amadeo-child-of-the-renaissance:
//You know… physically speaking vampires would still be able to be on the receiving end of sex. It’s not like their orifices were supernaturally disappearing after being turned…
A functioning member is not the only thing that grants a man the ability to have sex.Some vampires say the blood acts as a sort of substitute. That they simply don’t feel the need to have sex in a physical way. Which is fine. To each their own.
But I sometimes I can’t help but wonder if it is really necessary to view the (IMHO obviously remaining) anatomical ability of vampires to still have sex in some form as a thing that is somehow suddenly so impossible that it borders on the absurd to even think of it. Some seem to be rather aggressive about it-
I’m in agreement – Blood-sharing is the highest form of intimacy between vampires but why should that include other forms of intimacy and closeness, especially with creatures who are so attuned to physical sensation? We were told in the Story of the Twins that the spirit Amel (and this was known even before we learned AR’s take on what Amel really was/is in PL and PLRoA), was starved for the sensations of the physical, driven to wanting physical experience to the point that it actively sought contact, drew blood from human in minuscule amounts and then ultimately assumed a symbiotic relationship with Akasha’s body as she died, creating a new sort of being altogether.
It was about sensation, about experiencing all that was possible to experience. Vampire senses are enhanced upon their change from mortal to immortal and those enhancements continue throughout the existence of the vampire. That’s my verbose way of saying –why deny the pleasures of the flesh (unless that is one’s choice rather than an impossibility)?
And if the vampire embarks on a relationship with a mortal (probably not advisable, but arguable inevitable with some personalities) certainly there is nothing to prevent the vampire from pleasuring the mortal or even taking pleasure from that moral. In addition, the mind gift would likely have uses as an ehhancement.
Canonically, AR began with the idea that vampires did not have sex, but even that had exceptions(Marius and Pandora, for instance) after time had passed. It was described as less than satsfying. Many -most, actually- physiological details are left ambiguous, so who is to say what is functional or not.
Fanfic, though…it goes anywhere the imaginations of the authors want to take it. Some prefer to stick to canon, others, not so much. There are as many variations as can be imagined and they can and do change with the levels of interest each author might want to express/explore. I don’t see either way why it would be impossible, only that the pull of blood-drinking might be al that some of them want. Everyone’s mileage vary on the subject, of course.
Tag Archives: your headcanon may vary
@sanguinivora demanded a visual explanation of how to pronounce Lestat’s name so here it is…
Vadim Shatilov as Louis (with green contact lenses, ofc) what do you think?
Hmmm… I can see why you might suggest this person, there’s definitely an otherworldly presence there, subtly androgynous features.
(I’m not going to add here that
Shatilov “has the perf hair zomg!” bc there’s debate about Louis’ hair, and I enjoy both options separately, the fanon: long and silky like Shatilov here; and the more canon: short and wavy/full like Ezra Miller. There are even more variations of headcanons about his hair than these two but I think they’re the two main options.)
And Louis is supposed to be slender…
^Idk, for my headcanon, Louis is slender but muscled, too. He’s a fighter! He was living a pretty unhealthy lifestyle, and ppl tried to bleed out his mortal madness twice (or more times), he’d need to be a somewhat sturdy to withstand all that. Anyway, Shatilov
could be a young Louis, a teenage Louis maybe!
Look at this cute smile:
Thank you for the very well thought out answer. I really enjoyed it. I did have another question (if I may), in general, how do we as a base know what is unreliable information or not when it comes to our narrators because from what I’ve always gathered, they have the earnest desire to convey the truth as they can see it. Armand sure, cannon liar, but Louis in IWTV had nothing but genuine intention and no reason to lie. Thank you for your time, you’re awesome ^^
You’re so welcome, glad you enjoyed it! Answering asks is so much fun for me, it makes me consider my own current and previous thoughts, sometimes I even ask around privately for more ideas… and try to write it out as best I can, it gives me an excuse to make fresh gifs/memes, sometimes it inspires others to make fanworks… and I always like to hear back from the original asker that the effort was appreciated *u* ((No, you only get one question per quarter. Pffft. Of course you can ask more!))
“in general, how do we as a base know what is unreliable information or not when it comes to our narrators because from what I’ve always gathered, they have the earnest desire to convey the truth as they can see it.”
You would think that, but just like in real life, people can narrate a story for their own motivations.
TL;DR:
The characters telling their stories don’t always have the earnest desire to convey the truth, so it’s not always clear what the reliable information is! When we have accounts of the same event where the details align, that seems to be the best way to confirm it’s canon, bc even Anne Rice can’t always answer fan’s questions about canon stuff to everyone’s satisfaction.
When there’s conflicting details, we have to rely on headcanons, which ppl can choose to agree on or not, hence the fandom phrase, #Your Headcanon May Vary.
For example of facts aligning: I think we can all agree that Armand was the unspoken leader at the Theatre des Vampires bc Lestat left him there in a position of authority in TVL, which is where Louis found him some 80 years later in IWTV, confirming that that was Armand’s role there.
In the scene above,
IDK at that point in canon whether Lestat believes in a God, but if not, he’s deliberately lying to Claudia, bc she’s never going to see her mother again. Even if he does believe in God, he still doesn’t know where his dead go! He’s trying to answer her in a way that will keep her calm and complacent. He knows Claudia’s mother is dead, he saw the corpse in the movie. But she is still a child and he doesn’t want to scare her or depress her, or make her feel guilty about killing, which she just did!
I also think he’s a little taken aback bc she’s asking him for the whereabouts of her biological mother just minutes after he turned her into a vampire, a process that’s been compared to birth. It’s the most intimate act a vampire can experience. His smile falls right after she asks bc in a way it seems like he’s a deflated that she wants her biological mother, it’s like she’s already saying, “You’re not my REAL dad!” It might also remind him of his own mother who abandoned him ;A;
Re: Lestat P.1: In TVL, Lestat tells Armand:
“I never lie,” I said offhand. “At least not to those I don’t love.”
I’m still not 100% clear on this, bc of the double negatives. Can we translate it to “I’m honest with those I don’t love.” –> “I lie to those I love.” ? He spent some 65 years lying by omission to Louis and Claudia about the other vampires, and all the secrets he knew. So who’s to say he doesn’t also lie to his readers, “those I don’t love” ? How much does he really love his readers?
Re: Louis: I’ve always felt, and there are others who share this opinion, who gave me this opinion, that IWTV was dictated to Daniel from Louis with the intention of pissing Lestat off enough that he would rise from wherever he was hiding and find Louis. While I don’t think Louis intentionally LIED, I do think he might have embellished some things, exaggerated here and there, left out certain things, in order to achieve his goal. And it WORKED because…
Re: Lestat P.2: The Vampire Lestat was Lestat’s rebuttal to IWTV, containing all the secrets he couldn’t tell Louis during their time together, so I’m inclined to believe that Lestat earnestly wanted to correct the record and win Louis back, since he still loved Louis.
Re: Armand: TBH, I don’t know Armand’s story well enough, what I believe and what I don’t, in all of canon, to say that he’s a liar. I think, like Louis and Lestat, he embellishes, he lies by omission, and he tells people things when he wants a certain reaction out of them. He lied to his coven when he was a leader all those years since he never really believed in serving Satan. Or did he? It seems like he didn’t.
There is a particular scene that Armand describes in TVA that is questionable, as to whether it happened.
How he tried to “help” Claudia the night she died (fanart by @sheepskeleton here, if you dare, it’s gorey). Personally, I sometimes believe it’s the truth bc Armand does like… experiments! But then I also remember how David was flirting excessively with Armand in that book, and so it’s possible that “this story was just something that Armand made up; somehow trying to intimidate the others, displaying the cruelty he could be capable of.” (quote from @annabellioncourt)
Do you think there could be any possibility that Lestat is undiagnosed type II bipolar? I’ve noticed the same patterns in him that I see in myself, and it makes it hard to read the books recently because he is so chaotic in such an eerily familiar way that it unsettles me.
Yes, it’s quite possible that Lestat is
undiagnosed type II bipolar (is that grammatically correct? Or would you write “Yes, it’s quite possible that Lestat is undiagnosed as having type II bipolar personality disorder”?). You might want to ask some Lestat RPers for their thoughts on this, too.
I don’t know enough about diagnosing bipolar to say for sure what I think, in the past I’ve written that I didn’t think Lestat was bipolar specifically, but that he might have PTSD. Now, I feel like I don’t know enough about either of those to make a definitive statement. I don’t think AR has ever addressed it in any interviews, on FB, or at a booksigning. Anyone is welcome to reblog/comment on this post.
Anon: “I’ve noticed the same patterns in him that I see in myself, and it makes it hard to read the books recently because he is so chaotic in such an eerily familiar way that it unsettles me.”
I’m sorry that this makes it hard for you to read the books recently, Anon. Does anyone else out there have bipolar, or specifically type II bipolar, and have advice for Anon about this?
@mendedpixie7 wrote about Adam from Only Lovers Left Alive; and I feel like the similarity of Adam to Nicolas (and Lestat, I think, too) seems striking, and I hope this quote helps you in some small way, Anon:
The reason I love Only Lovers Left Alive is it shows that a character (Adam) can be severely mentally ill, in this case depressed and suicidal, and still be seen as lovable and capable of being loved and loving in return without being “cured” of their mental illness, and that a mentally ill character can have other attributes aside from being mentally ill while still showing the impact being mentally ill has on his personality.
Adam from OLLA is an extremely important character to me you guys.
I’ve been trying to read the whole vc series, but school and work just keep preventing me from getting really far! Is it ok to ask you to write a little summary for each book so I can catch up with the fandom until I have the time to read them all thoroughly?
Yeah, I understand, time is limited 😛
I don’t know that summarizing VC will allow you to “catch up” with the fandom, you really only need to read the first 3 books and the Vampire Armand to get most of the jokes on tumblr, bc most of the jokes seem to center around:
- Louis being a pyromaniac,
- Lestat being an obnoxious but somehow lovable glittery murder machine,
- Lestat and Louis being awesome and shitty murder dads,
- Claudia being an ungrateful spoiled brat,
- Armand being a little brat, or a slut, or an evul coven master, or all of the above,
- Daniel Molloy just wanting to vampire plz!!!11!,
- Marius being a pedo, or too bossy, or both,
- Gabrielle is a bad mom and an ice queen,
- Nicolas is spelled NICOLAS and he is NOT DEAD!,
- Secondary characters not getting enough love from anyone!!
There are often spoilers in summaries tho, do you really want to be spoiled? I LOVE being spoiled.
We have these unreliable narrators, there is a lot of disagreement as to what canon really is, and some fans choose to ignore parts of (or entire books) in the series. We bring our own experiences to the reading, and we choose what to connect with, so I think we can agree on some things about each book, but you will probably get a different summary from any given reader. Even AR has told us to disregard the hybrid Mayfair/VC books (Blood Canticle, possibly Merrick and Blackwood Farm) when moving onto the more recent VC additions (PL and PLROA). So, for example, I have a friend who has only read the first 3 books. She doesn’t even know what happens after that bc she prefers to think it ended after QOTD. So any new vampires made after QOTD do not exist to her. #Your headcanon may vary.
Anyway, you want summaries.
- http://vampirechronicles.wikia.com has a pretty good write-up for each of the books (they don’t have PL and PLROA currently, maybe they will eventually). It contains spoilers.
-
@vraik has thorough VC analysis in their series called The Consulting Analyst over on vraikaiser.com. Spoilers there, too.
- @hyperbeeb‘s capsule reviews are pretty gr9 [X]:
- Lestat’s Adventures with a Progressive Family
- Lestat’s Bisexual Adventures in 18th Century France
- Lestat’s Adventures with the Queen of the Vampires
- Lestat’s Adventures as a Human
- Lestat’s Adventures with Satan
- Lestat’s Adventures in a Coma
- Lestat’s Adventures with Polyamory
- Lestat’s Adventures in the Deep South
- Lestat’s Adventures with Not Being There At All
- Lestat’s Adventures with Witches and Other Weird Shit
- Lestat’s adventures with Being the Vampire Head of State
- Lestat’s Adventures with Literal Fucking Aliens
(Note, Pandora and Vittorio are technically stand-alone “New Tales of the Vampires” books, but Pandora would be No. 6 of the 13 book series).
- You can check my #VC Synopsis tag, which has more capsule humorous summaries.
Gonna try to do a little summary for each VC under the cut as a personal challenge.
Spoilers ahead! I’ll try to do this with as few spoilers as possible, as factually as possible.
1. Interview with the Vampire – Louis tells the story of his life and unlife to Daniel Molloy. Louis starts at the point in his mortal life just before he meets Lestat, and how his life up until that meeting influenced the unlife that followed after he became a vampire. Lestat’s reasons for choosing Louis are unclear to Louis, but he wants Louis to choose to be a vampire. Louis is under so much duress (failing health, still in emotional distress over his guilt re: a close family member’s death) that the choice is not 100% legit, Lestat can’t wait for a more opportune time and proceeds to turn Louis anyway.
The whole story could be seen as Anne Rice’s exploration of the role of religion and the reasons why terrible things happen to innocent people, the concept of punishment.
For me, it was also eye-opening bc I was 11 when I read it and it introduced the possibility of love between a same-sex couple, even if that was in more of a read-between-the-lines way.
It also has a child vampire and I hadn’t seen any media even attempt to tell a story with a child vampire before. Few media that attempt it seem to have captured the beauty and tragedy of such a creature as in this story, and she reappears in a few of the other VC. <— bc IWTV is from Louis’s POV, as told to Daniel, and then written out and possibly revised by his editors, this is the beginning of the Unreliable Narrator thing that continues throughout the series.
^ok that was too long, I’m going for shorter.
2. The Vampire Lestat – Lestat seeks to “correct the record” that Louis laid out in IWTV by giving us his own backstory, starting at his mortal youth and how that influenced the unlife that followed when he became a vampire, against his will (hence the “I’m going to give you the choice I never had,” line from movie!IWTV). There is more exploration in the role of religion and reasons why bad things happen to basically innocent people, and whether you really can make the best of a shitty situation or just give up. More about punishment. A very unique take on the origin of the vampires as a species is revealed. And the reasons why Lestat behaved the way he did (basically all secretive) in IWTV. <— This is more of the Unreliable Narrator thing that continues throughout the series, who are we to believe? Lestat or Louis? And the author’s retconning which is perceived as “making excuses later in canon for behavior that’s already happened.” Some readers really despise this. Personally, I like having the options and trusting one version of events, or none of them.
3. The Queen of the Damned – Lestat’s modern-era rock career wakes the Queen of the Vampires and she has this awesome Radical Feminist idea for world peace. She’s already gotten started on it! She upgrades Lestat physically so that he can help her accomplish her goals, but he’s not really on board. They meet with the vampires she has allowed to survive her purge and it doesn’t go very well. Also in this book, we have different narrators, more about the vampire origin story, and the Armand/Daniel ship is sailing at its best here.
4. The Tale of the Body Thief – Having suffered so much through the past 3 books, Lestat is a suicidal hamburger-brained moron and makes some very bad choices. Despite everyone advising him NOT to, Lestat makes a terrible trade with a body thief and learns quickly that he had idealized being human. He does some horrendous stuff, and wants off the Being Human ride. He has one friend who helps him set things back to the way they should be, and then he betrays that friend in a spectacularly cruel way. More importantly, Lestat also gets a wonderful cuddly doggo.
5. Memnoch the Devil – Lestat Goes to Heaven and Hell, meets Jesus Christ, meets God, meets Satan (who prefers to go by “Memnoch”) it’s all a huge interview process to decide if Lestat might work for God or Satan and it’s basically fanfic of the Bible. Some people hated it for those reasons. I found it really intriguing, bc it presents a reason why God created the earth, and why there’s suffering, why God allows suffering to go on, and where religion comes from. Like Lestat, Memnoch says he’s not the antagonist, but really the good guy in all this. When Dorothy gets back to Kansas Lestat returns to earth, there is disagreement about whether he went on a real trip or he was just fooled by a really talented spirit. Lestat is so confused that he throws a huge tantrum and then gets solitary confinement, then slips into a coma.
6. The Vampire Armand – Armand gets his spotlight and gets to really tell his story, do we believe everything he tells us?
Lots of good Italy times stuff.
Armand visits Lestat in his coma-state, and talks about that, too.
7. Merrick – Merrick is a Mayfair witch in NOLA who bewitches Louis in pursuit of his request for closure with Claudia, and hilarity ensues. Louis gets the most screentime he’s had since IWTV, but the whole book is told from a 3rd wheel’s POV, it would have been so much better from Louis’ or Merrick’s POV. Major fatal thing happens but fortunately Lestat wakes up from his coma in time to save the day.
8. Blood and Gold – Marius tells his story, as does the vampire Thorne tell his own story. Marius talks about his artistic influences and his experience with the early Talamasca and Santino and the Children of Satan. We see Daniel (now living with Marius) under a kind of spell, which Marius says is temporary.
9. Blackwood Farm – Lestat goes to the Deep South and hears the story of vampire Quinn (his story defies summary) and, with Merrick’s help, saves the day.
10. Blood Canticle – More vampire and Mayfair mixing. And Taltos. It’s a very big WTF book. But it has some very funny scenes and lines in it. It ends with Lestat promising the Dark Gift to someone.
11. Prince Lestat – Vampire scientists. A clone. Someone gets kidnapped. Ultimate Vampire Coven Gathering. Lestat is cranky, saves the day anyway. Ghosts apparently can linger on earth after death and make bodies for themselves. Characters from past books reappear. New characters are introduced. Louis writes a chapter about how OK fine, he does love Lestat. FINE.
12. Prince Lestat and the Realms of Atlantis – I haven’t finished this but basically… the REAL vampire origin story, and it involves bird-like aliens, who were sent to earth bc the aliens feed on the suffering of mortals. The bird-like aliens didnt want to create Atlantis. in fact they were pissed because this one creature of theirs, Amel, made Atlantis with the Luracastria (i dunno i think thats how it’s spelled) and their viewing tech couldn’t see through the material. Amel made Atlantis to spite the bird-like aliens omg i cant believe im typing this. Louis and Lestat finally have some legit canon cuddletimes.
– Pandora – the story of the vampire Pandora, and why Marius is bad at relationships. Lots of good Roman times stuff.
– Vittorio – is not a VC vampire, and wants nothing to do with that dysfunctional pile of fanged crazies. @monstersinthecosmos and @vittoriathevampire could give you a better summary of that one, since I didn’t absorb it too well 😛
OT but you’ll have to indulge my venting. If they’re doing the whole Vampire Chronicles, I can’t imagine anyone else doing justice to the patrician grandeur of Marius but Ralph Fiennes. The guy even paints! A white-silvery mane of non-human hair buoyant as his paintbrush. Picture it! The intense sweep of the eyes dissecting the other characters like portrait compositions…. restrained power.
Lemme just say: your description of Marius was so lovely! Whoever is cast, yeah, we’re going to need magnificent hair and we’re going to need to see him actually painting ;D
@sheepskeleton‘s fanart (which is based on Michael Fassbender) is more Marius than Ralph Fiennes, for me, tho…
[^X @sheepskeleton has a bunch of Marius pieces, this is one of my faves.]
Does Feinnes really paint? That’s pretty cool!
Feinnes is 54 and Marius was turned at 40. Movie/makeup magic could make him look younger, but I think we’d need a Marius who wouldn’t age through the course of a TV series that could last for several years. He’s going to be 60 in 6 years 😛
^Idk when this gif is from but I gotta say, yes, he’s got this great fatherly quality and Roman enough features… but the age thing… *sigh*
[X] I’m more into Michael Fassbender, 39 yrs old,
^or Nikolaj Coster-Waldau, 46 yrs old.
… or even better: someone new! Someone less expensive than all those dudes 😉
Leading the wolf to slaughter
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…
Btw ik he’s not in the fic but I meant Armand was a little bitch just because of the whole Nicki thing. And I agree with you that Nicki was mentally ill but Armand probably didn’t help him at all my torturing him. 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.
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;
So I’m confused, was Louis weak because Lestat made him that way on purpose? Or was he weak because he was Lestat’s third fledgling in a decade? Wouldn’t he be stronger because Lestat had Akasha’s blood in him? I know Louis refused to drink from Lestat, was he ultimately weak because he chose to be?
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.
I-want-my-IWTV 