#daniel asks

The only vampires he dealt with were Louis and Armand, who are fundamentally different people than Lestat. Show also very clearly says that Daniel unwillingly judged the book by its cover, the way fandom currently does the same (very meta). Louis is seen as deeper, more intellectual, while Lestat is a dumb blond, a trashy rockstar. Daniel doesn't see Lestat beyond prejudice and expected backstory that Daniel came up with himself, partially based on Louis' inaccurate description.

We have very telling bit where Lestat is trying to explain the meaning of his songs and inspirations behind them, including books, sculptures, painting etc. and Daniel interrupts him with juvenile mocking.

Of course, can't forget Daniel's choice of words regarding Lestat: "crack his cheeks", "blowup doll". They're extremely vulgar and rape-y. He views Lestat as beneath him because of how sexually free Lestat is, and clearly is under impression that since Lestat acts "like that", he has right to be intrusive towards him.

Daniel believes that interviewing Lestat is his right, that he earned it by saving Lestat, and Lestat is being difficult on purpose and unfair by denying him private information. Meanwhile, Lestat letting Daniel see even a glimpse of his past is a gift. He has every right to not tell him anything at all. You can clearly see how disappointed Lestat was in ep3 when Daniel went overboard with questions.

And in ep4, instead of acknowledging his mistake, Daniel digs his heels in with Lestat. And Lestat is not entertaining it. "Do you want me to play dumb like your maker and pretend you’re two steps ahead of me?”. Don't get me wrong, Lestat has his own shit he needs to unpack. But I love that Daniel can't magically fix anything by pointing out inconsistency in Lestat's story. This isn't story about egoistical old vampire being taking down a peg by a fledgling.

I love it too, anon! I wasn't really expecting Daniel to be bullying Lestat all season exactly, but I'd thought they'd get along better than they are? It's really working for me that they're not though, and I agree that the combination of Daniel's own problems and hubris are getting in the way, as well as the book of course, but also the fact that Daniel really just has no idea how to handle Lestat at all. It's so interesting too how there's a sense of entitlement over Lestat's story having gotten Louis', and it makes you wonder how much he feels a sense of ownership over it having, well, already written parts of it, albeit from another perspective.

I was actually thinking about it the other night, but one of the fun things is that I do think how Louis and Lestat in particular respond to Daniel tells us a lot about not just who they are as characters, but their respective backgrounds. Louis does respond to provocation, and yes, that's partially because his goal in his interview was to get to the truth, but it's also, I think, because provocation both allows him the release he often needs as an often very controlled person, but also I think he sees being challenged and being able to push back as a reclamation of personal power. He's denied that for the entirety of his mortal life due to his subjugation, and so the push-pull of that does become a sort of spar that he enjoys.

Lestat doesn't respond to provocation though, Lestat shuts down, crashes out, lashes out or all three. Lestat was raised in an environment where provocation was a one-way street to humiliation or to violence ("Are you a good boy, Lestat?" / "Say cabbage one more time.") and the result is that it sets him offside almost immediately. It was such a funny thing re-watching 3.03, because Lestat actually says at the start of the interrogation you be gentle with me, Dan, which while he says it patronisingly - - kind of is the best way to handle Lestat in that sort of process? Like yes, he needs to be challenged too, of course he does, but getting Lestat to open up usually does require a lighter touch, which I think we see a little of in the band, Fareed and even Christine, who's not exactly a light touch, haha, but she's one who takes defending him seriously which you can see, I think, that matters to him.

And ohoho, the way Daniel talks about him!! I've probably got an essay in me about that after the season. I'm always fascinated with how the show explores rape culture generally, and none of the characters have been immune to perpetuating it - Lestat himself calling Armand in this last ep a 'rag doll for sale' in Big Boss is a lot! - but Daniel's soaked in it this season, both the two examples that you used, but the two times now he's outright 'asked' Lestat about him giving head, first with Louis in Black Licorice, as Lestat tries to actually explain the lyrics, and again now with the man in Italy Gabi fucked in 3.04. It's super interesting, and does feel more aggressive than it's been in the past.

Hi anon!!! You shouldn’t worry about sending me anything that feels dark, I’m always interested in talking about toxic relationships and unhealthy dynamics where there’s a lot of obsession and jealousy. Like when desire becomes all-consuming and self-destructive. I find that so interesting. Also I love this ask because I don’t see this kind of meta about Daniel too often, and I think it’s so insightful and so in keeping with how I see him too!

So I find the idea of Daniel naturally falling into abusive relationships with men so apt because of everything he went through in the KK films. I’ve actually posted about this before, that I think Daniel would quickly come to associate his attraction to men with violence because of the experiences he had at such a formative age that blended rage and desire. First of all there’s his experience with Johnny. Like I see Daniel as having this big crush on Johnny when he meets him, there's this instant frisson and tension between them, but Johnny just hates him and does everything he can to hurt and humiliate him. Like going so far as almost killing him! Then almost breaking his leg at the tournament. Then there’s Chozen, who’s also extremely cruel & belittling to Daniel and who hurts him on multiple occasions. And of course we have Terry, who lies to Daniel, isolates and manipulates him, abuses him, and makes him think he’s special before revealing it was all a sadistic game to try to break him as much as possible. 

So imagine being a young queer teenager and all of your experiences with the men you’re attracted to are intensely negative, where they openly hate and hurt you, or they play with you like you’re some kind of toy. How would that impact your self-esteem and affect your future relationships? I can see Daniel going through this and really believing that maybe he just deserves to be treated this way, and that there’s something about him that makes men angry. And because of this I can definitely see him falling into relationships with men who treat him badly, and not stopping to ask himself why or tell himself he deserves better because he’s never experienced anything else. So if he’s hurt or belittled, he thinks that it’s normal, and if it’s not normal for other couples, then it is for him because he deserves it. And if men desire him, of course it’s tinged with violence, because it always has been. So he doesn’t see it as abuse, it’s just his natural dynamic with men.

And I think even later once he’s with Amanda, and things aren’t like that, and they’re good and healthy, he doesn’t stop to think, “oh, this is how it should always be,” because his relationships with women have always been positive. They’ve always been soft and romantic, like with Ali and Kumiko, whereas his relationships with men have always been violent and tumultuous. So again he never really stops to think about it or has the self-awareness to see himself as a victim of abuse. Or ever really reflects on why he’s scared of being with men again, like why the thought of it fills him with dread. He just associates that part of his sexuality with violence and with being hurt. And blames himself for everything that was done to him because that's the reasoning he's been fed his entire life, since he was 16.

I also think it’s extremely insightful of you to say that people in the fandom can often use abuser rhetoric when it comes to Daniel. I’ve seen an increase in people on tumblr say really cruel and baseless things about Daniel, calling him a bitch; that he was provocative and meddlesome; that he was asking for it; that he knew what he was doing; that he doesn’t have trauma, he’s just being dramatic; that he's an unreliable narrator etc, and I’m like… these are all the things people call women after they’ve been sexually assaulted or abused by men. I hate the victim blaming and I hate the lack of self-awareness when people say these things. Esp when Johnny in contrast is then put on a pedestal and all his worst flaws are forgiven.

(x)

Early into the interview, Daniel already started to find/point out incongruencies in Louis' recollection and it really drove it home the whole theme of unrealiable narrator(s) -- and it continued, he kept finding them (and/or we are given hints as to whereabouts the things are not totally clear like with sudden change in clothing etc.) -- I LOVE this storytelling that goes beyond telling the audience what it's about, iwtv excels at showing.

I'm following your rewatch and it's making me fall in love with the show all over again!

(x)

It's so good, anon, and I love how early they really establish that, particularly given this is the episode where we get our first real moments where Louis' memories are pointedly fallible (Rolin has to be one of the most patient writers in the world to seed the bit with the tractor salesman in 1.02 and not pay it off until 2.08). It's so satisfying, and makes me simultaneously very excited and full of dread that TVL is being split in two too, haha.

This is so sweet. Rolin truly has a way with words. I love how tangibly passionate and proud he is of Daniel. And what a treat to have a boss like this!

(x)

The Australian in me is leaping out here, because I didn't register those pumpkins as Halloween-related at all, in my head I automatically defaulted to fruit-and-veg stall markers, haha 🙈(in my defense, they're not carved!). That does make more sense though! I wonder if that means that it'll be Halloween 2024? If we use the Cowboy Carter tour as the marker rather than the ticket sale notification, that was April-July 2025, so if we're set before that October '24 could potentially make-sense? So maybe the rough timeline is more like:

14 June 2022 - Interview starts

Late June 2022 - Louis goes back to NOLA and reunites with Lestat

Potentially early-mid 2024 - book released? If the pic in the article is deliberately from the same interview, maybe June 2024 given Daniel's line in 2.08 about it being four months since release? If that's the case, Louis' challenge to the other vamps would happen before Lestat finds out.

October 2024 - Lestat finds out.

Halloween 2025 - something happens, whether that's the attack on the concert, or something else?