Tag Archives: meta

Do you think any members of the VC Cast have any irrational fears (canon or non canon)? If so, what do you think they are?

Leave a comment

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.

image

“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

image

^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.

image
image

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.

Leave a comment

monstersinthecosmos:

lokitapendragon:

Armand fans: please reblog and rant about why you love him. I remember a point where I found him intriguing but I carry Lestat’s grudges more than he does I need you guys to remind me why Armand is cool.

  • smol
  • face like an angel
  • cute grumpy bf
  • eclectic taste in music
  • canonically kinky
  • adorably curious about dumb shit
  • waaaaay the fuck smarter than he looks
  • powerful telepath
  • easily the most interesting character in VC like even on a surface level he’s always the dichotomy between how painfully physically gorgeous he is against the atrocities he’s committed and how he’s retained this almost innocent beauty and how disarming it can be when he does cruel things from behind that face but like even when he’s been cruel it’s so easy to explain his behavior by the layers and layers of trauma from his life both as a human and as a young vampire and despite all of it and despite how emotionally stunted he was for such a long time and it’s such a satisfying character arc that other vampires don’t tend to get in this series due to AR either abandoning her characters or getting sloppy with her writing but it’s so wonderful the way he opened up to Daniel and evolved so much as a person in that short time and it’s so heartbreaking that like i really think he’s such a good dude on the inside and it’s been so buried by all the terrible things that happened to him and the mechanisms he had to adopt just to survive and he can be a little bratty like face it I really think he’s the ACTUAL brat prince and he’s a complete fucking troll and sometimes I think it’s still a symptom of his centuries living underground and being emotionally repressed because it’s like he doesn’t know to express himself from not being able to for literal hundreds of years but even when he’s a salty little fucker he really cares about the people in his life like even with Lestat it’s like they’re always gonna be bros and rivals but they need each other to endure and Armand would be crushed if anything happened to Lestat and even when he acts like an asshole he’s opened up when it counts like even in the new books he opens his homes to everyone and takes in Antoine and he’s just a really fucking good dude that’s been through a lot of legit garbage and I love him 
  • gr8 hair

Dearest Lestat, I was just watching Disney’s “Beauty and the Beast” and I noticed that the Beast’s human form looks an awful lot like you. What do you think?

Leave a comment

monstersinthecosmos:

i-want-my-iwtv:

♛I would say that the resemblance is uncanny… in more ways than one. Yes, budding youth, handsome, blue eyes and blond hair. Even the expression in the painted portrait we see of Prince Adam is a familiar expression of mine *winks*

I relate deeply to that story. If I’m the Beast, and I’m constantly swooning over Louis’s slightest glance at me, does that make him Beauty? Probably.

As much as I do praise myself (and others do, as well!) to the high heavens for my looks… Being at home in my own body has been, and still is, a constant a struggle. It’s a love-hate relationship with the mirror. As often as I say it, the impact remains the same: my reflection has startled me on more than one occasion, it’s depressed me, it’s made me almost lose the will to live. There were times that I couldn’t look in a mirror. I wouldn’t wish that feeling on my worst enemy.

There is a real horror in what we are, hosts to a vampiric parasite. That moment of awakening, that first breath after the change. Beautiful and monstrous all in one. And each time I survive something and my reflection shows me something close to what I was before all this happened, that’s a small comfort. 

image

OMFG no really can we talk about parallels between these stories.

image
  • HELLO WOLFKILLER LOL
  • Let’s talk about how Belle and Louis are both pretty brunette book nerds.
  • Lestat experiences horrific changes to himself (his soul and his body both) throughout his life that turn him into a literal monster and he’s often terrified by his own body.
  • Belle basically winds up with Stockholm Syndrome, HI LOUIS. Like, the Beast keeps her captive for selfish reasons, eventually he grows on her. Louis entered this relationship with his eyes a little more open, and he was enthralled by Lestat in the very beginning, but Lestat did trap him there by withholding Important Vampire Information AND ALSO trapping him with a kid. Claudia is basically the library in this analogy.

SPOILERS BENEATH

Keep reading

//ooc: Very good addition from @monstersinthecosmos! I’m sure essays could be written on this. Lots of comparison could be made. 

The story of Beauty and the Beast is far older than the Disney movie (1991) and has been adapted many times over, I wouldn’t be surprised if AR had drawn on some of that story – or any of the various adaptations – for inspiration as TVL was published in 1985. Still, it’s worth comparing this Disney version (or the story itself) with TVL, being made within the same decade. Maybe the Disney ppl were influenced by AR ;]

a meta on meta

Leave a comment

sathinfection:

Something’s been nagging me about most fandom meta for a
while, and I’ve only recently put my finger on it:

The vast majority of what
crosses my dash is coming from a position of bad faith.

By bad faith, I mean meta presuming that most people are 1)
doing fandom wrong and 2) need to be instructed on how to do it right. Meta
writers are addressing common fanons, stereotypes, trends, and other aspects of
fandom that they dislike, and which they think need to be stopped or
reexamined. And you know what? I’ll admit that there’s sometimes a kernel of
truth in what people are presenting; however, I think the means are very
flawed. Wagging fingers at people doesn’t work very well, because you’re
guilting them for how they choose to spend their free time, in a hobby that
they love.

Here’s what happens when I see a piece of meta chiding
fandom:

  • People who already agree with the stance agreeing with the
    meta
  • People who disagree, posting rebuttals
  • People reblogging with guilty tags about how they feel bad
    for enjoying [bad thing]

Is this really productive? Is it encouraging less [bad
thing], more [good thing]? Not really.

Now that I’ve put myself in the position of doing the exact fingerwagging
I’ve criticized, what do I think is the solution to this problem? Because yes,
there are some things in fandom which are pretty bad, and which I wish reduced.

Produce the work you want to see in fandom. If you don’t
produce content, then comment, kudos, reblog, rec, or otherwise send good wishes
to things that meet your standards for [good thing], instead of yelling at
people for [bad thing]. Be supportive, rather than negative. Ignore shit that
you hate, because it doesn’t deserve your attention anyway. What’s a greater
condemnation of a work than silence? Being nastily critical will often put fans
on the defensive and create more support
of things that are legitimately problematic/bad/just plain silly. No one wants
to produce fanwork to an empty room. And all that attention that you’re now
giving to [good thing], rather than [bad thing]? Is going to produce more and
more [good thing].

Plus, you can always make friends through privately griping
about [bad thing], so you can still get your hate on, you diamond.

hey i was wondering, have you seen the person recently (not sure i should link or not) where a critic is analyzing the series in order? if so what did you think? they seem to have been in the fandom a long time like you, are you friends?

Leave a comment

You probably mean @vraik! 

I’ve been following Vrai Kaiser for awhile now, but never reached out… Because of your ask, I finally did so tonight and we chatted a bit tonight! ^_____^

I’ve read some of their IWTV analysis here, and over on their blog, Fashionable Tinfoil accessories. Here’s the tumblr masterpost of their IWTV review. 

One of the things we talked about tonight is that different ppl engage with fandom in different ways. Some ppl engage with canon by making fanart, fanfic, cosplays, etc., some ppl do it by examining the text, considering it on its own and also re: the cultural impact it has on its readers. 

Vrai presents some intriguing opinions with a really good sense of humor in their writing style, and they have great pics from various sources (w/ fun captions!) to break up the text, definitely worth checking them out ;D

image

[^X one of my memes, it’s Neil Jordan, certified vampire therapist]

Reading through Vrai’s reviews, this was something I grabbed onto and I really like it, re: Louis as an unreliable narrator [from The Consulting Analyst – Interview with the Vampire (Part 2)]:

I know I keep coming back to the fact that Louis lies and leaves things out of his story above and beyond his own ignorance of others, but it’s a crucial thing to return to in parsing out some manner of “truth” from the events we’re being told about. Between this account and Lestat’s own bitterness-tinged declaration that follows is an actuality, and the ambiguity of what defines that “truth” is very much at the heart of what allows these books to survive from one generation to the next. Even as parts become antiquated, you can always read a truth behind the bluster that speaks to you in a way Anne’s writing wasn’t able to cover. The ideas of these outsiders outlive the frame.

For a final touch on the subject, here’s an important moment from a little bit earlier.

“But you mustn’t be afraid to ask me anything. If I held something too close…” And when the vampire said this his face darkened for an instant. He frowned, and as his brows drew together a small well appeared in the flesh of his forehead over his left brow, as though someone had pressed it with a finger. It gave him a peculiar look of deep distress. “If I held something too close for you to ask about it, I would not bring it up in the first place,” he said.

So Louis as good as admits that he’s hiding things. It’s our job as readers, from here, to suss out where those lines get drawn.

Leave a comment

vampireapologist:

merciful-death:

vampireapologist:

I didn’t know that post was being reblogged and it makes me happy that it is but in the tags I found someone defending Louis’s narrative as truthful and I’m actually really curious about that point of view! Pretty much anyone with whom I discuss the vampire chronicles agree that Lestat is the more reliable narrator like literally no one I have spoken to says they believe Louis’s narrative over Lestat’s and I’d love for someone with that stance to get in my ask box and like, try to convince me to believe Louis over Lestat. That could be super fun!!

ooc; I feel like Louis was very particular about what he talked about and how he spoke of it when he gave his interview.  Louis is a very cautious individual who, in canon, is repeatedly stated as valuing his privacy, so for him to give the interview in the first place suggests that he had reasons for doing so.  I’ve always surmised one factor was that he wanted Lestat to be angry and come find him.  He didn’t really know Lestat’s circumstances re: Lestat going to ground, so for all he was aware, Lestat could have been out there somewhere, conscious and aware.

I think one of the more interesting inconsistencies is the timing of Louis’ encounter with Lestat at the end of Interview with the Vampire.  Louis states that it was “just last spring” that he and Armand had encountered Lestat in New Orleans, acting crazy.  Lestat verifies in The Vampire Lestat that Louis & Armand did come to New Orleans (although his account of the story is definitely different from Louis’), but he states that their visit occurred in the 1920s, shortly before he went to ground.  I think with the timing, Lestat’s definitely more believable due to the whole fact that he did go to ground for YEARS, which then leads me to believe Louis’ whole story regarding their reunion is fictitious (although, at the same time, Lestat WAS kind of losing it, so).  I think it was an intentional lie on Louis’ part, probably to put a bullseye on Lestat’s location just to be that douchebag.  And suggesting the encounter was more recent would make it seem like Lestat was still there.  Of course, Daniel ended up running into Armand instead of Lestat. 😉

I think a lot of how Louis speaks of the past with Lestat was due to him feeling pretty fucking bitter at the time, and honestly, I think he probably didn’t fully understand a lot of Lestat’s motives back then.  Louis is good at telling the truth, but not the complete story, and both he and Lestat are great at viewing things exclusively from their own points of view.  They’re both very opinionated.  Of course, Lestat’s also very good at exaggerating.

To make a long story short–it’s always been my belief that when Louis lies, he lies intentionally.  I think Louis and Lestat’s narratives together make the actual true story.

Oh! I absolutely think Louis’s lies are totally intentional! I think he’s dishonest in his narrative, not delusional! That exact inconsistency, Louis’s description of speaking to Lestat in the ruined house, is where I started side-eyeing Louis and second-guessing everything he tells us throughout his narrative. He didn’t just mark Lestat’s location, he made up what was apparently a totally fictitious Vampire trying to get Lestat’s attention just to make the encounter that much more…what? Dramatic? I guess?

“…and honestly, I think he probably didn’t fully understand a lot of Lestat’s motives back then.”

The lack of communication between them is like, THE issue in their relationship honestly. And the major problem is that the thing Louis wants most of all, answers about Vampires and their origin, is the one thing Lestat is literally forbidden to provide. Poor Louis was just wanted some rhyme and reason to his immortal life, the same way Lestat did when he left all of those messages for Marius over the years. They’re very similar in their need for knowledge, imo.

“I think Louis and Lestat’s narratives together make the actual true story.” I like this conclusion a lot! It’s just unfortunate we don’t actually get to hear them both tell two sides of the same story but for a very brief bit, because of course Anne Rice wouldn’t write and publish all of the Claudia years again told form Lestat’s pov. But! I wish we could read that, you know? In Louis’s narrative we get a brief background of his life before Lestat, and then most of the story revolves around his life with and after Lestat. Whereas Lestat’s story is almost completely without Louis until the very end, and their interactions are largely summarized. Like I said, it wouldn’t make sense in the real world to recap everything in Louis’s story form Lestat’s point of view. But I think if we were able to hear ALL of Interview with the Vampire from Lestat’s point of view, we’d end up with the absolute truth by picking through and putting together both narratives. It’d be a wonderful read!!!

Thanks for the response!!!! (:

“Louis is a very cautious individual who, in canon, is repeatedly stated as valuing his privacy, so for him to give the interview in the first place suggests that he had reasons for doing so.  I’ve always surmised one factor was that he wanted Lestat to be angry and come find him.” 

“I think Louis and Lestat’s narratives together make the actual true story.”

The lack of communication between them is like, THE issue in their relationship honestly

^Yep! Very much agree. AND WE CAN BLAME MARIUS FOR THIS, who forbade Lestat from telling the secrets ;A; This may have been retconned, but one good reason Marius gives for not telling the vampire origin story, etc., is that Lestat’s fledgling(s) might not be able to handle the truth:

[Lestat:] “Yes, ” I said. “But the legends, our origins … What about those
children that I make? Can’t I tell them- " 

[Marius:] "No. As I told you, tell part and you will end up telling all. Besides,
if these fledglings are children of the Christian god, if they are
poisoned as Nicolas was with the Christian notion of Original Sin and
guilt, they will only be maddened and disappointed by these old tales.
It will all be a horror to them that they cannot accept. Accidents,
pagan gods they don’t believe in, customs they cannot understand.
One has to be ready for this knowledge, meager as it may be. Rather
listen hard to their questions and tell them what you must to make
them contented. And if you find you cannot lie to them, don’t tell
them anything at all. Try to make them strong as godless men today
are strong. But mark my words, the old legends never. Those are
mine and mine alone to tell. " 

I don’t know if you are the one to ask but do you know if there are any ff of Lestat, Louis (and possibly the rest) reading ff about themselves? Because it would bee too meta and I love meta. Who should I ask if not you?

Leave a comment

Ahhh… that is a tough one! They definitely like the fanart of themselves.

image
image
image
image

[^X Digging up an oldie from the archive which I have tidied up a little for ya and I would just like to mention that the above was screencapped from the ACTUAL TV screen so there is interlacing and whatever I don’t care it adds to the charm, oui/oui? but HEY it motivated me to improve my graphic skills for y’all and I DID]

The only writer that immediately comes to mind is our very own fandom treasure @gairid, who has a Through the 4th Wall, Darkly series which does something in the vein (pun intended hehehe) of what you’re looking for, feels meta. It’s mostly the characters discussing Lestat’s ghostwriter: “Really, Lestat, you need to have a talk with her. It’s getting out of hand. What sort of biographer makes everything up without the slightest regard to the truth?” *giggles*

Gonna open this up to the group and ask anyone to reblog or comment on this post if they know of fic that does this!

Cut for length.

There is another current writer I know of who does more of what you’re looking for on a regular basis BUT she doesn’t post publicly ;A; I will try to nudge her onto AO3 in your honor ;] To be honest, the interaction of the VC characters w/ fanfic of themselves is usually described as their being amused and/or creeped out, as most ppl who find out about RPF of themselves seem to be.

Lestat would be hella flattered and in fact…. he has written really shmoopy fluff of himself and Louis, which he has not-so-subtly tried to get Louis to read. Louis reads it and makes grammatical corrections and hands it back. Secretly, he’s very touched.

Louis loves the fanart but is mildly creeped out by the fandom’s fanfic of himself, partly bc he thinks the writers spend too much time glorifying his appearance, and/or he’s written out of character.

Louis: “Why do they all think I’m sunk in this, this deep depression all the time? I… do things… I go out.” 

Lestat: “How much of the evening do you spend outside if I don’t drag you out?” 

Louis: “Well, I have to go out to feed.”

Lestat: “And that takes, what, 30 or 40 minutes?”

Louis: “Yes, about.”

Lestat: “So you go out, on average, 35 minutes a night.”

Louis: “Depression is not defined by the lack of amount of time spent outside!”

Lestat: –

Louis: –

Lestat: –

Louis: “Shut up.”

Gallery

Leave a comment

grimhel:

yiduiqie:

vintagegal:

Interview with the Vampire (1994) dir. Neil Jordan

one of the greatest performances ever 

I’m in love with this film for Tom Cruise ‘s performance and the fabulous long hairstyle of Brad Pitt. 

Definitely one of my fave scenes. There’s so much going on here. Lestat bursts in and immediately looks around to see if he can salvage anything out of this, but knows he can only save Louis, and still has time to have this thorny little exchange bc he’ll be damned if he isn’t going to take this as an opportunity to lay in a little verbal smackdown. “Have us sleeping in the field like cattle!” He has this subtle pain in his eyes, as if Louis was actually trying to usurp his role as the captain of this ship, not that he was in fact trying to commit suicide. It doesn’t even cross Lestat’s mind to remark on the fact that that’s what this was, a suicide attempt. Or maybe it does, and in not giving Louis the choice to go down with his fiery mansion, Lestat has made a renewed internal vow to guide Louis into becoming the vampire he knows he can be. 

Lestat could have easily just let Louis burn up with the house. Except that he loves him. Even though this was an act of ENORMOUS REBELLION it only makes Lestat love Louis more, bc only a BAMF like Louis could do something like this, try to destroy everything an apparently materialistic creature like Lestat has ever wanted, and not care about the consequences. But that’s not who Lestat really is, that’s all just retail therapy, hoarding shiny things to fill a void, and they both know it. Having stripped away Lestat’s treasured hoard, Louis’ face is 99% sexual ecstasy, he’s so satisfied with himself here.

Louis didn’t do this to rile Lestat, he did it to win, and finally do away with himself. But seeing his maker there, clearly to rescue Louis, the most precious thing to Lestat in the whole place, had to touch something in Louis. Because he lets Lestat save him without putting up a fight, and he doesn’t run away as soon as he’s capable. He stays with Lestat. As much as he doesn’t like his methods or philosophy, he’s captivated by Lestat. He trusts Lestat. 

They’re both helplessly bound together in how much they want and need each other ;A; 

Part of what makes them so shippable is how much Lestat wants to own Louis, and how not-for-sale Louis is, but how much he is drawn to Lestat against his own better judgment, like a moth to flame.

Source: vintagegal

Hello! I was wondering, since you’re a VC fandom veteran, do you have any idea why old fanfic writers had a tendency to write Marius as a villain in their stories? I came across many old fics that portrayed him as insanely controlling and abusive to other characters, and I know he’s no saint but he’s a lot more ethical than a lot of others, so I was wondering, was there a time when the fans expressed so much vitriol towards him?

Leave a comment

vampchronfic:

i-want-my-iwtv:

remarried:

vagabonddaniel:

coldinhumanity:

i-want-my-iwtv:

Ah, hmmmmmm…. I don’t remember that specifically, and I’m feeling like I should know that… 

^Lee Pace as Marius bc of reasons. 

… but I can surmise that since he was the only authority figure anyone paid respect to for awhile, that would naturally lead to them speculating on him abusing such status. 

Which he did, somewhat, with Armand, when he took him in. I haven’t personally dissected that ship too thoroughly, so I wouldn’t know. 

I’ll open this up to the group: Anyone out there have an answer for this anon?

//Haven’t been around long enough to know (only got into the fandom in 2005), but I would guess it’s just what you said.. that maybe his and Armand’s relationship as it came through in TVA and B&G was a negative surprise to people? Especially compared to how favourably he’s portrayed in say TVL/QotD.

ooc: I think it’s partially the later stuff with TVA and B&G, where he comes off as a not-so-nice guy. But back when there were only three books, Marius was the authority figure trying to implement rules for the vampires, so he was an obvious antagonist for The Brat Prince, resident rule-breaker. 

I read the books when I was 13 and was like, “wee everyone is hot” but then I reread them at 27 with more scrutiny and formed some vastly different opinions on characters. I realized I didn’t like Marius at all LMAO it’s just because he’s got a personality I’m not fond of in a man. 

So I imagine people might have been “eh *grunts & hand waves*” on Marius and that somehow designated him the one to make the villain when it suited. Fandom is not known for having impartial views on anything – now or back then.

^All good reasons, TVA and B&G would have had a big impact on fandom’s perception of Marius.

Later-canon Marius is very… um… he seems to have misplaced some of his marbles.  

#marius I leave u alone with my mortal luvvies for 5 DAMN SECONDS WTF

I don’t recall any specific fic where Marius was controlling or abusive though once TVA came out people began to think of him in less of a positive light partly because of  Armand’s specific reveals about him and also because he went against his own advice regarding making a vampire of a child (Armand was 17 which was perhaps why he admonished Lestat against such an action, but then how to explain Benji? Benji was made strong, to be sure, because, well, Marius—but he was still very young and Sybele was more than a little addled, so turning her was risky. It was around that time where people began writing more fic examining his darker side.

Leave a comment

merciful-death:

devilsfool:

thelionscrimsonclaws:

i-see-light:

Can we talk about… how Louis repeatedly has visual/auditory/tactile hallucinations, episodes of dissociation and depersonalization, and panic and anxiety attacks all throughout IWTV but these things are never really touched upon again in the series… like these are all possible symptoms of very severe depression, which I guess Rice alludes to Louis having throughout the series, but like honestly Louis was barely functional in IWTV and that’s never really been demonstrated again… in the later books Louis is always described as being calm, quiet, morally exceptional, conveniently kind, and romantically “sad.” I’ve always felt like the others’ perception of Louis was completely different from Louis’s perception of himself in his own account, and I wonder what ever happened to that intensity in his character in IWTV. I think if it’s touched upon later at all, it’s in Merrick? A little? Still though, it feels like Louis was conveniently stabilized and made static in the narrative in order to make him an easier character to sideline lmao

Very much so…..

//Frankly, this is an astute observation. And I think a lot of the changes in Louis’ character came, frankly, from his author no longer wishing to associate with him. Anne made it quite clear that she hated Louis’ voice and never wished to write in it again–and it took her almost forty years (39, to be exact) for her to be able to write in it again (I’m referring to the Epilogue in Prince Lestat). 

ooc; I agree with @devilsfool re: Anne.  I believe she was actually quoted at one point after writing Merrick saying that she didn’t want to ever write in Louis’ voice again???  Or something like that.  She definitely expressed not caring all that much for his character.

But I can agree with what you’re saying too, because ultimately, IwtV was the only first-person narrative from Louis until the last chapter of PL.  I’ve always felt Louis to be this intense perfectionist that can’t tolerate his own downfalls, and I definitely agree that he shows numerous symptoms of depression.  He’s his biggest critic, and I think that shows a lot in IwtV.

I feel like IwtV would have seemed a lot different if told from Lestat’s perspective?  Because while Lestat may get really, really angry with Louis sometimes, his descriptions of Louis are the most glorified in the books.  He’ll talk about Louis moping around, but he paints a general picture of Louis being a very strong person that is dedicated to his convictions.  Louis is literally his emotional rock, and really, I don’t believe Lestat would actually ever openly write of any breakdowns Louis may or may not have had.  And I feel like if Louis was to have a bad bout of depression, Lestat would be the one to know, above anyone else.

Then you have Khayman’s description of Louis, where he flat out says that Louis can’t exist without Lestat.  And Armand’s bit about Louis in TVA paint him as very melancholy, imo.

I also look at where Louis was when he gave the interview.  He’s a very careful, private person, and he had his reasons for giving the interview in the first place (which can be debated in itself; I’ve always thought it was a cry out for Lestat and/or suicidal recklessness).  He’d been alone for years and felt he’d nothing left.  He was infuriated that Daniel didn’t see his story as despairingly as he himself viewed it to be.  Louis felt down on everything at that point, and I don’t know that he’d really be that open with his experiences and feelings on any other night?

Idk, I’ve always felt that for as emotional as Louis seems to be, he still sucks majorly at actually dealing with his own emotions.  Which is how I reason his major breakdown(s) in Merrick.

/writing this at 1am and hopes it makes sense lol

#YES #THIS #this post cannot be improved upon

Gonna add 2 things anyway.

1 – AR wrote IWTV after the loss of her daughter. Louis was pretty much AR herself, dealing with that grief, questioning a God as to why he had to punish her so much. What did Louis do to deserve a life-in-death living hell? What did Claudia do to deserve eternal imprisonment in that little body? What did AR’s daughter do to deserve dying so painfully at such an early age?

In the end, Louis (and the readers) draws his own answers and has to come to some kind of peace in order to move on. Lestat has his Savage Garden, in which peace lies in the fact that there is no explanation, bad things just happen to good people. The most we can do is try to do Good and help eachother survive the slings and arrows, try not to be the slinger of arrows, and if we are, to do it for the sake of Good. We’re all imperfect.

2 – Louis’ voice is pretty damn hard to write, when done well. My guess is that AR didn’t see a need to revisit his POV, especially with the intensity of focus it required. @annabellioncourt​ had some excellent points on this awhile back:

“Louis is more along the lines of the Oscar Wilde’s era of the very late 19th century, which is what most people think of today when they think “Victorian writing.” Similar in voice (though not subject) would also be Matthew Arnold (read some of his essays, and tell me that’s not how Louis talks), Wilkie Collins, and Henry James.

”…Louis is not so much involved in human goings on, he’s aware of events and films, but still speaks in the language of the century where he spent the most time communicating with others–also he would not have lost his speech patterns over those decades with Armand because Armand was mostly isolated in his language circles. So we can look at all of that as to why Louis talks the way he does.“

“Louis does show a HEAVY influence from the French symbolist poets (the school that Charles Baudelaire was from).”

And of course Louis would express himself in the language of the writers he enjoyed. OF COURSE HE WOULD. We all know he’s basically a big ol’ bookworm w/ fangs.