Gabriella’s Lestrap

Okay! What an absolute feast of a treat. The resounding echoes of Lestat's hypersexualization trauma are certainly making so much more sense now, so let's break down who-what-why and what we still need information on.

One thing that is clear in Gothic depictions of Mother-Son incest is that the thing that creates the sensation of horror is the hunger of the Mother’s sexuality, and how sons become the victims of it. The anxiety this is drawing from and reinforcing is that not only are Married Women in possession of their own individual sexuality, they can use it to interrupt the lines of power within the heteropatriarchal system. The idea that a Man can be a victim in a heterosexual relationship is an incredibly hard pill to swallow, and even more so if the Man is emotionally vulnerable and not the one who is sexually aggressive.

Gifs

In reality, Mother-son incest is incredibly uncommon, and in literature, it is over emphasized in discussions that do not match how little it appears in fiction itself. Why? What causes people to weirdly fixate on Mother-Son incest -especially with the denial of male victimhood? What makes this particular form of incest so intense?

Partially it’s because it completely subverts typical lines of power dynamics, heteronormativity, and societal gender structures. Jenny DiPlacidi uses Queer Theories of power as presented by Leo Bersani, to examine why exactly people react to mother-son incest with the same intense historical over-reaction as they do to male-male relationships.

Gothic texts by writers such as Matthew Lewis, William Beckford, Eugenia de Acton and Charlotte Dacre rearticulate this subversion through a queering of desires that creates male victims of maternal desires or agency and disrupts cultural requirements of male dominance. Though these modes of the Gothic respond to the figure of the mother differently, both position fer as aligned with sexuality and disruptive to heteronormativity’s restrictive models of sexuality. Heteronormative fears of maternal sexuality are exacerbated by the idea that mothers could use sexual agency; in a socially disruptive way, to seduce, force, or coerce their sons into a sexual relationship. As Susan McKinnon puts it: ‘Where sexual intercourse is thought to involve the “naturally” assertive, even aggressive, agency of men and the equally “naturally” passive acquiescence . . . of women, it follows that paternal incest would be viewed in terms that stress its relative “normalcy” at the same time that maternal incest would be viewed in [mentally ill] terms.’ (248)

I think we can see how this plays out in fandom discussions around Marimand vs Gabistat. In simplified versions of Marimand (which is so father-daughter it’s not even funny), Marius is always the lustful sexual aggressor that preys upon Amadeo (the reality of that is much more complicated), while I’ve always seen Gabrielle characterized as the passive enabler of the relationship with Lestat, and it’s Lestat who is the sexual aggressor. Those presentations of incest are exactly in line with heteronormative understandings of gender, power, and sexuality, so they tend to be the most palatable forms of talking about the incestuous relationship. By making Gabriella the sexual aggressor, we are suddenly fucking with all heteronormative alignments of gender, power, and sexuality, and that creates a sense of alienation and disgust.

As McKinnon points out so succinctly, mothers are assumed incapable of assaulting their sons because ‘they lack the sexual equipment necessary for direct sexual agency or assault. Without a penis women are assumed to be the acquiescent objects, not the active agents, of sexual acts.’ The idea of women as actively assaulting men sexually is such a troubling idea to normative definitions of female agency that the existence of acts is often dismissed [. . .] ‘the only way to account for the contravention of the “natural” is by conjuring the “unnatural” – a woman whose intellectual deficiency or psychological pathology completely undermines her maternal nature.’ (248-249)

The fact that Gabriella is NOT intellectually deficient nor psychologically pathological, simply emotionally damaged and thus limited in her scope of care, is particularly discomforting to a lot of people I've seen react to it. Gabriella isn't pathologically grooming Lestat to be the husband that never was, she is just inhibited in her expression of her maternal instinct of care, and that is where the incest and abuse originates.

Gabriella's Sexuality

I think that her quest for power and authority is so understandable as much as it is horrifying. When nothing but your sexual performance is valued (and not even sexual performance, BABY-MAKING performance), it essentially has the chance to turn that drive (like a Freudian drive) into overload, which is why she is Like That. Gabriella has performed her duty to provide sons to the house of de Lioncourt means that she is not value-less in the eyes of the patriarchal system, but she has no further value outside of this. Gabriella, in the eyes of her husband and elder sons, is no more valuable than the chair she sits on. She can't seek freedom with her mind, nor her history, nor her own will. Pleasure is the only thing she owns, and it is something that she feels power in escaping into.

Gabriella herself hasn't had an experience with having a healthy relationship with a family member, LET ALONE a son, so she is emotionally stunted and can only share the intimacy, power, and freedom that she knows how to cling on to when attempting to be emotionally vulnerable.*

gifs

Gabriella ends up with this self-feeding relationship with her sexuality. It's always on her mind, it is her power fantasy escape, and so it tips from her tongue if at any point she feels like her options are limiting her power and control: “mother as I am expected to mother” or emotional vulnerability. If she wants to feel in control, her options are confrontation or escapism through intellect

Or confrontation and escapism through sexual fantasy

(the body-blocking in this scene is so important. The way she approaches above him, before getting down on his level to treat his open wounds while sharing her own personal dreams… the more sexual her dreams get, the more pain Lestat is experiencing as she is touching his wounds… ugh, the subtle story-telling in this show is still vibrant)

The fact that Gabriella approaches Lestat in his weakest physical and emotional hours, means that Gabriella is not seeking challenge to her vampiric escapism when attempting to create a connection with him. Their emotional reliance on each other is something Gabriella would see as her assigned place in the heteropatriarchal system, so she encourages sexuality so that SHE can continue to escape from the oppressive system. This seems to be one of the only ways she feels comfortable being emotionally vulnerable. The fact that Lestat seems to be using his male privilege to do exactly what she wants to see from Men who are Worth Something, makes him a safe space to be vulnerable, and someone worth the effort of sharing her inner world with.

gifs

Lestat's Victimhood and His Attempts to Reconcile the Abuse

This tumblr post is one of my favorite text posts about what Lestat is getting from the relationship, and why he maintains—and even defends it—despite his clear victimization:

“lestat and gabrielle are both the victims of severe emotional and psychological abuse, and find solace in each other (in similar ways to show louis and claudia) because​ of that. their relationship would be nonsensical outside of that context. lestat sees them as equalized by the abuse, both the victims of power dynamics, rather than as parent and child. by the time the physicality is introduced it almost feels like a natural outpouring of the emotional incest already occurring, which itself feels like a natural outpouring of what they've experienced at home.”

Lestat finds comfort in the emotional incest—it makes him feel secure in a family/world that seems to be shaped against him. But that’s all he really wants, the emotional connection. This is directly at odds with the fact the Gabrielle is not actually emotionally available, and finds the emotional incest unsatisfying to her power, since gender roles would demand that she is the emotional support for her son. Gabriella’s denial of this is subverting the gender role, and also denying Lestat’s escape into the taboo of their relationship. She will not be claimed as solely a mother, but as a person with physical and sexual autonomy, because that is what her vampiric coping mechanisms have established that power and freedom ARE.

gifs

Because of the abuse (this is just one part, Magnus is coming up), Lestat has normalized and made a toxic relationship with his validation seeking – which is his vampiric trait. When Lestat is asking for sex, he is seeking external validation. Too much external validation, and it becomes sickening because it's just treating the exterior of the wounds without cleaning them. He wants emotional and mental validation, but because the coping mechanism of external validation is easiest (because of the incestuous abuse, and Gabriella using sexuality as act of power), it makes a negative feedback loop of draining his emotional and mental energy (Lestat wanting all those fans, and Baby Jenks asking why he makes it so HARD). The abuse from his family and emotional incestuous relationship with Gabriella has ALSO left him emotional stunted, but because the times when he has felt emotionally validated are the times he feels most powerful, that is what he REALLY desires. That's why his vampiric trait is Narcissism.

This is also why 3x02 ends up focusing on modern-day Gabistat so intensely, because it is showing the complexities of both of their vampiric coping mechanisms, and how they dig their teeth into each other’s weakest points: Lestat wanting emotional connection without the distance of sex, which threatens Gabriella’s security in escapism, and Gabriella wanting sensual connection without the vulnerability of emotion, which threatens Lestat’s sense of security.

This doesn't mean they don't love each other, or don't feel affection, or don't worry about each other's well-being. Gabriella arrived to nurse Lestat back to himself, and so she is - in her own fucked up way - attempting to see if he's feeling secure, powerful, and free. Again, her motherly instincts are inhibited by her own trauma-responses and coping mechanisms, so she's connecting the only way she feels safe to. The abuse is traveling on the connection that is love, it is not separate from it.

Lesclaudia and Loustat Echoes

Hey so that * I put up earlier? This is going to apply here, because you know who else are emotionally stunted and can only share sexuality, power, and their own ideals of freedom when attempting to be emotionally intimate?

Mostly Lestat, but a little of Louis as well, since Louclaudia is primarily emotional incest and that’s what Lestat wants in a companion. (another layer to why Lestat was threatened by Claudia)

Claudia, as a stunted child who is representing a socially and physically disabled Black female Vampire, has little-to-no worth in the White Supremacist hetero-patriarchal system. She can’t achieve social value in creating children, she is limited in her choices of companion, and so she is left with Lestat and Louis, the patriarchal heads of her family. There is no external escapism available to her, so she is left with her sexuality and her emotional relationship with Louis to escape into.

Lestat is also the one who acknowledges that sexuality is an available escape, taking her to Lover’s Lane. Here, he is attempting –based on what he knows about female escapism—to share sexuality, power, and vampiric ideals of freedom in place of emotional intimacy. However he delineates the line of “I will not be your sexual escape” when she finds that sexual escapism isn’t freely available to her, either.

“Which one of you is gonna fuck me?!” “I prefer a fuller figure.”

We also see the echoes of Gabistat-style emotional incest in Louclaudia in 2x02: together, they are making up stories about their past and identities to hide the uncomfortable history of their relationship. Gabriella and Claudia both stick to their fantasies of reality and their experiences with being desired to create the story, which both Lestat and Louis find discomforting because they do not find it easy to escape into the female fantasy. Gabriella’s experiences with desire are empowering, which she once again holds to avoid emotional connection, while Claudia’s experiences with being desired are disempowering and violent, which she delays expressing and sharing until she is in a place she can control the emotional connection (in her coffin, without having to look at Louis, where it’s easy to end the conversation, and also as a way to elevate her desire to belong with the coven. It is an emotional delivery that Louis cannot refute with his own anxieties, for fear that he would abuse her vulnerability.)

I know a couple other people are working on more exact parallels, these were just what came to mind when I watched the episode.

So TL;DR, what do we know about Gabistat incest from this episode, and what do we need more information to determine?

We can see that through the emotional and physical relationship Gabistat have maintained and struggled with, that their coping mechanisms are directly draining on each other. Lestat desires emotional validation above all else, which Gabriella cannot provide him without the security of her sexuality. Gabriella uses her vampiric coping mechanism of sexual freedom and power to hold power over Lestat, as she will withdraw emotionally if Lestat doesn’t bend enough to her comfort level.

What we don’t know is how Gabriella maneuvers the complexity of her sexual freedom alongside her son’s, when her son becomes emotionally invested in another person. Is Gabriella getting satisfaction from Lestat’s fawning in a way that encourages isolation and control, or is this where her twisted maternal instincts come in and measure the worth of her son’s emotional partners against herself?