Ace of 💜s

my brother in christ you cannot be more wrong and I'm so tired. also if you ask a random stranger this in real life, a random stranger who's mature enough to understand the difference between fiction and reality, they will look at you like you speak gibberish.

proship stance = anti harassing real people over goddamned fiction. your kink is not my kink and that's okay. don't like don't read. there are some prompts that trigger the fuck out of me. I don't read it. I don't even like it. but I will defend its rights to exist because

1.) it is fiction

2.) no one in real life is harmed

3.) it cannot harm you unless you go searching for it, knowing it will upset or trigger you

4.) a lot of victims and survivors cope and heal through fiction, a safe and controlled environment

5.) censorship is a fascist tool. once you allow one thing to be censored because someone somewhere doesn't want it to exist, anything and everything can and will be censored.

A couple asks ago you talked about Memnoch the Devil and Armand’s failed suicide attempt. I’m so fascinated with Armand’s relationships with ever character (surprisingly not just Daniel lol) and more specifically with lestat. Could you go into it that event at all and how Lestat talks Armand off that ledge?

And now with how the shows changed things do you think the reasoning that would draw Armand to the fire would be different now? And of course I’m a creature of habit forgive me! How do you think that would that look now that Daniel is wayyy more in the picture or “kinda might be” in the picture.

(Obviously we’re in the middle of the new episodes chaos, so please no rush answering💕)

Hey! How are you? 👋🏾 💕

So, okay about Armand's failed suicide attempt from Memnoch the Devil:

So, Armand's attempt didn't fail because Lestat, or anyone else, talked Armand out of doing it. It failed because after 500 years, Armand was too old for the sun to have the power to kill him anymore.

Armand just didn't know that at the time when he attempted to do it, to stand in the sun and let it burn him to death:

[...]

[...]

---

So yeah, after Armand did this, everyone, including Lestat, including all of us book readers at the time when the book first came out, thought Armand was dead. Dead and gone.

And because of things Anne Rice was saying before the book came out, we thought it might even be the final book in the Vampire Chronicles at that.

And that her killing Armand off was one of the final things we'd ever see done in the series as a whole.

It really was the "Armand Lives" campaign by fans that helped bring him back when Anne continued to write more books for the series, starting with Pandora and The Vampire Armand, which came out within 8 months of each other:

So yeah, in the books, Lestat didn't talk Armand out of doing it. Davind was the only other one there with them at the time, and David didn't either.

And it wasn't because they didn't want Armand to do it, but it was because the sun was coming up, and there was zero time for them to do so. Because in the books, once the sun rises, a vampire completely slips into unconsciousness wherever they are at the time. It is something they can't help or stop.

So if Lestat and David had stayed with him any longer, they too would have been caught out in the sun when they were rendered unconscious as they burned.

This, in fact, is what happened to Lestat when he went out into the Gobi Desert to try to commit suicide in the book before this one, Tale of the Body Thief. He flew up high as the sun was beginning to rise, and then, as the sun started to burn him, he fell to Earth, unconscious and burned under the sun of the desert all day.

The only reason it didn't kill him was because of the amount of blood he'd drunk from Akasha before then, during the events of Queen of the Damned, which basically left the sunlight unable to kill him, only just tanning his skin.

Anyway, Armand, at over 500, was too old to have the sun kill him, which he didn't know. So he was just severely burned by what he did and survived it.

And that is when he first meets Sybelle and Benji, btw, in the aftermath of his failed attempt, which we learn in The Vampire Armand.

---

Now, as to how I think the show might do it? Well, I actually already wrote a whole meta about that already, here:

And I also wrote one about how it could maybe relate to Armand's missing eye, which we saw in EP301 here:

If it was just the two of us again... 'cause, yeah, who else is gonna have us... A trailer park. Nevada, Utah, the desert. Couple folding chairs. Plant some flower boxes. What blooms at night?

Evening primrose.

They got birds in the desert?

There's birds everywhere.

Hey!

So okay, I don't have a theory on the colors of the posters. I truly have no real clue what is going on with that, currently.

But when it comes to the shadows on posters, I very much do have thoughts and theories about that.

So first off, all living vampires have two shadows behind their physical selves. We see this with Lestat, Louis, Armand, and Gabriella's posters:

While all humans, either living or dead, only have one shadow:

Now, the reason all LIVING vampires have two shadows behind them is that one shadow represents their soul/etheric selves and the second shadow represents their vampire-selves, which are connected to either their Makers and/or the Sacred Core/Amel itself.

There is a whole lore thing about subatomic links all vampires have, and how a part of Amel resides within them after someone is made a vampire, and how that works, that is explained in the book Prince Lestat and the Realms of Atlantis. You can read a more detailed breakdown of how it all works, wrt Amel and those subatomic connections here:

Anyway, regular humans only have one shadow to represent their souls/etheric bodies. I explained about the soul/etheric body in this post in my prediction about Daniel's death:

Now, take a look at the posters for Nicki and Magnus:

Each of them, even though they are vampires, only has one shadow, right?

Well, that is because, even though they were vampires, they are both now dead.

When a vampire dies, that severs their connection to Amel and the part of them that is Amel, and made them vampires, is now gone.

The only thing that exists for Nicki and Magnus, in truth, is their souls, their etheric bodies. And while their soul/etheric selves are likely no longer on Earth, they are somewhere. (In fact, in PLatRoA, we learn exactly where Magnus ended up.)

So with all of that in mind, and given everything we know from the first six episodes, take a look at this:

So, IF my theory about these posters is correct? Then TC and Salamander's time as vampires might very well be short-lived, I think.

And, out of all the members of Lestat's band, only Alex will be the one to survive (at least this season).

Yeah. Gabriella's fledgling. Which, given her being all-in on the Great Conversion, and given what Lestat just said to her about Alex in EP306, maybe she'll be one of the reasons why he will.

* * * * *

Now, a few other points. First, Akasha and Daniel's posters:

Both vampires, but both only with ONE shadow. Why?

Well, Akasha, being the one who HOLDS Amel/The Sacred Core within her, and Amel's presence being the thing that made her a vampire in the first place, THAT, IMO, is the reason Akasha only has one shadow.

Because Akasha's soul and Amel's soul/spirit are entwined with each other. That is the specific thing that happened when Akasha lay dying after a failed assassination attempt. As her soul began to leave her body (her Silver Cord having snapped), Amel snatched up her soul, entwined himself with it, and then forced them both back into her dying body.

Amel's spirit/etheric body was deeply infused with the synthetic polymer Luracastia when he did all this, and it is that polymer that was instrumental in Amel making Akasha into the first vampire. With him as the source, the "seed," the Sacred Core of that.

As for Daniel? Well, I have long thought something similar to Akasha is behind him being a vampire, and I already have a long written-up theory about that here:

Needless to say, I do not think Daniel's turning was in any way standard, i.e., that it happened in the same way other vampires are normally turned.

I also think there is a reason that Daniel's shadow-self in his poster is not a mirror image of his primary/physical self, like it is for every single other person who has a poster.

And now, last but not least...

I think a certain someone (Jarda) might just get turned off-screen.

As for Raglan, I think his two shadows are not that he'll become a vampire, but instead a hint about his unique abilities, i.e., his ability to move his soul from one body to another.

Because there is a whole thing in PLatRoA that explains what is going on with souls going into bodies that are not their own, and the tethers involved if their original bodies are still alive and such.

As per the "teams"... Ryan Kattner changed his color to pink in an IG post, indicating the "teams" aspect of it all. Though it isn't really "Team Lestat", more that yellow... are... frauds. Or... do something / are something they are not.

Pretending to be someone else.

Fake Lestat. Jarda.

Armand pretending to do the steps, while having an agenda.

Alex helping Armand behead Louis and Lestat, hiding behind a mask.

Daniel not really/fully a vampire (and sometimes possessed?).

Raglan... well. Is Raglan. The body thief. He has his own agenda.

Regina, pretending to be Claudia. "Fraudia" as they called her in and outside the show.

Now, AKASHA is red, because she is just herself. Uncategorized as of yet, if you so will. A force in and by herself, too.

Bear in mind that I'm insane obviously, but the specific colour-coding choices on the posters make me think of the "of Cabbages and Kings" rhyme from Alice. Especially with the frequent references to monarchy in its various forms and...uh, cabbages. Exactly how that distinction is being drawn in context I don't know. I'd guess that those who are in favour of vampiric rule & liberty (either through the Great Conversion, or just in the more anarchic Savage Garden sense) are the fuchsia-coloured "Kings" and those who oppose it, either because they are human, or wish to avoid change and cling to the old ways, are the yellow-green "Cabbages".

Though cut me some slack, both Alice books were published way after Lestat became a vampire. Over 60 years at least. So when it came to the cabbage's term, I didn't even think of the poem in question.

Which would be the poem "The Walrus and the Carpenter" from the book Through the Looking Glass, the second of the two Alice books.

"The time has come," the Walrus said,     "To talk of many things: Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—     Of cabbages—and kings— And why the sea is boiling hot—     And whether pigs have wings."

(I memorized this whole poem when I was in 4th Grade, btw, just for fun)

In the book, it is a poem that is told to Alice by the characters of Tweedledum and Tweedledee.

Anyway, there are a lot of literary critiques of this poem. Some say the poem is just whimsical nonsense, like a lot of things are in the Alice books, while others have a different reading of it. Which, yes, one of those interpretations being that the poem is a commentary on greed and preying upon the innocent, given what the Walrus and the Carpenter do by the end of the poem.

Here's a video of actor John Gielgud reading the poem:

As to Akasha, her poster being red very much could be a reference to The Red Queen, from Through the Looking Glass, as well.

For those who don't know, the whole story of Through the Looking Glass is set up as a worldwide chess game, and Alice is in the role of the white Pawn. The Red Queen is, of course, on the opposing side of Alice. By the end of the story, Alice has "taken" the Red Queen, checkmating the Red King, ending the game.

Anyway, one of the famous early chapters in the book is when Alice meets the Red Queen for the first time and engages in a race -- or, more accurately, the queen takes Alice by the hand and has them run very fast, and then faster and faster, and then, when they finally stop, Alice notices that they are still exactly in the same spot as when they'd begun.

When Alice remarks upon this, the Red Queen tells her that, to actually get somewhere different, they would have had to run twice as fast as they had been:

"Well, in our country," said Alice, still panting a little, "you'd generally get to somewhere else—if you ran very fast for a long time, as we've been doing." "A slow sort of country!" said the Queen. "Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place. If you want to get somewhere else, you must run at least twice as fast as that!"

The Red Queen is a different character from The Queen of Hearts, btw, who is from the first Alice book, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. She is the more famous one known between the two and is the one who is the one who kept decreeing for people's heads to be cut off.

Though when the Gryphon was tasked by her to take Alice to meet the Mock Turtle, he made this comment about her always calling for such a thing:

The Gryphon sat up and rubbed its eyes: then it watched the Queen till she was out of sight: then it chuckled. 'What fun!' said the Gryphon, half to itself, half to Alice. 'What IS the fun?' said Alice. 'Why, SHE,' said the Gryphon. 'It's all her fancy, that: they never executes nobody, you know. Come on!”

Both Queens were the antagonists of their respective books, but I personally always tended to find the Red Queen from Through the Looking Glass to be more ... I guess the word I'm looking for would be imposing, than I do the Queen of Hearts. Mostly because of what the Gryphon said about her and her constant calling for people to be executed, but no one ever actually being so.

Anyway, the show. Lestat's little New Year's Eve party could very much be looked upon as the Mad Hatter's Tea Party for sure.

Both Alice books would have been published by that point in time, and Lestat might have read them over the 10 years he spent with Akasha, given they were both published when he would have been asleep underground.

But yes, if I had to pick between the two queens, I'd say Akasha fits more the Red Queen from Looking Glass. Because her executions aren't going to be just a "fancy" that never actually happens.

And I can very much see Akasha's plan, and those trying to stop her, also being like a giant worldwide chess game, between those who might side with her and those who openly will not.

In fact, before Alice "takes" the Red Queen in the book, and puts the Red King in checkmate by doing so, Alice has become a Queen herself, and is no longer just a pawn.

After ep 6, I have a theory that, if Daniel Will really die,IT Will be bc of Alex, who finds out the truth about his brother's death and this Will be his revenge on Armand. What do you think after the episodes?

Hey! 👋🏾

So... oh boy... I've been holding onto this feeling I'm about to say for almost 11 months now, since I first suspected Daniel was going to die. And when @nalyra-dreaming got screeners, she told me in chat to hold off on what I was thinking until I saw EP306 myself (because yeah, she's one of the people who knew my theory about this), because I might change my mind.

Now, after having seen EP306... I'm not sure I feel different about it. But before I say it, I guess I should first start this by laying out what I see at the moment wrt things.

* * * * *

So first off, I think Armand is very aware that something is "off" with Daniel. As I laid out in answer to another ask I just got today, I think, on top of everything else going on with Daniel's biological body -- the shaking, and everything else the show has hinted at -- that there is also an invasive spirit within Daniel, which accounts for his orange eyes, and things like the colors of his bowling ball and what his character poster hints at.

And as I said in my answer to that ask, if that invasive spirit that I think is within Daniel's body is "locked in" in the same way Amel's spirit is "locked in" Akasha's body? Then there is no way to separate them.

Meaning there is no way to free Daniel of it, or free him from any of the pain he might seriously be going through because of all of it.

All he'd really be able to do is lean into that pain to deal with it.

Anyway, I think the Talamasca are ... involved with Daniel's current state, at least if I'm correct about the spirit being in him.

And, at the end of the day, I do not think Armand would take ... kindly to that (understatement).

Because, as Assad said about how Armand sees and loves Daniel, "It's tattered, it's broken, but it's mine."

I think this is Daniel's chest that Armand has carved that "A" into, as the red part of the shirt matches the shirt Eric is wearing when he filmed this:

And that we also see him wearing in the short promo trailer that came out a day or so ago:

At the moment, I think that man Daniel is snarling at is a Talamasca agent.

His chest doesn't look bloody, so I don't think the "A" has been carved into his chest yet. But Daniel is there with them for some reason, and I think that reason is tied to Daniel saying back in EP302 that the Talamasca had him "on retainer."

And I don't think the way he said that to Louis was just out of embarrassment. Daniel really didn't like it when Real Rashid showed up to get Daniel to set Louis up to meet with Raglan.

The Talamasca are doing something either to or with Daniel, IMO. And again, if I am correct about the invasive spirit being within Daniel, I think it being there is their doing.

And if Armand is working with them in figuring out how to separate Akasha from Amel to get their hands on The Sacred Core, I think Daniel is being used as leverage to get him to help them.

Why Armand, you might ask? Well, his book-canon ability to see spirits unaided might be why. But also, as I said in my theory about why I think Armand is doing everything he's doing, I think, for a time, Armand might have also been the one watching over Akasha and Enkil while he was in Dubai:

Meaning, if what I speculate here about this is correct, then yeah, when Raglan James made contact with Daniel in Dubai in S2? The Talamasca might have likely known that The Vampire Armand was the keeper of Those Who Must Be Kept at the time.

And so they have been using Daniel to try to get at Armand to help them get The Sacred Core.

And to do so, I think they basically set Daniel up in the exact same situation that mirrors the situation with Akasha and Amel.

Because if Armand helps them figure out how to separate Akasha from Amel, then he can use the same method for separating Daniel from the invasive spirit they put in him.

* * * * *

However, the truth of the matter is that, if my above speculation about what is going on with Daniel is correct?

Then there is no way to separate Daniel from the spirit within him, just as there is no way to separate Akasha from Amel . . . except via the death of the host body.

And do I think Armand would do that, have Daniel die, not only to free Daniel but to get him out from under the Talamasca's hold/grip?

Yes, I think he would. But, of course, not before making sure Daniel's spirit was bound to something, so it would remain behind.

Because again, as Assad said, Armand sees Daniel as his. And he is not going to totally let that boy go IMO, death or no.

* * * * *

Now, I will say, I no longer think Armand would deliver the killing blow to do this, if what I'm speculating turns out to be correct. (Which is something I did think, for a long time, might be how it went down.)

But I do think Armand would do something to make sure the Talamasca knows they f-ed up by doing something to Daniel in this way if they have done to him what I've speculated.

* * * * *

So yeah, if Daniel dies at the end of this season, I'm not sure exactly how it will happen, but I think this will be the reason it does. Because Armand will basically be trying to help Daniel, to save him, really, in the only way that might be left for him to do so.

i also think a lot of people aren't really getting the *point* of louis' reaction. it's extremely harsh and judgmental and completely insensitive to the fact that lestat is being abused, but that is the purpose of it. the entire season is lestat attempting to justify it. this is louis saying that you cannot justify it. there is no rational way to justify that happening. and when lestat has a breakdown over it, they both sort of realize at the same time that this means lestat has been suffering incestuous sexual abuse for 200 fucking years.

it overwhelms lestat, and it clicks for louis. that's when he changes tacts, when he comforts lestat, when he gently tries to help him admit that it's been abuse all along in the bar. it's so realistic, such a necessary sequence.