#the vampire lestat

LIVE

Louis - Lestat, are you taking a “selfie” of me?

Lestat - Non, mon coeur, a selfie is when…oh nevermind, at least you’re trying. Hold still now.

*snaps photo*

Lestat - Oh Louis, you’re looking particularly beautiful tonight I’m posting this immediately!

Louis - But Lestat, the post office doesn’t work on Sunday…

Lestat - sigh…


I dusted off my tablet and stylus to bring to you a little Loustat this fine evening

Lord Harlech – To be or not to be!

I’m sharing a personal theory on a little inconsistency in the Vampire Chronicles that has always bugged me. I’m very much aware that this is most probably just Anne having changed her mind or just lacking continuity, but damn was this fun to think about and speculate! This is obviously my opinion only and I’m sharing just for fun, so don’t take it too seriously

So here’s my first meta/fan theory/conspiracy theory/something:

Lord Harlech – To be or not to be!

Armand becoming a vampire when he was so young is a massive part of his character and it’s often been brought up as a disadvantage to him in canon (mostly by leaving him in a more childish mindset). The story of Armand’s mortal life and turning into a blood drinker has been told in three separate books by three separate narrators in three somewhat different periods. Below are some screenshots of the event of Armand’s turning told by our three narrators:

If they’re TLRD for you (and I get it lol) just skip to the part after that. They’re just reference anyway.

Book: The Vampire Lestat

Narrator: Lestat retelling what Armand showed him through the mind gift

Book: The Vampire Armand

Narrator: Armand retelling his own story to David

(I’m just adding bits, cuz his whole transition was a bazillion pages lol)

Book: Blood And Gold

Narrator: Marius retelling his own story to Thorne

(Just snippets again)

TLDR, right? Lol

So there are some differences between the three versions, although TVA and B&G are mostly in line (with a few exceptions that I’ll list below).

But the most noticeable thing for me is the famous Lord Harlech, who is suspiciously omitted and entirely missing in TVL.

Here’s the breakdown:

I love Excel and it has endless applications in life lol

So the question here is – was there a Lord Harlech at all? Was Marius truly left without a choice in turning Amadeo so young, or was it all by design? The question I try to ask is:

Why lie?


Assuming that this is not just a mistake (which I’m pretty sure it is lol), one of our three narrators is lying. But who?

Is Lestat lying? – If Lestat is lying, then that means that Armand showed him his story with Harlech included and then Lestat deciding to change it centuries later. However, the event in question happened three centuries before he was ever even born, so it doesn’t pertain to him. The only reason I can think of him maybe lying is to piss off Armand with whom he has a shaky relationship. However, that might also piss off Marius, for whom he feels quite a bit of respect. Either way, it seems that it’s unlikely that he’s lying (imo).

Is Armand lying? – Well yes lol! If we assume that Lestat is not lying (which I do) then it means that Armand either lied to Lestat or in his autobiography. Here I’d consider his mental state during the time – when he was showing Lestat his past, he’s truly hit rock bottom – he’s desperate, beaten, directionless, starved for love, light and purpose, he’s lost everything, he’s exposing all his vulnerabilities to Lestat and just let’s the guard fall down – not too likely to lie. But what about in TVA? He’s at a turning point in his life, trying to outgrow his past, having reconnected with Marius who has expressed a regret for turning him so young. He also admits that Marius brings out the best in him and he admits to loving him still.

So what if he invented Lord Harlech to protect Marius’ reputation? What if, having seen that Marius is regretful of it, he uses his own autobiography to exonerate his maker and tell the world “hey, he had no choice, it’s not his fault!” The newly-fabricated Lord Harlech is Armand’s gift to Marius, a way out of his “great crime”. To top it all off, Armand paints a picture of Marius being terribly conflicted and hesitant before giving him the blood. Which of course strengthens the image of Marius’ assumed innocence in the matter.

And if that’s the case, why didn’t he do that in the beginning when telling his story to Lestat? Why not come up with the story from the get go and stick to it? Well…he thought Marius dead then and what’s the purpose of defending the reputation of a dead man? Or a living one that had chosen to never come back for him?

Is Marius lying? – Marius is most definitely the most subtle of the three narrators (although the bar’s not very high with Lestat and Armand lol). He admits to having made up his mind that he’d turn Amadeo the following night and then lo and behold – said following night Amadeo is dying by the elusive Lord Harlech’s poisoned blade. He even goes on to say “It was not his decision that mattered now. For I had made mine.”

So what Marius is basically saying is ‘yeah, sure I turned him while he was on his death bed, but I would’ve done it that night anyway.’

So how to interpret this? I see it this way – Marius indulges in the Harlech fantasy (perhaps because he wants to respect Armand’s whishes and sticks to the version he has chosen for his own transition into the Blood), but he also clearly states that in the end that didn’t matter and he takes responsibility. Perhaps that admission is his gift to Armand, he’s respecting his decision but also wants it to be known that he’s owning up to it (and dare I say – not regretting it really).

And Also the whole “greatest crime against our kind” line from TVL takes a very different meaning, dependent on Harlech’s existence:

  • If Harlech doesn’t exist – his crime was not waiting until Amadeo was old enough
  • If Harlech did exist – his crime was turning Amadeo instead of letting him die

I guess I’ve spent so much time thinking about this, because Armand’s premature turning is such a big aspect of his character. Also, it’s been brought up time and time again for the dynamic between Armand and Marius – Marius calling him childish, faulting him for being too naïve or immature or savage. And all this because he was turned at the tender age of 16 or 17.

So what was it? Was Armand made so young because otherwise he would’ve died? Or was he turned young for no reason other than that Marius willed it that way? Did Lestat just bitch around or did he accidentally expose Marius and Armand’s dirty little secret?

And what does that mean for their relationship?

The Vampire Lestat is low-key painful to read because everytime I start to get into the book again, the plot is getting interesting and stuff, they throw in something gross and I have to put it down for a little while.

wicked-felina:

So I was speaking with some fandom folk on Discord about Anne Rice and the Vampire Chronicles, and shared some of the e-mails we sent back and forth over the years. People seemed to enjoy it, so I’m going to share some in a series of posts.

Please note that I often disagreed with Anne on stuff, and we went back and forth, but I am leaving her virtuoso performances unedited so that you don’t interrogate the text from the wrong perspective.

On whether Louis or Lestat is lying, and what truly happened between them in Paris and when Louis stated he saw Lestat for the last time at the turn of the 20th century:

talths: The Vampire Chronicles was my favourite book series growing up so it was really sad to hear talths: The Vampire Chronicles was my favourite book series growing up so it was really sad to hear talths: The Vampire Chronicles was my favourite book series growing up so it was really sad to hear

talths:

The Vampire Chronicles was my favourite book series growing up so it was really sad to hear about Anne Rice’s passing.
Here’s hoping they do her writing justice with the live action series because I’m desperate to see an adaptation where lestat and nicolas interact on screen


Post link

vamp4rebatscave:

image
image

A drawing about Armand & Lestat being lovey-dovey was the most requested in my ask, so…

This wasn’t meant to be ready as a Valentine’s Day drawing but I guess date coincided

sweetazathioprine:

obsessed with this drawing of Louis and Lestat just walking from the Velvet Rose doujinshi

xxhellonursexx:Another comic re-draw, as requested by @imelzaThis is a small portion of a larger par

xxhellonursexx:

Another comic re-draw, as requested by @imelza

This is a small portion of a larger part of a page dedicated to the turning of Louis. It stuck out to me in particular because of their poses and their faces–Louis’ cute lil’ face feeding on Lestat’s wrist is so sweet, almost in a breastfeeding kind of way, but the phrasing of Lestat’s words and his facial expression give it a more sexual edge. 


Post link

Little animation of our beloved Lestat.

Done this while I’m reading The vampire Lestat. Drew all these frames made me kinda nutz ngl

Instagram

loading