Ok but lookit how hashtag aesthetic this WIP photo is
This is like the visual representation of an unfinished fanfic. You can see that it’s inspired by the original, which was the original artist’s interpretation of the depicted subject. The original artist made editorial choices in how to represent their subject, and this second artist is interpreting the interpretation with their own editing.
It’s a great way to climb into the mind of the original artist, absorbing some of their ideas, rejecting others, and an exercise in one’s own craft in that process.
“For my characters, I pick my names, really, by instinct and feeling they have to feel right for the character, they have to be pretty to me, and they have to have a sound that I can hear Lestat saying aloud, and Dora was a perfect name. I was also probably influenced by Dora in David Copperfield, by Dickens. I also search passionately for names in many sources. I look through baby name books. I circle the beautiful names when I come across them in history books and art books, and I sometimes write beautiful names on the walls of my room, having come across them in random reading. Names are extremely important to me. I can’t progress with the character until I have the name and can rapidly say the name, and type the name.”
I wasn’t even thinking about Lestat when I wrote interview with the vampire I was thinking about Louis. Louis was the hero, everything revolved around Louis. Lestat just sprang to life in the corner of my eye. This character took on all this ferocity. I never sat down and thought “Well, this is based on my husband, Stan,” or “This is what Stan would do.” I had an idea of Lestat as the man of action, the man who could do things that I couldn’t do, that man who could make the decision that I never had the nerve to make; and the person who could go through life joyfully in spite of the questions that torment me — the doubts that torment me, the horror of death that torments me. Of course, that was tied up with the idea that he was an 18th century personality; he was from the age of reason, he was much more rational, much more cynical in some ways than Louis. Louis was more a naïve romantic character, much more I think 19th century. All of that was working in my mind. Not that the Romantic period is limited to the 19th century, certainly not; it starts in the 18th. But still, Lestat represented the Enlightenment. He represented a different view on things. He’s also inherently a comic character, in the sense of always triumphing and always coming back and never being really destroyed. He never really absorbs a tragic definition of himself for very long. He always comes back laughing at everything and just rebounding. It may take him a few years, but he always does it. I really wanted to explore a personality different from my own. He became a kind of dream version of what I’d like to be; he was the man I wanted to be; he was the person I wanted to be. I wanted his strength. And once he became a living character I never had to consciously steer him in any direction. It was just a matter of getting into Lestat and then he’d go, and he’d take me where he wanted in the novel. I never had to worry about his dialogue. My knowledge of him was so complete, and so instinctive, that I could just write. The other characters I might have to think about — where they were coming from, what they had to say. But not him. I know exactly what he thinks about everything. If I walk into a theater and see a play, I know whether he likes it or not. If I watch an opera, I know whether he loves that opera. If I go visit a city, I know what he thinks of that city. I’ll never be away from him; he’ll always be apart of me.
Thanks for the compliments! YES THIS THING IS GLORIOUS ♥u♥
So I’m not sure exactly what you’re getting at, re: an ‘audience book’ vs ‘author’s book’ but it I do know that AR has always advised to “write the book you would want to read.” She just put up two quotes recently that I think are relevant here:
Unfortunately, I think we generally prefer those books coming from negative places for her, and I think it’s because she spun gold from the misery, she fought her demons through those stories and the product was captivating, clawing into the reader and giving us some secondhand catharsis.
Stories that came from a more positive place for her seemed not to produce that kind of engagement for the reader, but it’s important to remember that some ppl may prefer those.
Either way, she’s given us an incredible gift. The stronger works resonate with us to the soul like only our favorite music and art can, the weaker works are humorous and we can lovingly refer to them as “the vampire crackicles,” but even they still have good moments in which AR has tapped into the old veins (pun intended!) to give us that gold we’ve come to expect from her.
I stand by my previous short answer on this subject: I think AR can still capture that old quality we all fell in love with, albeit in slivers. Which is why I can’t disregard any of the books entirely. It’s still hard for me to accept Prince Lestat as canon, I might never, but there are moments and lines of dialogue in it that are SO VERY GOOD. Moments where I’ve had to pause and smile, because it was as if the old Lestat, from IWTV or TVL, actually graced us with his presence, if only for a moment.
^Stan and Michele Rice on the left, Lestat and Claudia de Lioncourt on the right. As a side note, before this gets into the more serious topic, AR has said she based Lestat on Stan, and there is a story out there that his name was meant to be “Lestan,” but ended up as “Lestat” bc of a typographical error. I don’t have a source on that.
(In the first draft of [IWTV], Rice described Claudia as three or four years old.)… Rice based Claudia’s appearance on her own daughter, Michele, who died at the age of five from leukemia. Claudia even shares Michele’s birthday, September 21.* However, despite the intense tone of suffering and guilt evident in Louis’s telling of the story, Rice insists that she had not been aware that she had included her feelings about Michele’s tragic death. “I never consciously thought about it when I was writing the book,” she says. “I wasn’t conscious of the connection. I knew that I was using the physical beauty of Michele as the model, but Claudia was a fictional character in her own right. The character, the voice, and the things Claudia say have nothing to do with my daughter – but there’s no question that this is the symbolic working out of a terrible grief. What else can it possibly be?”
In the first version of [IWTV], Claudia eventually goes off with three vampire brothers whom she meets in Paris. She does not die. As such, it was as if Rice had attempted to give her daughter a form of immortality. Rice, however, experienced psychological problems that cleared up only after she had rewritten the ending – by killing off Claudia and taking Louis through an experience of intense grieving. This version was much more cathartic for Rice.
Hit the jump for more, cut for length, not content.
From Premiere Magazine, November 1994:
(sorry, I don’t have a link, I transcribed this from the page)
In real life, Claudia was a nickname for Michele Rice, Anne Rice’s vibrant blond daughter, who had once piled her hair on top of her head, and spoken in a smoky voice like Claudia Cardinale. She was three years old when she developed leukemia, and five when she died, in 1972.
At first, Rice soaked her maternal despair in a steady stream of sixpacks. Then she unleashed her rage unto paper, into what eventually became Interview with the Vampire. Michele was reincarnated as Claudia, the raging woman locked in a child’s body. “Louis was me,” says Rice. “That dark, brooding, melancholy person ripped from Catholic faith and tormented with guilt – that was me. I’d love to be Lestat: the wishful me, the active, the dream, the other one. Louis was the more true, autobiographical portrait of the conflicted and lost and orphaned person. That’s what the book is about. It’s about being orphaned.”
“Writers write about what obsesses them,” says Rice. “You draw those cards. I lost my mother when I was 14. My daughter died at the age of 6. I lost my faith as a Catholic. When I’m writing, the darkness is always there. I go where the pain is.“
Book characters that at first make you think “Holy shit this guy is an asshole” and by the end make you think “If anyone touches this person I will destroy them” are the best tbh
It’s worth mentioning that in another thread, in another topic, AR is asked about “But as a long time fan, I’ve ( and many other fans, I´m sure..) never understood the whole “Lestat and Louis- thing” and I think in a psychologically way it is also very interesting. Please, can you POFOUNDLY explain this whole relationship?”
^What CAN she really say that would change one single line in any novel about her characters? She’s told us the story, she’s saying it’s up to us to interpret it however we choose. #Your Headcanon May Vary.
Questions like those are the kinds of things that make her want to explicitly spell it out for us (through Lestat’s POV, in PL, here):
““I love you,” I whispered. In a low intimate voice, [Louis] answered: “My heart is yours.””
In writing/storytelling, as in art, there’s the old adage “Show; Don’t Tell.” In this age of social media where we can ask the artist/storyteller anything, should we? Why do we need her Official Confirmation? It doesn’t hurt to ask, but one should take the answers with a grain (or truckload full) of salt.
It seems to me that it’s better to read the story and have your own interpretation, “Read between the lines,” rather than have it broken down and explicitly stated.
I was cruising through the net, following the cold trail of one of the periodic “Is or is not Fanfic the Ultimate Literary Evil?” arguments that crop up regularly, and I’m now bursting to make a point that I never see made by fic defenders.
We’re all familiar with the normal defenses of fic: it’s done out of love, it’s training, it’s for fun. Those are all good and valid defenses!
But they miss something. They damn with faint praise. Because the thing is, when you commit this particular Ultimate Literary Evil you’ve now told a story. And stories are powerful. The fact that it wasn’t in an original world or with original characters doesn’t necessarily make it less powerful to any given reader.
I would never have made this argument a few years ago. A few years ago I hadn’t received messages from people who were deeply touched by something I wrote in fanfic. So what if it’s only two or three or four people, and I used someone else’s world and characters? For those two or three or four people, I wrote something fucking important. You cannot tell me that isn’t a valid use of my time and expect me to feel chastened. I don’t buy it. I won’t feel ashamed. I will laugh when you call something that touches other people ‘literary masturbation.’ Apparently you’re not too up on your sex terminology.
Someone could argue that if I’d managed the same thing with original characters in an original world, it could’ve touched more people. They might be right! On the other hand, it might never have been accepted for publication, or found a market if self published, and more importantly I would never have written it because I didn’t realize I could write. The story wouldn’t have happened. Instead, thanks to fanfic being a thing, it did. And for two or three or four people it mattered. When we talk about defending fanfic, can we occasionally talk about that?
I once had an active serviceman who told me that my FF7 and FF8 fic helped get him through the war. That’ll humble you. People have told me my fanfic helped get them through long nights, through grief, through hard times. It was a solace to people who needed solace. And because it was fanfic, it was easier to reach the people who needed it. They knew those people already. That world was dear to them already. They were being comforted by friends, not strangers.
Stories are like swords. Even if you’ve borrowed the sword, even if you didn’t forge it yourself from ore and fire, it’s still your body and your skill that makes use of it. It can still draw blood, it can strike down things that attack you, it can still defend something you hold dear. Don’t get me wrong, a sword you’ve made yourself is powerful. You know it down to its very molecules, are intimate with its heft and its reach. It is part of your own arm. But that can make you hesitate to use it sometimes, if you’re afraid that swinging it too recklessly will notch the blade. Is it strong enough, you think. Will it stand this? I worked so hard to make it. A blade you snatched up because you needed a weapon in your hand is not prey to such fears. You will use it to beat against your foes until it either saves you or it shatters.
But whether you made that sword yourself or picked it up from someone who fell on the field, the fight you fight with it is always yours.
Literary critics who sneer at fanfic are so infuriatingly shortsighted, because they all totally ignore how their precious literature, as in individual stories that are created, disseminated, and protected as commercial products, are a totally modern industrial capitalist thing and honestly not how humans have ever done it before like a couple centuries ago. Plus like, who benefits most from literature? Same dudes who benefit most from capitalism: the people in power, the people with privilege. There’s a reason literary canon is composed of fucking white straight dudes who write about white straight dudes fucking.
Fanfiction is a modern expression of the oral tradition—for the rest of us, by the rest of us, about the rest of us—and I think that’s fucking wonderful and speaks to a need that absolutely isn’t being met by the publishing industry. The need to come together as a close community, I think, and take the characters of our mythology and tell them getting drunk and married and tricked and left behind and sent to war and comforted and found again and learning the lessons that every generation learns over and over. It’s wonderful. I love it. I’m always going to love it.
Stories are fractal by nature. Even when there’s just one version in print, you have it multiplied by every reader’s experience of it in light of who they are, what they like, what they want. And then many people will put themselves in the place of the protagonist, or another character, and spend a lot of time thinking about what they’d do in that character’s place. Or adjusting happenings so they like the results better.
That’s not fic yet, but it is a story.
But the best stories grow. This can happen in the language of capitalism—a remake of a classic movie, a series of books focusing on what happened afterwards or before—or it can happen in the language of humanity. Children playing with sticks as lightsabers, Jedi Princess Leia saving Alderaan by dueling Vader; a father reading his kids The Hobbit as a bedtime story as an interactive, “what would you like to happen next?” way so that the dwarves win the wargs over with doggie biscuits that they had in their pockets and ride to Erebor on giant wolves, people writing and sharing their ideas for deleted outtake scenes from Star Trek and slow-build fierce and tender romance with startling bursts of hot sex between Hawkeye and Agent Coulson.
A story at its most successful is a fully developed fractal, retold a million times and a million ways, with stories based on stories based on stories. Fanfic of fanfic of fanfic. Stories based on headcanons, stories based on prompts, stories that put the Guardians of the Galaxy in a coffee-shop AU and stories where the Transformers are planet-wandering nomads and stories where characters from one story are placed into a world from another. Stories that could be canon, stories that are the farthest thing from canon, stories that are plausible, stories that would never happen, stories that give depth to a character or explore the consequences of one different plot event or rewrite the whole thing from scratch.
This is what stories are supposed to be.
This is what stories are.
This is the most beautiful thing I have ever read. Thank you. Read this, @audlie45, and especially @goddessforloki, who doubts herself for no reason. @hallotom, if you can, please tag some necessities you know.
I-want-my-IWTV 