I use this gif a lot for “such feels,” but there’s really more going on here, and not necessarily happiness. She’s told him that the boys are the gift to him. He starts w/ a facepalm, bc, hey, Lestat would actually rather not kill children.* He tries to go for adult evildoers. It’s clearer in TVL than in movie!IWTV, but he does tell Louis in an earlier scene, “Evildoers are easier, and they taste better.”**
Lestat is also very guarded in his body language here, all closed off w/ his arms across his chest (we don’t usually see him this closed off in the movie). When he shows his face, he’s not smiling at first, bc, this wasn’t really the kind of truce he would have wanted. But then he rallies, shakes his head a little bit, and tries to smile, probably tells himself inwardly, “She did this for me, she has good intentions…”
^”Well, you certainly have… outdone yourself,” he says. He’s struggling to compliment her, that hesitation could have led to a criticism. Trying to convince himself that this is a peace offering and to reign in his usual edgy sense of humor. The main rule in their home was always “Never [kill] in the house” and she wants him to share this kill. In. The. House. A rule she’s broken countless times. He’s still guarded, still has his arms up protectively.
The smile fails as he looks over the boys like he’s looking at something unappetizing at a buffet. For me, that would be the wilted salad area.
^There’s a full second pause as he looks at her bc he’s still struggling to believe it was all this easy. Then he asks: “We forgive each other, then?” This is Lestat without any of his bravado, no games, not asking as her maker, just as someone who loves her and wants her love, too. This is the Lestat who spent most of his childhood unloved or beaten down for trying to find a place where ppl would love him ;A;
^There’s almost a full second pause as she looks at him – bc she doesn’t really forgive him – and then says: “Yes” She’s lying right to his face, so evil! If you cover her mouth, her eyebrows don’t change at all with that smile. But there is still a chance to abandon her plan if she wants to.
^Having secured the peace, putting his trust in her about this gift being OK to consume, he has this little sigh of relief; his usual confidence comes back in, you can see a hint of a smile as he turns away.
(This victim is one of the moments in the film that really pushed the envelope for its time, when Lestat bites into the child. It’s actually a lot less homoerotic/pedophilic than in the book, where he gets his hands wrapped up in the kid’s shirt. Unlike when he bites adults and we see his face, here, we see him from behind. It makes it less sexual, he didn’t choose this victim, it’s seems like it’s more about the consumption.)
^Anyway… he thinks she spiked their blood with absinthe bc he immediately feels drugged/drunk from it.
She tells him it’s laudanum, and he repeats that word, has he heard of it before? Probably not, bc she tells him what it does.
So right up until the moment she explicitly lays it out for him, he still believes they’ve reconciled, and even that she flavored the blood for him as an extra consideration! It’s a very painful betrayal, specifically bc he wanted to believe her SO BADLY that he ignored all the red flags ;A;
You could say he deserved this betrayal, but I think this scene is part of what makes Tom’s Lestat so very good. Even as he’s led into getting his punishment, you still feel sorry for him, it’s hard to hate a monster when he’s being this trusting and gentle and really wanting to well… not be a monster.
I recognize that this is a social media site so you are welcome to reblog and comment and engage on this, but please do so respectfully, and keep in mind that #your headcanon may vary, and we are all entitled to our own interpretations/opinions about canon, and about movie!IWTV.
(Asterisked notes under the cut.)
* It’s implied that Lestat and Claudia finished off whole families together in an earlier scene in the film, including children, but we’ve only seen him kill adults on screen up to this point. In the book, it’s Claudia who insists on killing families (her own, IIRC), and she kills a mother and daughter who worked domestically in the flat for Louis and Lestat. Lestat rarely kills children in the books, typically it’s only in moments of extreme emotional weakness.Tom would have known this, bc he read books 1-4.
**
“Evildoers are easier, and they taste better.” – This is what Lestat tells Louis to try to get him to acclimate to the idea that killing is okay, and in fact, some ppl need to be killed anyway, to protect the general population (like Lestat killing the wolves to save the villagers back in the Auvergne). But in the books it’s implied that innocent blood tastes better, which makes it harder to resist. “…these victims had been taken in the perfect semblance of love. The very blood seemed warmer with their innocence, richer with their goodness.” (TVL)
I might do more of these if you’re interested, but they do take a long time to put together. We’ll see…
(2/2) moment to moment in a way that made me picture a silver clock ticking in a void: the painted face, the delicately carved hands looked upon by no one, looking out at no one, illuminated by a light which was not a light, like the light by which God made the world before He had made light. Ticking, ticking, ticking, the precision of the clock, in a room as vast as the universe.”
Are you homework anon? I got this ask right around the same time as the homework ask… part of your assignment (if you are homework anon!) is probably to practice critical thinking on your own and figure out what you think this passage means.
It doesn’t have to mean the same exact thing to everyone, and that’s what makes discussion about canon interesting, all our varied opinions. It’s great when we agree, but we don’t always on all topics 😉
But of course I wrote out a long answer despite the fact that I didn’t want to! Oh well.
“The great adventure of our lives.”
I’d suggest that the opening line is the topic sentence on which he’s going to build support or undermine the statement, or both. Louis has already had a number of great adventures (or so it appears to the reader!), so what makes him call THIS one the great adventure? Only now, embarking on the great Looking for Other Vampires: European Tour w/ Claudia, does he feel the freedom Lestat wanted him to feel when he was first turned. Louis didn’t embrace his vampire nature then, he fought it, he fought Lestat, he was not having a good time at all, and although he did reluctantly admit to enjoying some of the aspects of vampiring, he was holding back. Claudia shows up and Louis has a new purpose, he loves her, and she helps to inspire in him a hunger to be alive. ❤
“What does it mean to die when you can live until the end of the world?” – He’s not saying that he can’t still die, bc he’s seen a vampire be killed (at least, he thinks so). But now he’s really considering immortality as a possibility, maybe he wants to be with Claudia forever!
“And what is `the end of the world’ except a phrase, because who knows even what is the world itself?” – Now he’s asking questions of his topic sentence, he’s unsure of the excitement he feels about this new chapter in his life. Is it legit? Can he actually give himself over to enjoying it and being excited about it? Keep in mind that he’s never mentioned traveling before (except for the fact that he came to America from France), he’s lived an isolated life in NOLA and probably expected to die there. He might really have mixed anxiety and excitement about everything and everywhere outside of NOLA.
“I had now lived in two centuries,” – it’s around 1860 when he leaves NOLA with Claudia, he was alive at the end of the 18th century, and experienced half of the 19th century. Obviously a lot of things changed, as he says he’s “seen the illusions of one utterly shattered by the other,”
Then he goes on to talk about himself, and how he’s had internal changes of his own, probably re: embracing his nature, finding a will to live, and I don’t want to translate each piece for you bc it seems fairly self-explanatory: “been eternally young and eternally ancient, possessing no illusions,”
This is Louis being poetic:
“living moment to moment in a way that made me picture a silver clock ticking in a void: the painted face, the delicately carved hands looked upon by no one, looking out at no one, illuminated by a light which was not a light, like the light by which God made the world before He had made light. Ticking, ticking, ticking, the precision of the clock, in a room as vast as the universe.”
^but it seems to relate to him feeling outside of nature, outside of religion, and yet still touched by God’s light, being a vampire, like something that can’t affect anything but can watch and take notice of all the things evolving around it. Something Marius later calls a continuous awareness:
“And for no apparent reason, I was possessed of a strange idea about life, a strange concern that amounted almost to a pleasant obsession… That it came to me in these last free hours as a Roman citizen was no more than coincidence.
The idea was simply that there was somebody who knew everything, somebody who had seen everything. I did not mean by this that a Supreme Being existed, but rather that there was on earth a continual intelligence, a continual awareness.
…My idea of who or what it was, was vague. But I was comforted by the notion that nothing spiritual – and knowing was spiritual – was lost to us. That there was this continuous knowing…” (TVL)
^It seems like something Anne Rice has always been passionate about, how the vampires exist in this world, and how they are dependent upon it, fascinated by it, and yet kept apart from it, how they absorb and contain all this historical knowledge of this world that they’re obsessed with by their very nature… and she has carried through to some extent in even the most recent VC.
I hope you’re not the anon with the project for class, asking me to do your homework for you! But I do want to answer this, so you get my opinion, which may not be the actual answer.
I think there’s more than one climax, depending on what your reading of IWTV focuses on. I’m not as religious as some ppl, so I don’t give that theme as much weight as other readers might. And that is a huge aspect of Louis’ struggle with vampiring and giving into his vampire nature, being in direct conflict with the most important of commandments, Thou Shalt Not Kill (in conjunction with Thou Shalt Not Steal, bc this kind of killing is doing both).
Here’s one definition I found for climax, the noun: “the most intense, exciting, or important point of something; a culmination or apex.” For me, that moment could be a catalyst, too, changing a character to some extent, could be a drastic re-calibration of their inner dialogue with themselves, reconfiguration of their moral values, etc.
I’m not quite sure which scene in IWTV (book or movie) that would be for you, but for me, one of the most intense moments was when Louis found Madeleine and Claudia’s ashes:
First is denial.
It’s in this moment that Louis has lost the most precious person, the one who’s told him what to do, someone he could worship and follow, someone who metered out his doses of happiness with her approval.
He’s also lost his own
(and very first!)
fledgling, and even though in both the book and the movie there doesn’t appear to be much attachment to between them, @vampchronfic/@gairid‘s headcanons about that have convinced me that there IS a bond, deep and invisible, created in the act of turning. Maker and fledgling are drawn together. Something like the attachment between a mother and her child, perhaps more powerful bc (hopefully) the giving of the Dark Gift was a consensual act between adults. It’s even more cruel in the movie bc she dies the same night she was turned, talk about bad life choices.
ANYWAY.
He holds off on the anger for now, goes straight to bargaining. He reaches out to touch them, maybe he thinks there’s some way to save them still? Or maybe the ashes are just on the surface, maybe Claudia and Madeleine are still intact under there? It feels like a nightmare and he wants to prove it’s not real.
But it is real, and they crumble, and everything that they were is gone.
This, his lightest touch, it’s heartbreaking, their final destruction at his own hand ;A;
Depression and acceptance. It’s real, they’re beyond saving, he’s failed them both in so many ways. The only thing left is (anger stage) revenge against this injustice, against the Theatre troupe, and once that’s accomplished, against himself.
So I’d say this was a climax bc it acted as a catalyst for Louis, he finally burst into action because of this, and any remaining illusions he had about vampiring and immortality were shattered. He’s 1,000% done and he’s gonna go out in a blaze of fiery glory punishment.
I-want-my-IWTV 