#vc lore

I read your posts about why Eric will be replaced by Luke in later seasons and now I can't unsee it, I'm sure it will happen sooner rather than later. When they mentioned the silver threads (is that the word they used? I'm not sure now) and the concept of the soul I immediately thought of you I was so excited that you had been right about them having to explain that soon. I wanted to ask how do you think the information they gave in the finale (which wasn't much I have to say, at least for a non book reader like me) fits into your theories, I feel like they gave some emphasis again on the bowling balls being orange and violet and I'm torn between thinking it means something and it being just a nod to Daniel's original eye colour.

(Anyway feel free to not answer if you don't have anything to say and excuse me if what I'm asking doesn't make sense it's been a very long week for me and coherent thoughts in English feel very out of my reach right now.)

Hello! 👋🏾

So first of all, thank you so much for the kind words! It's nice to hear that my little blog and constant writing about Armand and Daniel helped you to fall in love with their story. 😊

And if you do start reading the books, my big word of advice is not to just skip over or dismiss the Prince Lestat Trilogy. Especially Prince Lestat and the Realms of Atlantis. The show is pulling in so much lore from -- and revealed in -- that book in particular, especially when it comes to souls and spirits.

Many like to dismiss that book because "lol, aliens!" which, yes, is quite weird, and, at many times, feels like a separate thing from the VC in many ways, as I said in my own review of that book.

But the lore surrounding souls and spirits in that book is very solid, in my opinion. And it is that book that had me seeing how they were very likely about to maybe do what I think they are going to do with Eric and Luke when I finally read it.

Because yes, once you see it, you can't unsee it. Which is, again, why I held off saying it all for as long as I did. But once I saw the show really begin to start going into the lore about souls from PLatRoA, as I suspected they'd have to when it came to the larger story the show is telling, because they are doing the books when it comes to all of that, well -- 😅

So yes, if you are not a book reader, the hints the show has begun to give about all of this will, rightfully, all go completely over your head right now, if you haven't already been told about it beforehand.

What we got this season was just the beginning of the setup about it all, in my opinion, that will be expounded upon going into next season. With Raglan saying what he said to Daniel, which was about "the evidence of the soul's existence, meaning beyond mortality," as well as Lestat's mention about "Silver Threads," and that being an illusion to The Silver Cord, being seeds laid towards explaining all of it:

Because all of this will have to be explained to the general show-only audience watchers, if what is coming with Akasha and Amel is to make any sense for those groups of viewers.

And once I read PLatRoA, I immediately began to think the show was going to use Daniel's character as a means to explain all of it to that side of the audience.

Because it would be a way to show it all and not just tell it all, by using a character that the audience is already familiar with as a means to do so, as well as giving his character an actual, real story arc, which didn't happen with his book counterpart, after the Devil's Minion chapter.

As I said in my other posts regarding Luke and how/why I think this is all going to happen, Daniel's character did next to nothing after Queen of the Damned. His becoming a vampire had no impact on the larger story after that, at all.

So I can completely see the show changing things up and doing something like this with Daniel's character instead. Not only because it would help begin to more deeply explain all these concepts about souls and the Silver Cord that the show slowly begun to start bringing in this season, but also because it would give Daniel's character not only a story arc, but a unique connection to things that will be happening within the larger stories the show looks set to adapt regarding Queen of the Damned and Tale of the Body Thief.

Because, as I think Season 3 showed, Daniel being a vampire really didn't amount to much. The show never really explored this with him at all during this whole season, nor do I think they ever really intended to.

Daniel, quite frankly, could have remained human for all that we saw him actually do in Season 3, and it wouldn't have changed anything major, in my opinion.

Yeah, not even the reveal of his vampire bond with Daniel. Because, as I've written about before, I think we saw a hint back in Season 2 that they already had the manifestation of that bond even before Daniel got turned. So they could have still done that moment as well, if they had wanted to ... even though doing so would have opened up way more questions than the show was willing to explore this season with Armand and Daniel, so okay. This is the one thing the show likely wouldn't have done with Daniel, and revealed this season, if Daniel had still been left human.

Anyway, "[...] brief, incidental life as a vampire," indeed.

So yeah, I think going this way with Daniel's character not only gives him more of an arc, that doesn't just have him as one more vampire among other vampires, but also really connects him into the larger story the show is telling.

As well as subvert the expectations some, including myself for a time, had that the show would simply body-swap him in some way, at some point.

Because going this way with him is not a body swap. And it is all, very much, still Daniel. Just, well, now existing differently.

And as we just saw with Claudia in EP306, spirits can very much touch and interact with living people and physical objects around them, which is also true with many of the spirits/ghosts in the books.

So, going this way with Daniel isn't going to limit his character in any way regarding what they may have planned for him and Armand together either.

So yeah, the info we got during the whole season regarding these things, along with what we got about it in the finale (Lestat's mention of seeing "Silver Threads" as he began to fade into death made me smile), still has me very much thinking that this is the route the show is going with Daniel's character. And I think we'll start seeing the show dive more into it all with him in Season 4.

Especially now that, via a recent interview with Rolin, we look set to finally get Daniel's POV in Season 4 as well.

... now all that said? I think the bowling ball thing was a red herring, and just an easter egg regarding Daniel's book-canon eye color and his current eye color. Because, if you look, multiple bowling balls were sitting around in the colors of orange, violet, and mixed together when Daniel was in the bowling alley in the finale.

I mean, people can but I don't think it is a "must".

For those of you who want some of the things I caught in it, like lore hints etc, here is a post on that (written in frustration at the news of cancellation):

Some spoilers below:

So, to start off, I found Jasper's backstory really fascinating. Jasper, being a young child in the 1920s, means that, given how old he appears now, he's actually pretty young for a vampire in my estimation, if he was turned around the same age as the actor playing him. Which would place his turning in either the late 1960s or early 1970s, I would guess.

(Which, come to think of it... the burning of the Amsterdam Motherhouse Library was in 1972. Hmm...)

Meaning yes, Jasper is much younger than even Louis in vampire years, as -- even with the time difference wrt Louis' turning in the show vs the books -- Louis is probably one of the oldest of the American vampires in the show's universe, as was established back in Season 1 of IWTV.

But what I also find fascinating is that the coven Jasper talked about didn't appear to just have vampires as a part of it, either, but humans as well. In the books, the only time humans were seen within a coven of vampires was when they were kept as pets (by Armand) within the Paris theater coven.

But I'm not against the idea that there could have been a coven somewhere in Europe, like Jasper's boyhood one, that had humans in it that were not seen a pets, but more of a family set-up thing. I honestly don't see it as too much of a stretch. Because hell, even in the books, some vampires have human assistance or caretakers who, for many vampires, are seemingly quite beloved of. Hell, in the final book, Blood Communion, the vampire Fontayne tells Lestat about one of his human caretakers of his house, whom he loved and had wished to turn and make his companion. So I wouldn't be surprised if something like this was going on within the coven that little kid Jasper was being raised within. (And, of course, the vampires in the coven did not want to turn Jasper since he was just a child at the time, and were probably just waiting until a time after he'd grown up and lived more or something.)

And what Jasper said about the founding of the Talamansca, while he and Guy were in the room with the ancient vampire whose blood was being slowly drained and sold on the black market. Yes, it is very much true that vampires were part of the founding of the Talamansca ... though it technically was only one vampire, Teskhamen. Though I guess you could also count Hesketh, since she was a vampire, then died and became a ghost. But then she was also technically a witch before she became a vampire, too.

The point is, the Talamasca was technically formed and created by a Vampire, along with a Witch, and a spirit (Gremt Stryker Knollys) as well. And it was the watching and study of those three entities -- Vampires, Witches, and Spirits -- that the Talamansca was tasked with observing and studying.

But the idea that, at the start, the Talamansca in the show's universe, they had these entities working with the humans in the institution, but may have also known who founded it -- which they very much did NOT know in the books -- is new and different. But it's a change I'm not mad about and want to see what kind the story the show is looking to build on with it.

Because, I mean, so far, with this being the way things happened in the show's universe, then I can understand why Jasper is mad at them and how the Talamansca's actions... and inactions... have done harm to him personally.

And I do also think this is all expanding on things from the final three books in the VC, which had Teskhamen, Gremt, and Hesketh begin to try to set things up to stop the Talamansca from focusing on vampires completely, and instead focus on spirits and ghosts. This was one of the threads about the Talamasca that Anne Rice had started setting up in the final trilogy, but never got a chance to expand on and explore, since she was never able to write the three more books she wanted to write after the Prince Lestat trilogy.

But I suspect the Talamsnca show -- as well as the main IWTV/TVL show -- is going to pick up those threads and go somewhere with them. The Talamansca show, in particular, really seems to be picking up things specifically revealed in or alluded to in the final book, Blood Communion IMO.

Especially wrt the thing about iron being able to restrain a vampire. That is something that is straight up only revealed in the final book in the VC series. And if you want to stop a vampire from using the fire gift, spell gift, or killing gift against you, you are also supposed to cover their eyes with iron, too, when you restrain them in iron. But given that Checkers was a newborn Revenet, that wasn't necessary in this case.

Wow, I've really gone on a lot about the book lore and where the show is clearly honoring and expanding on it. But I really do find it one of the most fascinating aspects of the show.

I also liked Guy very much in this episode. Sure, it may have been a bit reckless to keep up with the plan when Raglan sussed him out, but hell, I liked seeing Guy think of a backup way in to try and still do what he came to do.

Even though I was wrong about him trying to play Jasper about the book. He apparently really does think the 752 is that book. Which, IMO, I still say no way is it just a book. But I also don't think it's that USB stick that the cops found either. So who knows what or where it is. 🤷🏾‍♀️ But I hope we at least find out what it is before the season is over in 2 episodes. 🤨

Raglan... oh Raglan James. Thank you so much, show, for making it crystal clear that that man is out for himself and only himself.

Going away from the Talamansca show for a moment, I always felt that Raglan sought out Daniel in Season 2 of IWTV for his own personal purposes and reasons, not because the Talamansca asked him to or something. Hell, I kind of think even the publishing of the IWTV book wasn't the main goal behind his seeking Daniel out; doing so was just an opportunity within his main goal of making contact with Daniel, IMO.

Though the Talamasca show didn't make it too clear that Raglan worked for or was part of the Amsterdam Motherhouse. He clearly knew right away Guy was lying when he used that woman to pose as someone who was from the Amsterdam Motherhouse, so I guess it can be inferred that Raglan is part of that Motherhouse, but...

Lots of grousomeness in this episode as well, but I liked it. I think this show can benefit from leaning even more into the Gothic Horror aspects of the source material it's pulling from.

As to the other characters, I wouldn't call Doris fascinating, but I am curious what's going to be revealed about what she is. Because, again, I don't at all think she's a witch. Helen, I'm okay with being a B-story plotline, but if it moves to the A-storyline next week, I'm not sure I'm going to find it as interesting as I do as the Jasper-Guy-752 plot... unless it contains as much lore and worldbuilding as that plotline does. But I'm just not sure yet that it will. And as for Olive, she was sadly just a rather non-entity this week. 😑

Hi!

So I've talked about Alice a bit before, but not in a way that fully examined what we learn about her and Daniel's daughter(s) between what we learn in Season 1 vs Season 2.

Because there are things we learn between the two seasons that, IMO, appear to contradict each other.

So, to answer this question, let me first start with Alice herself.

Now, I'm someone who thinks Alice is a real person. And that she and Daniel were married and probably had at least one kid together at some point.

The problem, however, comes with the date of her pregnancy, given by the show in Season 2. Because Louis flat-out says Alice announced to Daniel that she was pregnant in 1985.

However, the car seat line from Season 1 suggests that Daniel and his "ex-wife" had a kid sometime between 1978-79. And everyone (including me) just assumed that Alice was the mother of that child.

Because while we know Daniel had a second ex-wife, we know from episode 1x02 that Alice was Daniel's first wife (per him saying so himself), so the child born seven years before car seats were mandatory in 1985 was either Alice's -- or some unknown woman whom Daniel never married.

Which, yes, is a possibility, but -- at the moment -- we have zero indication if such a situation was remotely the case. Plus, it was Daniel's ex-wife who said Daniel never owned the type of car he had his daughter in, which kinda indicates that it was the girl's mother who made this remark. Which, again, given the timeline, would point to Alice.

However, if the child were Alice's, it would mean that Alice and Daniel would have already had a kid when Alice announced her pregnancy in 1985. A kid who would have been around six or seven years old at the time.

Yet, at the moment, there doesn't seem to be any indication that Daniel and Alice had a six or seven-year-old daughter around during that time in 1985.

And I think mentioning that, if it were the case, would've been notable to do, given that it would've meant that the 1985 pregnancy would've been Alice's second.

And, if so, that would mean that she and Daniel weren't married at that point, even though they would, given what was said about the car seat, have had one child by that point, with a second one now on the way.

Because another big thing to note, IMO, is that 1985 was also supposedly the year that Daniel proposed to Alice. However, note the memory of that event that Louis reads from Daniel's mind in episode 2x02. In that memory, Alice supposedly said "no" to the marriage proposal.

Yet, we know she and Daniel did get married, given that he, in that very same episode, notes that she and he got divorced in Staten Island.

So, with those discrepancies, the first big key point here that I want to point out is that it was Daniel's editor who said it was "seven years before car seats were invented" when Daniel talked about remembering having his daughter in a car seat in the back of the Buick.

All Daniel's "ex-wife" (because that is all she is identified as in the book's passage) said about the incident was that Daniel never owned a Buick.

Now, this all comes directly from Daniel's memoir, as Louis reads the passage from it about this whole thing. And a thing that others, even before me, pointed out is that Daniel's memoir is the one book in all the dust jackets of his published works that was not published by the same publisher, Catalina Imprints.

Instead, Daniel's memoir was published by Roman Weiss. Meaning it was likely edited by them, too.

This is the same publishing house that also appears to have published the Interview with the Vampire book in the show's universe as well.

And we have spoilers regarding how Daniel feels about the editing and publishing of that book.

Like a few other people, I've been thinking for a long while now that the name "Roman Weiss" is an alias for Marius de Romanus, Armand's maker. Because I've also thought for a long while now that Marius is the one who fogged, blocked, and rewrote Daniel's memories.

And Marius, being the one behind the editing and publishing of Daniel's memoir, would fit right into that, IMO.

Because, as Daniel himself confessed, his memories of the 1970s are a total blur. So he really wouldn't be able to contradict anything his editor might have said about that decade.

But also, that would account for the discrepancy between that car seat line (implying the child was born in 1978-79) and then Louis revealing the year that Alice said she was pregnant (1985 -- the exact same year car seats were made mandatory).

Because while Daniel knows his memories of the 1970s are a blur, I don't think he has yet realised that his memories of (part of) the 1980s appear -- at the moment -- to be a confusing mess of contradictions.

As I said above, I do think Alice is real and exists, and that Daniel did marry her. However, I also think that some of Daniel's memories that he thinks are about Alice are actually about Armand. The memory of the rejected marriage proposal, in particular, I think, was about Armand. (And wasn't about a marriage proposal, per se, but about the vampire equivalent of that.)

Personally, my theory is that Daniel's relationship with Alice overlapped with his relationship with Armand sometime around the mid-1980s (1984-85), which -- going by the Devil's Minion chapter in the books -- would coincide with the time frame when Daniel started running away from Armand again because he was depressed, hurt, and bitter that Armand continued to refuse to turn him into a vampire.

And which I've long predicted that the show is going to make it a bit more complicated on Daniel's part by weaving the AIDS crisis into his feelings about Armand refusing to turn him.

Because HIV/AIDS testing wasn't available at all until, guess when?

March of 1985.

Yeah, 1985. The same year that car seats became mandatory for young children. The same year that Alice announced she was pregnant and Daniel was fully apathetic about it when she did.

And yes, 1985. The same year that Daniel proposed to "Alice," and was rejected. However, unlike his reaction to Alice's pregnancy announcement, he was clearly emotionally hurt by that rejection "Alice" gave him to that proposal in a very deep way, even over 35 years later, to the point of visibly breaking down over it when forced to confront the memory of it by Louis.

And side note, yes, this could also likely mean that Daniel would have been having unprotected sex with Alice while he was maybe still under the fear that he might be HIV positive without knowing. It really just depends on when in 1985 Alice got pregnant (like, if it was at least after March).

But I've never said I thought Daniel Molloy made only good choices in his life during that time period. And I don't think the show has been setting Daniel's character up with him having done so either. (And there were a lot of misconceptions about AIDS back then in the 1980s, too, including thinking that those who engaged in hetero-sex couldn't get it.)

BTW, in the books, it was also in the year 1985 that Marius and Armand finally reunited for the first time since the Children of Satan kidnapped him and took him away. Because yes, technically, Armand and Marius didn't reunite until the events with Akasha went down. But, at least right now, I am very much of the belief that the show has changed that part behind the time when they did reunite, but not changed the time period/year from the book in which they did.

So yes, I still think Marius and Armand reunited in 1985, as in the books. And all the subsequent years afterward -- where Daniel and Armand were apart -- will also be equivalent to the 20-or-so years they spent apart in the books. Which is when Daniel was with, and under the care of, Marius.

BTW, in the books, Daniel was turned by Armand into a vampire early, before sunrise, on October 31st, 1985.

Only, in the show's universe, Daniel wasn't turned because Akasha never rose -- and Daniel probably wasn't dying either -- to force the situation of Armand having to do so. Instead, IMO and theory, Marius took the situation into his own hands and forced a separation between them by altering Daniel's memories -- blocking or altering all memories of Armand in them.

And hence, IMO, the meaning behind Armand's comment in episode 2x06 about Daniel being "abandoned." Because, despite how powerful and strong in both the mind and spell gift Armand is, that power would be no match for Marius', who is a Child of the Millennia. (Meaning a vampire who is at least over 1000 years old. Marius is over 2000 years old.)

So, IMO, if Marius was the one behind it, then there really would have been nothing -- at the time -- for Armand to do to reverse it.

Except for maybe if Armand (or any other vampire in truth) turned Daniel into a vampire. (Because if the show sticks to the book's lore on this, Daniel being turned would've brought back all his real memories in place of the ones that were altered, fogged, and clouded over, just like it did for the character of Jesse Reeves in the book QotD when she was turned.)

Because, IMO, Marius would very much be of the idea that either Armand be the one who turns Daniel into one of them, or let him go. Just like he vowed to let Bianca go when he at first decided not to turn her, and found Armand instead to make and groom him into being his companion.

And while, in the books, Marius took it into his own hands to turn Armand's human charges, Sybelle and Benji, when Armand was clearly never going to, I can very well see -- in the show -- Marius not being in such a place to have done such a thing with Daniel. And instead, thinking that, if Armand fully wants to keep Daniel as a companion, then Armand should turn Daniel.

And that, when it became clear that Armand was never going to do so, well . . .

And after altering Daniel's memories, IMO Marius kept himself around, especially in case something regarding Daniel's memories came up again.

Such as, IMO, the writing, editing, and publishing of Daniel's memoir.

So anyway, yes, at the moment I do think both of Daniel's daughters exist. (And my theory is that they are half-sisters, each with a different mother -- which is something I've thought about them since Season 1, honestly -- one from each ex-wife.)

I just think one of them -- the eldest of the two -- was not born seven years before car seats were mandatory. I think that was very much something Daniel's "editor" threw in to try and confuse Daniel himself about what he remembered.

With that "editor" in question, IMO, being Marius -- the same person who IMO fogged, blocked, and rewrote Daniel's memories in the first place.

And we know his daughters don't even speak to him anymore. So Daniel being off on one -- or even both -- of their ages isn't in any way unbelievable, IMO. The memoir in question could have very well been written, edited, and published after Daniel's daughters had already stopped speaking to him.

Just read your new chapter and it's so beautifully written and compelling. I had a question though. How did Magnus make Lestat love him? Was it because he is his maker? I guess what I’m trying to ask is it your perception that AR involuntarily love their makers? I read something somewhere else on Tumblr that was arguing that Louis only loves Lestat because he is his maker. I don't know much about TVC vamp lore, but I know the sire bound is a common concept within other vampire universes. Thanks!

Glad you liked!

In short: no.

With Lestat and Magnus... that is something that Anne hid in the chapter of Lestat's turning, I invite you to read it.

But it's not a general thing, no.

Madeleine didn't feel the same love, Claudia did not feel that kind of love either. Bruce didn't. Lestat turned people for others, and for very different reasons. Et cetera. This is not a "normal" thing that happens, this is not something that "bonds" them.

Anne put that interesting ... switch in there (and one she picked up later), but that's not a general thing. I invite you to read that chapter in The Vampire Lestat - the show expanded that very much written as a rape scene/turning into a week (and I'm sure season 3 will be harrowing in this aspect). Making Lestat love Magnus... was another way of rape. Another way of abuse. Something to bind Lestat to him, to force him. Abuse is a common theme for Lestat - and the show.

With the available text that carries repercussions.

But it is not a general thing for them, no. The VC differs here from other vampire lore, and it would be good to remember that. Fledglings are not "bound" to their makers. The... "only" thing is that they cannot "hear" them directly. And that certain people put up certain rules, and are ... sometimes in the position to enforce them.

When Lestat says to Louis that they are connected through a cord he speaks of the silver cord - and their love, which supersedes that.