#tlv

I’m not interested in a conversation about morals. These characters are not good people, and we know that Louis and Daniel (so far in the show) were terrible to vulnerable people before they were even turned into vampires. (In fact, this behavior is why Lestat is attracted to Louis in the first place.) I just think it’s interesting how the show is portraying trauma cycles. Armand says that he makes sure Daniel’s victim “makes it home,” which sounds almost tender, considering that he could have just dumped him somewhere after wiping his memory. Does Armand feel for the victim? If so, it does not outweigh his protectiveness over Daniel.

In an earlier episode, Lestat mocks Armand’s CSA in a song; Louis mocks it during the infamous fight in San Francisco. Armand himself chooses the word “donated” instead of “pimped,” which sounds less aggressive. I can’t tell how clear Armand’s understanding is of his past traumas, but I just find it interesting, in his relationship with Daniel, that he knows Daniel can be sexually violent and yet helps him—not the victim but Daniel—deal with the “event,” as he puts it (which is another way of softening language around something horrible).

I’m interested to see where they take this storyline. Based on the way Daniel reacts to Lestat’s song for Armand, I can’t see him being Marius’s biggest fan even though Daniel is guilty of violating vulnerable people, too. In terms of violations, Armand, so far, seems to be most guilty (participating in Claudia and Madeline’s deaths aside) of violating people’s minds, although I doubt he sees it that way. (He should, but I don’t think he does.)

Anyway, I’d like to know what other people think. I hope we can be thoughtful about it, though. This show is good at pressing people’s buttons, for a variety of reasons, and many people have a favorite villain (because that’s all we can choose from, which is also interesting).

✶ horror heart locket acrylic keychains series 6 ✶

the vampire lestat, saw, the passenger, mulholland drive, twilight & buffy the vampire slayer

☆ preorders are open !! / £3 each

☆ ww shipping from the uk 🇬🇧

🖤 preorders end: july 31st 🖤

Did someone say, "White Woman Jumpscare"?

Sorry, that was flippant, but I needed to get it out of my system.

For really real,... there has been heavy discourse. Imma weigh in.

**SPOILERS** for The Vampire Lestat, 1x04 **SPOILERS**

TRIGGER WARNING In addition to the expected topics in vampire stories, Armand's backstory involves child sex trafficking.

Big Boss

In Lestat's diss track, he compares Armand to a "rag doll for sale" and a lot of people are having big feelings about it.

1.) Some people think it's meant to refer to Armand being trafficked as a child and is therefore mocking CSA.

2.) Other people say Lestat would never do that because he was assaulted by Magnus. Sam Reid claims Lestat wouldn't use this subject to hurt Claudia, so it also means he wouldn't do it to Armand.

3.) Still others claim that if he did it,... who cares? It's just Armand. Armand deserves it, Armand is his enemy, and this is a show about evil vampires who kill people, etc.

So did he do it? Well, I'm going to address these in reverse order. For the drama and suspense!

It's Just Armand

Is it? Just Armand? Because I think if people genuinely care about this -- not just in a Edward vs Jacob kind of way, but sincerely -- being upset that their protagonist used a person's trauma from being sold into slavery and prostituted as a child to publicly humiliate them, it isn't because no one explained that the person "deserved" it.

In fact, if you say that and people think you mean it, one of two reactions could happen: either they think, "maybe I deserved it, too" or "wow, I do not trust you now."

The point is, it's a line, and if he doesn't mind crossing it, yeah, people will judge him harshly! Especially if they thought he would never.

But Lestat Would Never!

Really? I don't know if I'm convinced. Generally, Lestat is more focused on joy than sadism, so it's mostly not within his nature to roll around in the gutter, but when he goes low? He goes to hell. He's also ridiculously not woke on account of him being an old guy, so he might not be up on the whole "we don't shame victims" conversation.

Also, while I won't call it canon, the surprisingly insightful and endlessly fascinating prop of the Trial Script suggests there was almost a scene where Lestat very much did publicly roast Armand for being trafficked:

"[...] Louis was now the paramour of the little gremlin, the call-boy, the middling theatre director, the camp follower." -- Lestat, "Trial!"

Now, you may say that someone put words in Lestat's mouth, and it's very possible, but those are all words I can easily imagine Lestat saying. And he said a lot of scripted things in the Trial that people had no trouble believing were improv, myself included.

He did have a writing credit, after all.

The Verdict?

Honestly, I don't think he dunnit!

See, in the books, Lestat once described Armand as looking like a beautiful but neglected doll.

If this is a reference to that, I'm guessing he wanted to emphasize the unkempt part of that to drag him -- his dirty nails, his ragged clothes -- to insult him for his appearance when he was a Child of Darkness, but I don't think he meant what people think he meant.

Also, the lyrics in this track are sweaty as hell, the Watsonian explanation is likely that Lestat rushed to alter Salamander's song, "Big Bus" into a hit piece in a short amount of time so he could ambush Armand at the next concert. I'm guessing "for sale" was just a cheap way to rhyme "those nails".