failed to write, someday might, but not today

To be clear, I'm not saying that because I dislike Bolaire, or purely because it was a Nat 20 vs Nat 1. I'm saying that because what he says is actually countered later, but in a way that I'm thinking Bolaire was doing a "true from my perspective, not necessarily objectively true" sort of thing. I think he was framing it explicitly in such a way that Hal would take his side and not question why Thjazi would respond so negatively to him. But with the coming episodes, we the audience get an idea about why he'd react so negatively.

For the record, here's that speech from Stone-Faced.

(sighs) One week after I met your brother at your home, Thimble arrived at the museum with a letter. (sighs) Your brother had discovered things about me that could get me, I'd say put away, but that sounds like I'd done something. He knew things about me that were, if put out into the open would've made my life if not difficult, unbearable. He told me I had to work for him, and he forced me to start stealing from this library for him, for other people. He told me if I told you any of this, that would be the end of me. I have tried so hard to never lie to you. Any lie I've ever told you is because your brother forced me to. I thought finally I would be free. I thought finally I could just know that my contract was over, know that there was someone who would let me go so that I could start cleaning up this fucking mess that your brother put me in. He has compromised every level of my life that I was very happy with and just treated me with more disdain than I can possibly express. And it has broken my heart that I've had to sit here and think about that in front of you for so long. (sighs) Your brother was a very complicated man. Many people I've heard have said many things about him. But he could also be very cruel and hateful. He was not kind to me to the bitter end, and I did not deserve it. Any sins that I have would pale in comparison to the things that I have done for him or the things I have seen him do. I thought Thimble, I thought maybe since she had been kind and worked very hard to make sure I never had to be in his presence. Used to say that she-- I would give her gifts and in return she would, as a Thimble should, keep me from coming into contact with a prick. (chuckles) So he's dead and there is something wrong out there. You know there's something wrong. There is a shadow.

So what is Bolaire communicating here? That without warning or reason, Thjazi used Bolaire's nature as a Panto Mask against him to force him to do terrible things. That Thjazi was cruel to Bolaire for no reason. That he "compromised every level" of Bolaire's life. That he did things so terrible that it Horrified the Horror.

Now. These things can be true. They can also be true from Bolaire's perspective, but not necessarily objectively true.

"I'd say put away, but that sounds like I'd done something". Bolaire has "done something". He has committed incredible acts of violence and murder. He has killed Falconers, killed and chopped up criminals, he literally has to wear other people and trap them in a mind prison so that he can live his own life (granted he doesn't have to do the mind prison but it seems he defaults to this). Even Taliesin, above table, acknowledges that this is the kind of artifact Percy of Vox Machina would put in a metal box and chuck into the sea. Bolaire is, put simply, dangerous. Incredibly dangerous. It is entirely disingenuous of him to suggest he hasn't done something to warrant being put away. He absolutely has.

But maybe not from his perspective. From his perspective, well, they were criminals! They were obstacles to his freedom and he surely can't be blamed for doing whatever it took to be free, can he?

"He has compromised every level of my life that I was very happy with" This is so vague and ambiguous as to be meaningless but it's worth noting that at the beginning of this session, the cold open was Bolaire being peeled off of a severely decayed body and taking over someone else immediately afterwards. So I'm inclined to believe a common theory that Thjazi insisted he remain on one body rather than go around bodysnatching other people. Which I imagine was very uncomfortable and made Bolaire unhappy, but wasn't exactly unwarranted or needlessly cruel from Thjazi's perspective, or indeed from most people's perspectives.

"He was not kind to me to the bitter end and I did not deserve it" Again, I think this is just a "My truth is that I didn't deserve it". It doesn't necessarily follow that he objectively deserved Thjazi's kindness or neutrality, which is what's implied here.

"Any sins that I have would pale in comparison to the things that I have done for him or the things I have seen him do." That is, again, definitely something I think is colored by Bolaire's own alien perception of what he considers right and wrong. What does Bolaire, a being who has gone through what? Three or four bodies in barely a week consider a "sin"? You can view that in one of two ways I think: That Thjazi did such monstrous things that he Horrified the Horror, or that Bolaire has such Blue and Orange Morality that he considers chopping up dead bodies to be an average Tuesday but something like telling a baldfaced lie to be horrendous.

I say that because Bolaire does, in fact, bring up Thjazi being a liar a lot. Thjazi was a trickster, a scoundrel, a thief and liar. And the last one seems to be what Bolaire gnaws at the most: He calls Thjazi deeply manipulative, a deceitful person, he straight up tells Thimble Thjazi was only pretending to tell her everything while lying to everyone else. I genuinely wonder if Thjazi's capacity for lying is something Bolaire finds so deeply distasteful that that rings as a greater "sin" than Bolaire living "honestly" as himself.

Combined with all this is the objective fact that we have absolutely no reason to believe Thjazi was aware that Bolaire isn't actively malevolent. Antiheroes and heroes alike work with evil artifacts for the greater good all the time; Vox Machina is a great example with the Sword of Kas.

From the outside looking in:

Thjazi meets Bolaire at Hal's place. Learns that Bolaire is a sentient artifact that has killed people, including fellow revolutionaries, and who wears people. He has absolutely zero idea why Bolaire is hanging around his brother. He has absolutely zero idea what Bolaire is doing. He only has history to fall back on: Bolaire kills people. Bolaire wears people. Bolaire is getting awfully chummy with Hal and seems entirely too interested in the theater.

He doesn't speak directly with Bolaire because he has no idea if Bolaire can put the mask on Thjazi himself. Better safe than sorry. He sends Thimble because she's too small to be forcibly masked and can get away swiftly if needed.

He does what he can to keep Hal out of it, in deference to Hal's request from years earlier, and blackmails Bolaire into not telling Hal anything. He presumably makes not wearing another body a requirement for Bolaire, which makes sense in the context of dealing with a malevolent artifact: You try to limit the damage they can do outside of your control.

We know that Bolaire is a PC. We know he's got a rich inner life and the capacity for benevolence and can be trusted. Thjazi, on the other hand, almost certainly did not. And had no reason to take that chance when Bolaire was hyperfocusing on his brother, of all people.

First, Brennan uses Hannan as an antagonistic force toward the Seekers he unifies them by standing against both Occtis and Vaelus. He also provides contrast to the more measured and peaceful Druids we've seen thus far. He provides a counterpoint to Vaelus, the only other Elf we've seen in the campaign, and forces her to reveal more about her position regarding the Shaper's War by defending it.

As his relationship with Vaelus develops, we get more nuanced glimpses of what Elvish life is actually like, the full weight of Sylandri's hold of her creations, and Vaelus admits who she actual has been missing and grieving all these years; not Sylandri, but her family. Admitting this lets us understand the sacrifice she makes when she chooses to put her family aside, to break the Stone of Nightsong and help the Rungjani dead find peace.

And of course, when Hannan learns of Mara's capture he flies to Obrimus Manor to help her. There, he does not barge in to search, instead he starts to counter the Undead. This is extremely important support for Thimble. The magical darkness dissipates, her search difficulty decreases significantly, and the undead threat is lessened greatly. I feel confident in saying that Thimble would not have succeeded without this intervention, but critically, he supports Thimble's success without swooping in to make it his own.

With this support, she is able to finish off the Undead Monstrosity that was Raimond Davinos. Now Teor's death is not in vain because she heroically finished the work he had started. Together, they rid the world of a great evil while freeing Raimond's spirit and recovering his blade.

Thimble is able to recover the Pridesires. Their spirits and bodies cannot be harnessed by the Tachonises. She recovers the Royce Bracers and the Einfassen ax, which could have complicated things had they been discovered in the crypt. She also finds valuable information throughout her search, learning where the Gnomish statues were taken and information on the tenebral ship. Hannan facilitates all of this as he holds the darkness and the dead at bay.

The last important thing Hannan does is to die.

And this is very important, narratively.

Primus Tachonis has been bested by the work of the Magpies. We've seen him threatened by the Einfasen and condescended to by Yanessa Halovar. Why should we be threatened by him? Maybe he's just prideful and sloppy. Maybe he's careless and stupid. Maybe he's actually not that frightening.

And then he kills Hannan without a second thought, and we see the truth that Brennan has been nudging us toward since the beginning.

Primus is not stupid or short-sighted, he is panicking.

He knows things we do not. He knows something is coming, and the full wrath of the Druids that may come in a handful of months doesn't matter, because there are larger forces at play. So yes, the Einfasen and the Cormorays are deeply powerful and the Halovar's have power and influence as well as cunning and poise the others seem to lack.

Even so, Primus Tachonis is the most dangerous threat right now, because he is desperate. In his mind, he has nothing to lose. The murder of Hannan proves this.

Sometimes the cost of a great story is the loss of a great character.

I can still feel weight of the one I had as a child in my hands if I think about it hard enough. They aren’t regular dolls. They’re called rag dolls because, traditionally, they were made of leftover material and typically stuffed with rags instead of regular stuffing which makes them heavy. Comparing a person to that, I’d even say corpse-like. I had a really old one and it was the same size as me when I was young, so it was like dragging a body around. I couldn’t lift it on my own for several years.

“Rag doll for sale”

Little Arun is someone who can be manoeuvred into any position, who will not fight back and will be anything you want him to be. He is so perfectly submissive and pliant he may as well be a dead body.

And good news! You can customise him to your liking! You can dress him in different outfits, you can style his hair, you can even rename him! He’s all yours and he can’t do anything to stop you! You bought him, after all.

the line "rag doll for sale" is firstly a call back to 2x03 to Lestat's comment about the "grubs" and how he wished to maintain his "jabot collar" and not end up in rags like the Children of Darkness. when Lestat mentions "for sale" he is talking about Armand's principles. he is calling Armand a SELL OUT who adapts and develops his own interpretation of the Great Laws when it is beneficial to him, and switches sides depending on who grants him survival. something that is repeatedly called out in s2, even with Daniel's line in 2x06 of "Maitre in the bedroom? or maitre only when it's hot or convenient?" in Paris, Armand gives the pretence that he has allowed Louis to have power over him ("are you sure about that, Arun?" 2x04) because he is getting what he wants from him (a committed relationship) so he completely ignores the fact he was supposed to kill both Louis and Claudia in accordance with the Great Laws, because he is personally benefitting. however, the minute Louis begins acting outside this limited power he has been given, Armand immediately sides with the coven once more "they gave him a choice, and he chose." 2x06 and then conspires to kill Louis, Claudia and Madeleine. his attempt to defend himself in 2x08 says everything you need to know about Armand's tendencies as a sell out: "it was [Louis] or my coven of two hundred years, and i could not count on your love on lasting as long." HAD Louis not still been in love with Lestat, had Louis entered their relationship out of genuine love for Armand and NOT to initially protect Claudia, Armand is saying right here that he would have violated the Great Laws for him! that is a demonstration of his hypocrisy as the 'Big Boss'.

then these two lines show Lestat demonstrating Armand's pattern of behaviour. he says, "Big Boss wants to get you in his bed" this is a reference to how BOTH Lestat and Louis had people (Nicky and Claudia) who were used as "bait" to "ensare" them into *beginning* a relationship with Armand. ("are you inviting me in?" / "that depends. are you going to kill me or not?" 2x03) and the line "his kisses put me in a coma" is Lestat clearly referencing the murky underside to Armand's obsession with Lestat.

and of course, the most obvious lines are "if you're a boo-boo then he doesn't want you"/" only the Big Boss gets to decide who gets to stay alive and who dies." the former being reference to Nicky and Claudia as Armand only ever saw them as liabilities and weaknesses to the coven. and the latter being once again a reference to Armand's hypocrisy. he is saying here that at the trial HE SHOULD HAVE ALSO BEEN SENTENCED. "she is of my blood. i broke the second law. when you sentence them for their crimes, you sentence me, too." (2x07) except Armand doesn't have Lestat killed as well because he is too obsessed with him to let him die, so he gives him a free pass on execution despite the fact (under the pressure of Louis) HE is Claudia's MAKER. the literal person who made her at "fourteen years old."

of course Armand's sexual history is a very tragic aspect to his character and informs a lot of his current behaviour, but the assumption that EVERYTHING has to be about the fact he was Arun/Amadeo gets tedious because there is a LOT more to his character than just that. you must remember that the Amadeo/Arun element to him is 100% about his victimhood, but 'Armand' is also reflective of his role as perpetrator. Armand from his experiences understands how power works, *cough cough* looking at you Bench Scene in 2x04, and he knows how to manipulate it to get what he wants. only ever picturing him as vulnerable as he was during the Amadeo/Arun days really stifles the other elements of his character (the gremlin ones) that i personally love to see.

But that one line still conjures that image. Given the number of references to the state Armand was in when he first met Lestat, yes that line is a reference to his cult days. But Armand’s history with sexual abuse is so prevalent and colours so much of his ability to make rational decisions that it’s absolutely not incorrect to interpret the line that way in addition to it referencing the Children of Darkness. There has been no point in this show where anyone involved in it has said “this is the singular way to interpret this aspect of the show and everything else is wrong.” That’s not what Sam said in that very short clip. I mean Rolin won’t even officially say how many lies he thinks Armand told overall, he just offered his take (which I am inclined to agree with.) Everything is open to interpretation and there have been a number of references to that very idea hidden throughout this season. Daniel says as much himself when talking about Claudia’s diaries being published in the book. Once you put it out there, they decide what it is.

That obviously doesn’t mean anything anyone interprets is plausible, but considering how many people came to this conclusion on their own, I am inclined to think it is a viable one even if it isn’t Lestat’s core intention with the line or the song. Especially when the show really hasn’t gotten into Armand’s backstory, aside from the Louvre scene, and we are clearly building up to introducing Marius. It’s not a leap at all to get there.

It isn’t just rags that are mentioned, it is specifically a rag doll and whether used as a verb or, in this context, a noun, it still comes with that same connotation I described in my initial post. This entire song is filled with lines with layered meaning (that’s why it’s my favourite so far) and it is absolutely not out of character for Lestat to be insensitive enough to imply something like this, even unintentionally which is the direction I’m leaning in now. Again, I’ll mention his cosying up to Marius despite knowing exactly what Armand was put through. In the book, he ditches Armand after blaming him for being a slave to Marius and to the cult. He’s not afraid to be a dick.

It’s true there is this tendency to focus too much on Arun/Amadeo and let Armand get away with with his awful acts. But on the flip side, there is a tendency to treat him as far more deliberate in his actions than he actually is. He is such an incredibly impulsive person, he isn’t this mastermind people keep pretending he is and the fixation some (not you, I really like your analysis) people have on vilifying him more than the other characters is equally tiring. Jacob said something beautiful recently about how any of these characters could be a villain in a lesser story, but in this one it’s Armand, at least in season 2 (the full quote is so incredibly insightful, which isn’t surprising considering it’s Jacob.)

Armand is a bad person. Lestat is a bad person. They are all bad people.

Too good to leave in the tags. I hope you don’t mind @traumatizedimmortals let me know if you do and I’ll delete.