You are not alone, there are others out there. People: Comment/Reblog if you ship Lestat/Armand *u* It’s an AU ship for me, I can ship almost anything AU.
They have a bizarre kind of chemistry, don’t they?! If they weren’t both so obsessed with being alpha, they could really enjoy each other.
This is one of the only fanarts I’ve seen of them in any kind of shippiness, and even then, I think it’s the scene in TVL where Lestat is succumbing to Armand’s illusions.
“You know it was the damnedest luck!” I whispered suddenly. “I am an unwilling devil. I cry like some vagrant child. I want to go home.”
[Source unknown, even reverse-image searched. Tell me the source if you know it!]
Anyhow they have referred to eachother in canon as being brothers of a sort, so I tag them #murder brothers, if you want more Lestat/Armand action.
Ah, okay. Nicolas had a rough time in canon, sadly ;A;
[^X Nicolas by @unionthesalmon – plz reblog from X or the source]
“Armand was a little bitch just because of the whole Nicki thing.” – Armand may have been trying to help Nicki in the ways he knew how. Armand had been a coven master for hundreds of years, dealt with madness from many ages of vampires, maybe this was something that helped in other cases. It could be seen as cruel from our mortal standards, but maybe that was considered a reasonable form of treatment for vampires.
We only have the account of Nicolas and Armand’s interactions in Eleni’s letters and very little is said. No one ever brings it up again (unless they do in PLROA, which I still haven’t finished), and since we only have the one account, I can’t jump to the conclusion that Armand was definitely torturing Nicki. He can be cruel, but Lestat asked him to take good care of Nicki, and I feel like Armand tried to do the right thing.
“And I agree with you that Nicki was mentally ill” – Some ppl headcanon that he was, and I don’t know what I think about that, but again, maybe Armand was trying to treat the illness and save Nicki!
“And I freaking loved Nicki, I cried when he died. If Armand hadn’t have done that, would Nicki had lived on? Maybe not, but still.” – If we go by my theory that Armand was trying to help him, maybe Armand’s treatment prolonged Nicki’s life. We just don’t know.
If Armand was really torturing Nicki, I think we would have found out more about it in TVA, or some other book, or Lestat would have confronted Armand about it.
But whether Armand really antagonized Nicolas to his death or not, Nicolas had enough reason on his own to end badly even before Armand got involved… as Nicolas tells Lestat, it was his intention all along to fail:
“All a misunderstanding, my love, ” he said. Acid on the tongue.
The blood sweat had broken out again, and his eyes glistened as if they
were wet. “It was to hurt others, don’t you see, the violin playing, to
anger them, to secure for me an island where they could not rule. They would watch my ruin, unable to do anything about it.” I didn’t
answer. I wanted him to go on.
“And when we decided to go to Paris, I thought we would starve in
Paris, that we would go down and down and down. It was what I
wanted, rather than what they wanted, that I, the favored son, should
rise for them. I thought we would go down! We were supposed to go
down.”
Perhaps becoming a vampire was not the cure for that intention/feeling/illness, and it just magnified the self-destruction he already felt ;A;
As always, #Your Headcanon May Vary, these are just my own opinions, and I am SURE other ppl have other excellent answers for this.
I’m focusing on Louis’s strength at turning and the first few years after, since he does grow more powerful over time on his own (and he also gets *~upgraded~* later in canon, idk whether you accept later canon but it happens!).
TL;DR: I don’t think Lestat purposely made Louis weak, it was a combination of factors, but mostly that the procedure isn’t an exact science*, Lestat was a young maker and turned Louis too soon after making two fledglings before, and the fact that Louis was malnourished** (refusal to kill ppl) for those first few years might have been a contributing factor.
**So Lestat does talk about Louis being weak in IWTV, but not that he purposely made him that way, just that he allowed it to go uncorrected; he didn’t force Louis to kill ppl, or force Louis to embrace his vampiric gifts and learn how to use them:
“Lestat looked at me. ‘I expected you to feel these things
instinctually, as I did,’ he said. When I gave you that first kill, I
thought you would hunger for the next and the next, that you would
go to each human life as if to a full cup, the way I had. But you didn’t. And all this time I suppose I kept from straightening you out because
you were best weaker. I’d watch you playing shadow in the night,
staring at the falling rain, and I’d think, He’s easy to manage, he’s
simple. But you’re weak, Louis. You’re a mark. For vampires and
now for humans alike. This thing with Babette has exposed us both.
It’s as if you want us both to be destroyed.‘”
^Lestat is saying Louis is weak by choice, and he’s describing weakness of character more than physical strength, so I believe he was physically weak bc of the Dark Gift. The Dark Gift is not an exact science*, despite all good/bad intentions, it’s the vampiric form of pregnancy. But there are things about the procedure that can affect the strength of the fledgling:
Whether the blood is transferred once (for Louis) or multiple times (for Marius) between maker and fledgling – Multiple times seems to make a stronger fledgling. Why didn’t Lestat do it multiple times for Louis? I think Louis was already in such bad physical shape that Lestat didn’t want to risk it. Plus, he had already turned 2 fledglings using the single transfer procedure, he probably felt like that was good enough.
Age, power, and timing of making previous fledglings of the maker – it seems like power is outweighed by the other two factors.
The fledgling’s diet after turning – Louis was feeding on animals for the first 4-ish years of vampiring, which is like bad junk food, and probably not drinking
the volume of blood he needed, either.
Yes, post-QOTD (and pre-Merrick), Louis refused to drink Lestat’s blood. I headcanon that that felt like a rejection of Lestat bc blood-sharing is a major expression of intimacy for vampires. He might have refused it bc he saw how it had changed Lestat and he didn’t want that to happen to himself, but I think he also wanted to preserve his own vulnerability, in case he wanted to suicide ;A;
Hit the jump for more, cut for length.
“So I’m confused, was Louis weak because Lestat made him that way on purpose?”
I don’t think it was on purpose. It’s not an exact science* and Lestat had only done it 2x, had only heard about the procedure from Armand and Marius. There is some speculation that the blood transfer needs to be exchanged more than once to ensure a stronger fledgling. Marius, for example, exchanged blood with his maker multiple times when he was turned, but with Louis, Lestat only did it once. I think that’s because Louis was so weakened by the bloodletting he’d been forced to undergo (”When
I was subdued finally, and exhausted then almost to the point of death,
they bled me. The fools.”) that Lestat didn’t want to risk exchanging more than once? Idk.
Also, Louis was feeding on animals for the first 4-ish years of vampiring, and that’s like bad junk food. He was probably not even drinking the volume of blood he needed, either. That might have had an impact on his strength. It probably contributed to his attitude at the time, being underfed and undernourished for so long ;A;
“Or was he weak because he was Lestat’s third fledgling in a decade?”
This is probably more of the reason. As Marius tells Lestat in TVL:
“Well, for one thing, ” he said, “your powers are extraordinary, but
you can’t expect those you make in the next fifty years to equal you or
Gabrielle. Your second child didn’t have half Gabrielle’s strength and
later children will have even less. The blood I gave you will make some difference. If you drink… if you drink from Akasha and Enkil,
which you may choose not to do… that will make some difference
too. But no matter, only so many children can be made by one in a
century.And new offspring will be weak. However, this is not
necessarily a bad thing. The rule of the old covens had wisdom in it
that strength should come with time.And then again, there is the old
truth: you might make titans or imbeciles, no one knows why or how.
In Ricean vampire physiology, a maker needs to wait a good long while between making fledglings; too much frequency will make subsequent fledglings weaker than they could have been. Plus, even though Lestat had the blood of a much older and stronger vampire when he was turned (Magnus), Lestat himself was only a decade into vampiring himself. It seems the vampiric spirit discourages the transfer of powers from young vampires to their fledglings. If anyone got the bulk of that power, it was Gabrielle, Lestat’s first.
“Wouldn’t he be stronger because Lestat had Akasha’s blood in him?”
Marius said that that would make “some difference” but I think the fact that Lestat had already turned 2 vampires, and was young still himself, prevented that power from being transferred.
“I know Louis refused to drink from Lestat, was he ultimately weak because he chose to be?”
He was weak by vampire standards at first, and yes, I think he chose to remain that way. But he’s still stronger and faster than a mortal. He’s also able to defend himself and kick a lot of ass. What he lacks physically he makes up for mentally, he’s strategic in the way he attacks when he does attack, and he can hold his own against much stronger and older vampires (he took out most of the Theatre des Vampires on his own in IWTV!).
*Re: the Dark Trick is not an exact science:
Armand mentions in TVL:
But let Armand understand here also that the effect of the Dark Trick is unpredictable, even when passed on by the very young vampire and with all due care. For reasons no one knows, some mortals when Born to Darkness become as powerful as Titans, others may be no more than corpses that move. That is why mortals must be chosen with skill. Those with great passion and indomitable will should be avoided as well as those who have none.
The author reinforce this by adding that, when they adopted Claudia, Louis took the maternal role. What do you think? ( Pt 2/2 )
It’s not a groundbreaking concept, we often talk of mommy!Louis in fandom. If there were a “mom” in that relationship, Louis would be more of that than Lestat was! ❤
#don’t you love the way Claudia snuggles in there #tucks herself in #like she’s actually Louis’ doll? #she is 80% made of that dress and those curls #how he places that little kiss on top of her head right before he shuts the lid #Right before theyll be in total darkness #just to reassure her #He is such a good mom
^my tags on that gif, bc I do love mommy!Louis ❤
(Lestat was actually Claudia’s biological maker, it’s his blood that turns her; she is technically Lestat’s fledgling, which actually makes Louis her “brother”!)
Louis was based on Anne Rice herself; Lestat was based on her husband, Stan; and Claudia on her own daughter, Michele, so you could say Louis was the “mom” bc of who he was based on. IWTV was partly about AR investigating the tragic loss of her own daughter through these characters. Louis’ separation from Claudia was not his choice; neither was AR’s from her own daughter ;A;
When you’re a Ricean vampire, gender doesn’t really matter, it definitely doesn’t matter physically in making new vampires, which is how they procreate. Post-IWTV!Lestat is much more into fashion, jewelry, and other typically “feminine-specific” stuff/activities that Louis has little or no tolerance for. Lestat is also one of the most prolific makers we know of in the series. The act of making fledglings could be compared to pregnancy, and he loves doing it, so that could make him more “feminine” than Louis, who has only made two fledglings (but both were made under duress, not 100% his choice).
Lestat and Louis both parented her in their own ways. Lestat took Claudia out and taught her to hunt, and all this other stuff he shared with her that Louis couldn’t. Hunting can be considered more “masculine.” You could label more domestic things like literature “feminine,” I guess, and that’s what Louis offered her. IWTV!Lestat was just more interested in action and less interested in introspection. Your author says that one of Louis’ feminine traits is “speaking about his feelings,” Lestat does TONS of that in later books. So if you only read IWTV, you miss out on that.
The other thing is that IWTV is Louis’ account, so yes, it paints Lestat a certain way, when Lestat was frustrated that he couldn’t reveal so many secrets that it drove a wedge between them. I feel like most of Lestat’s “masculine” behavior is just about that frustration, at having to keep his history a secret because of Marius’s threats.
As Lestat puts it in TVL, Louis’ account is somewhat accurate:
“…which for all its contradictions and terrible
misunderstandings manages to capture the atmosphere in which Claudia and Louis and I came together and stayed together for sixty-five
years…
But he adds this about Louis as a narrator:
“[Louis’] blindness to
the motives or the suffering of others was as much a part of his charm
as his soft unkempt black hair or the eternally troubled expression in
his green eyes.
So I wouldn’t say you can totally define Lestat and Louis’ gender roles in their relationship based solely on reading IWTV. But many of us, myself included, enjoy daydreaming about mommy!Louis ❤
Poor Madeleine! Did not deserve to die like that ;A; Unfortunately, I’d say she was condemned to die by proxy, being so attached to Claudia.
I don’t think Madeleine’s death was totally under Armand’s control. He was not really the leader of the TdV (see more quotes on that below the cut); in TVA Armand says: “For the record, [Claudia] was slain by my Coven of mad demon actors and actresses,… it became all too clear to too many that she had tried to murder her principal Maker, The Vampire Lestat. It was a crime punishable by death, the murdering of one’s creator or the attempt at it”
^“slain by my Coven”but not that he ordered them to do it. Just that he didn’t stop it from happening.
This is an #unreliable narrator situation again, as there are at least three different accounts of the trial that was held under TdV (see more below the cut)(four if you include the above statement from TVA). In all instances, the important part of the “trial” was that Claudia was the one who had to be convicted and sentenced to death. Louis and Madeleine were secondary concerns.
There was no explanation for why Madeleine was also condemned to death, I would suggest that Santiago (and/or Armand) wanted to kill Madeleine bc she was mad (the extent of which we don’t really know) and/or they didn’t really know what else to do with her. Santiago probably wanted to do it bc it’s thrilling to kill another vampire, as Armand pointed out in book!IWTV: “`You see,’ he said, `killing other vampires is very exciting; that is why it is forbidden under penalty of death.’
Movie!IWTV – Armand is not part of the “trial,” we see him close the door against the whole scene, and he waits until later to free Louis from his (upside-down!!! SO MEAN) imprisonment in the walled-in coffin o’ doom. So one would guess that Armand at least negotiated w/ Santiago to have Louis’ life to be spared in this way.
Book!IWTV – Armand was not present at the “trial.” Santiago seemed to be the one running that show.
Again, one would guess that Armand at least negotiated w/ Santiago beforehand.
TVL – Armand was present at the “trial” and seemed to be the one running that show, and Madeleine is not even mentioned.
In movie!IWTV, we see Armand closing the door on the screams of the condemned, and the explanation as to why he didn’t come out to help when Louis called for him? He had told Louis that he wasn’t really the leader of this coven, “But if there were a leader, I would be that one.”
In book!IWTV, similarly:
“ `Are you the leader of this group?’ [Louis] asked him. ” `Not in the way you mean leader,’ [Armand] answered. But if there were a leader here, I would be that one.’
Armand knows that to exert power, you have to defend it:
[Louis says:] “ `Stop them if you will, advise them that we don’t mean any harm.
Why can’t you do this? You say yourself we’re not your enemies, no
matter what we’ve done… ’
” I could hear him sigh, faintly. [Armand says:] `I have stopped them for the time
being,’ he said. `But I don’t want such power over them as would be
necessary to stop them entirely. Because if I exercise such power, then
I must protect it. I will make enemies. And I would have forever to
deal with my enemies when all I want here as a certain space, a certain
peace. Or not to be here at all. I accept the scepter of sorts they’ve
given me, but not to rule over them, only to keep them at a distance.‘
We are the music-makers,
And we are the dreamers of dreams,
Wandering by lone sea-breakers,
And sitting by desolate streams.
World-losers and world-forsakers,
Upon whom the pale moon gleams;
Yet we are the movers and shakers,
Of the world forever, it seems.
The Ao3 Tag of the Day is: Yet another trope I will devour no matter what even though I know exactly what is going to happen.
“Now, I’m getting into the coffin, and you will get in on top of me if you know what’s good for you.” – Lestat de Lioncourt, Interview with the Vampire
I-want-my-IWTV 