#and they don't have the excuse of being Louis's POV because even in his POV Louis never denied that Lestat loved Claudia

[sharonccrter]

Do you think there’s still a way they can fully redeem Lestat’s character for those viewers that don’t get past 1x05? I’ve never read the books so it kinda annoyed me that they would add a scene like this and potentially ruin the future of the character without it even being canon. I felt there was a chance they could have retconned it as a memory manipulation or something (I was fully expecting the memory to be a mesh of what Armand did to Lestat in the books (presumably??)) but that’s not gonna happen now.

Tbh it doesn’t bother me personally, I loved the apology scene and that it was clearly shown as something inexcusable and Lestat himself acknowledges it, but im not sure if it’s enough.

Another thing that I think the writers were trying to portray but some people aren’t really seeing is that Louis is a bit of a hypocrite. He attacks Lestat pretty brutally for putting hands on Claudia, but he himself does it later in the show. And then he excuses Armand for threatening Claudia and also doing the exact same thing?? But a lot of the audience won’t see those things as wrong because of how graphic and horrible that drop scene was in comparison (Which it totally was, it’s just that the writers don’t seem to see that they’re not comparable?).

On the other hand, I like Lestat being a complex character. There’s a lot they can do in s3 with his back story (I. e. Cycles of abuse with his father and maker that they hinted at). But I feel like there’s a big portion of the audience that won’t be accepting of it.

Basically I feel like the writers are a bit out of touch with their audience and how they’re writing is perceived, which is worrisome going forward😬

Sigh. This turned into a a word vomit and I apologize lmao but I was curious on your take

Eh, some people will never get over it, and that's their loss; in my opinion, they haven't ruined anything about Lestat's character. Yes, the scene was not in the book, but I understand why they did it, even if I'm not in love with the idea. It was for shock value but also to give Lestat more of an 'arc'.

I think it comes down to the fact that none of the characters are good people, Lestat has always been a deeply morally grey character who's done fucked up things, but he's such a compelling and exciting character that Anne Rice literally made him the main character and wrote 14 books from his POV.

She never claimed he was a good person, but he is a good character to write and read about. And yes, while I don't excuse Lestat's actions towards Louis. I do agree it's hypocritical for fans to say, "Louis was justified to act violently to Lestat because he laid hands on Claudia," when Louis has also laid hands on Claudia himself. Not to mention, Louis sat back and let Armand treat Claudia badly, and when she called him out, he had the audacity to say, "That doesn't sound like him."

Louis has always centred himself as the victim of the story. He even admits in episode 2x07 that he made himself more passive in the telling of how Claudia was made. Because he wasn't ready to face the bad shit he's done, and that's Louis's whole freaking character. I have to be honest here, Anon. I hated Louis in book 1; I do love him in the show because Jacob Anderson has done a fantastic job, but sometimes I just meh about the character.

If Lestat has a lot to atone for, and he does, he's not a good person, then Louis has a lot to atone for, too. I mean, hell, I even love Armand, the messy bitch that he is, because they're all bad people; that's literally point. And Yes, some people may not be able to get past 1x05, and hey, I do think there is still more to the story since Sam and the writers hinted at it being revisited in S3; but that's their problem.

I don't think the writers are out of touch; I think media literacy is dead, and people just don't know how to have fucking fun anymore. They also clearly don't understand what gothic horror is. But honestly, anon, I'm reaching the point where I don't care. They can either get on board or get off the train.

Also never apologise for sending long anons, happy to chat as long as you like :)

[prouvaireafterdark]

I personally don't think season 3 will or should be Lestat writing his own book. First of all, because of the abuse, I sincerely think any Lestat POV also needs another party present to call him out and not just let the audience assume his side is the truth, otherwise it will seem like the show is implicitly taking the abuser's side of the story (especially after how it framed Daniel's role in digging through Louis's story). Either he will show up to the penthouse and continue the "interview" framing or he will tell his story to Louis so both can be there to hash out what happened between them or something of that sort.

A straight up Lestat POV where he gets to paint himself as the victim would be pretty gross after what we've seen him do honestly and honestly why would the audience take anything he has to say seriously?

Okay I'm gonna be really honest here, unless Louis and Lestat's reunion has already happened and/or he's in a coma in the basement, I have no idea how people expect him to crash the interview at this point. Like it just does not make sense to me that he would just magically appear like that.

Honestly, I would much prefer that Lestat skips the memoir part and becomes a famous rockstar after reading Louis' interview and asks Louis to meet him with his song lyrics/media exposure so he can tell Louis his story himself before the San Francisco concert because that means we get maximum Louis. If Daniel is there to call him out on his bullshit, all the better, but I do want the story from Lestat's lips because the comedy of his narration is just too good to pass up. I've waited 15 years to hear Lestat describe himself with his own clown mouth and I hope season 3 doesn't disappoint.

Also, I just want to mention this because I feel like when people talk about Lestat there's a tendency to think about Lestat discussing his trauma as him painting himself as the victim and it really grates on me because two things can be true at once. Like, Lestat isn't the victim in his relationships with Louis and Claudia, obviously, but he absolutely was a victim. He was horrifically abused and neglected by his family his entire life growing up and was abandoned by every person he ever loved, even his own mother after he saved her life by making her a vampire bc she never wanted to be his mom (or a mom at all) in the first place. He is profoundly fucked up because of these traumatic events and they have a direct relationship to why he was so abusive to Louis and Claudia. Like he's probably got every trauma-induced personality disorder in the DSM-5 and literally cannot regulate his emotions or make himself stop being terrible until Louis hits his hard factory reset button and gives him an intervention by making him rot in the dump for a while so he's forced to think about what he's done.

Does that excuse any of his horrific behavior? No.

Does that mean he shouldn't have to atone for his bad decisions and the pain he's inflicted on other people? No.

Does that mean we should take every word he says as gospel and cast suspicion on Louis and Claudia's narratives? No.

But that doesn't mean every word out of his mouth is a lie either, and honestly, it's not like Lestat ever says "actually, every bad thing Louis and Claudia said I did was a lie because they're liars and I was a perfect father and husband and they tried to kill me for no reason." He fully admits that Claudia was right to kill him and that it's the kind of thing he would have done himself.

And like, in order for there to be a cycle of abuse, one has to first be abused. That's just how it works. And I don't really get why people are so set on erasing Lestat's traumatic history or viewing it as an either/or situation where only one of them is allowed to have been a victim of abuse and that if Lestat is allowed to talk about his abuse in season 3 he's by definition excusing his actions and challenging Louis' narrative.

I feel like part of the point of Anne Rice's work is that these vampires are, all of them, extremely monstrous AND deeply traumatized. They are both victims AND victimizers. It's what makes them so compelling and nuanced. I don't understand why some people want Lestat to be a cartoon villain with no redeeming qualities or path to redemption, and I also don't know why people seem to think that a season 3 from Lestat's perspective can only mean that the audience will not be asked to question or interrogate his perspective the way they've been asked to with Louis and Claudia in season 1.

Like, after everything they made Lestat do in season 1, if you're genuinely worrying that the writers are going to say "none of Louis or Claudia's trauma happened at all and actually Lestat was a perfect, sad angel the whole time who was unjustly wronged by Louis and Claudia and this is something you, the audience, are meant to uncritically believe because Lestat bat his eyelashes while he said it," I literally don't know what to say. It sounds ridiculous because it is.

There's just no way they're doing that and I think everyone should take a breath and stop stressing over it.

[ca-suffit]

So, I'm the anon that asked the "how do you rationalize the violence?" question, btw. Thank you for your answer. I personally believe 2x07's version of the events is closer to the truth (I don't think there's a POV that 100% accurate, but I think that's as accurate as it gets about it), but that doesn't excuse Lestat's violence. Louis might have provoked him, but he had just seen Claudia being chocked and stepped in to defend her. I don't blame him for lack of a better word, 'exploding'. I think I would've done worse if I saw my niece, that isn't even my own child, in that situation. And yes, Lestat has gone through a lot of trauma in the books and the show, and people can argue how that and being turned into a vampire shaped his mind and have this aggressive side he might not be proud of, but it doesn't excuse anything. Because Lestat himself caused a lot of trauma in both Claudia's and Louis' lives. I do hope if the show is going with a loustat endgame (haven't read the books, but from what I've heard, they're canon), they're gonna have Lestat using his infinite lifetime to reflect on that, really earn Louis' forgiveness, be the kind of companion he deserves and never even consider doing it again. If it's possible to redeem him. I don't know if it is, but at least they have the "they have all the time in the world to do that" card. I do hope they try it, though, because making this behavior normalized and recurring would be terrible. I just don't know if it will be convincing and satisfying, but I'll wait I guess. I hope the same for Armand too and that they give him and Assad the grace of flashing out the character instead of demonizing him to make Lestat look better. I hope they also know he'll need and deserve more from the narrative than a half-assed apology, because there will definitely be some double standards about Lestat and Armand. There already are. But I struggle with some other stuff too. Because I love Louis, but he's not innocent either. I also don't believe in punitivism and I don't want to be reducing him and feeding into people that want to stereotype and demonize him, but... Claudia really is the only character that has always been inferior in terms of power imbalances in the dynamics of the show. At least among the main characters. If we consider killing people to feed then it's basically useless because they're vampires and not even the human is innocent because Daniel didn't worry about Malik being lunch. I do think it's a good thing for Louis' accountability that he feels regret and remorse for his worst actions, but I don't believe the fandom does the best job at discussing that. Many times it feels like babying the white character, reducing the characters of color into racial stereotypes of abusive, comparing them, ignoring what's convenient to prop their favorite etc. Like one is always traumatized, misunderstood, trustworthy, ashamed, trying to be better and the other is always wrong, unreliable, overdramatic etc. There doesn't seem to be a lot of nuance on people's interpretations and a safe space to discuss the differences of each moment and dynamic without accidentally feeding characters you love to the lions... Anyway, I'm rambling at this point, I don't even know what I was trying to ask lmao. But thanks for the attention and the previous answer.

(context) u can ramble all u want here tbh.

there *are* a lot of questions to explore and this fandom makes it v hard to do it. despite what the racist side would have u believe, ur not going to get attacked for exploring questions. ppl know whether someone's being intentionally racist or not when trying to talk about these characters.

the thing that the fandom isn't understanding (on purpose) is that having black and brown characters have these complex personalities u can explore is a rly good thing?! racists want u to believe that there's topics we can't talk about bcuz of stuff like saying ppl "need" louis to be "a victim," but all that rly says is "I don't want to have empathy for black ppl but I'm gonna say it another way and blame others for it." nobody here is saying louis, claudia, or armand is off limits to exploring, just don't be fucking racist about it! ppl would rather run off and say the fandom is full of bullies who will call u racist instead of...looking at their own biases? half the time nobody is even saying the word "racist," these ppl apply that shit to themselves in a panic. it'd be funny if it wasn't so harmful.

things to ask urself here are....what is ur definition of "redeemable"? where does that belief come from in the first place? a religion? society? both? what is ur own relationship with abuse and trauma? have u explored what codependency looks like in real relationships? do u understand all the emotions behind these things the characters are doing? why is louis feeling regret and remorse important to u?

I think a lot of confusion and anger over the DV is that ppl only know of one response to it and that's to leave forever. a lot of society is built on v black and white thinking with no emphasis on forgiveness or growth. ofc nobody has to interact with anyone they don't want to or "owes" anyone forgiveness or help to rehabilitate and all that, but it doesn't change that the person themselves is capable of growing and changing. we tend to have strict ideas of what "abuser" and "victim" look like and don't realize how quickly those identities can switch on the same people. a lot of abusive behavior is learned from trauma and traumatized ppl tend to form relationships with each other and act just like these vampires do. it's hard to place anyone in single categories bcuz it's a spectrum. this is humanity reflected at us thru vampires.

all of these vampires carry their specific trauma and triggers and are living in ages where none of this even has been put into words yet, plus they're vampires on top of it. their rules *are* different from ours to an extent and a lot of it is bcuz they're also a v small group who is immortal. imagine someone u rly hate for having harmed u badly in some way (mentally and/or physically) and then imagine u knowing ur gonna run into them or hear their thoughts for the rest of eternity. are u supposed to kill them? could u live with that for eternity too? what if they're stronger than u? what if they read ur mind first and kill u instead? it's a lot to forever think about. idk what the show is going to do, but I have faith it'll be satisfying bcuz of knowing AMC's history with writing about traumatized ppl. Television has gotten rly good at writing about abuse and trauma in v nuanced ways. ppl tend to shy away from it tho bcuz they're not ready to confront these things in their own life and so they find an excuse to say it's bad. the racist side cannot get over calling it "shock value" even tho all the violence (physical, emotional, sexual) has been treated with great respect to the audience and characters. u see the violence move thru the characters, affect them for years, and nothing shown of the violence itself is meant to feel cheap and "shocking." these ppl simply do not want to engage so they find a reason to justify why and this story will never make sense to them bcuz of it.

[showmey0urfangs]

Hi, I’m a new fan and only read the book until TVL, but why do I feel like the fandom doesn’t really like to talk about David or even David & Lestat relationship? I think Lestat supposed to fall in love with him right? But why do people seem like they don’t want David & Lestat together? I know many people ship Nickistat and Armandstat beside the canon Loustat but why I rarely find people who ship David & Lestat, what happened to them? I heard Anne Rice at some point want David to be Lestat’s endgame? Could you please give brief explanation about their story & relationship?

Hi Nonnie! Oof, I don't know where to start. So David is an old member of the Talamasca who gets briefly introduced in QotD. He goes on to have a big role in TotBT, where through some magic mumbo jumbo he switches into the younger and hotter body of an Indian man (which is also kind of problematic in itself), and he's also heavily featured in Merrick, which is told in his POV—to my and many other fans' chagrin.

I cannot speak for other fans but personally, my dislike for him is mostly because he's a self-confessed, out-and-proud pedophile—a pretty valid reason to dislike a character imo. 😂

And unlike our other resident VC pedo Marius, David doesn't even have the "excuse" of being from ancient Rome where pederasty was a socially tolerated custom.

Reading Merrick was such a harrowing experience for me because I went in expecting Louis's story, how he was dealing with his grief for Claudia after IWTV, but instead, I got 100 pages of useless backstory and 50 pages of David describing a child's breasts and feet in great detail:

-----

-----

And of course, let's throw in some racism too while we're there:

Oh, thank God this beautiful 14-year-old child I'm lusting after doesn't have African features. 🙄

And other characters are aware David is a pedo but are okay to look past it for some reason:

-----

-----

-----

And the way he acts towards Armand is also pretty revolting (TVA):

-----

-----

I think many other fans also dislike him because Anne was trying to shoehorn him in to take Louis's place as Lestat's main confident/love interest, but for me, it's...yeah...it's the pedophilia! And the fact that, just like Marius, David is still painted as a wise and knowledgeable character who is the voice of reason and a mentor to the other characters.

I would be perfectly okay if the show disregards his character entirely and gives his scenes to Louis and Daniel.

[batsplat]

okay what’s up with the good wife out of all the media you reblog this is the most random one ?

it's not RANDOM omg that is a top three rewatch show to me... I love my silly little lawyers.... perfect mix of fun week to week cases, excellent side characters, interpersonal mess between the main cast, plus all the ways they'd imaginatively tackle Current Events. the good fight had a similar appeal - minus the focus on week to week cases and plus far more explicit politics. didn't always work, but it's one of those shows where I just kind of appreciated how willing they were to take a swing at it and get a bit weird about it. even in the good wife, they had so many Good Bits... the nsa agents who were super invested in the main cast's relationships, the liberal judge with all his Causes, the wife killer, LOUIS CANNING!! obviously, the 'in your opinion' lady, the google guy... also this is from the good fight but the federal investigator lady who always had the birds fly against her office window was a+ plus, it's such a dumb bit but it got me every time as a great appreciator of dumb bits. such a corny pair of shows that are very much like,, About Liberalism and a reckoning with that entire era of american life from an unabashedly liberal perspective, with all the inherent pitfalls and shortcomings of that pov... but does consistently manage to do interesting stuff with that starting point. a lawyer show that's also a bit of an autopsy of a mostly dead vision of america, kinda all you need sometimes

and I love alicia and will, my tragic heterosexuals!! the forbidden love of it all!! I love how cruel and selfish alicia was a lot of the time and how she's mostly in control of that relationship even though will SHOULD be the one in the position of power, how she's constantly using him and then pushing him away while will is so obviously besotted, how she simply keeps finding excuses to stop herself from being happy... does she even love him at all or does she just like him in theory, does she just want to be desired... how they always have 'bad timing' and just cannot figure their shit out... "it's romantic because it didn't happen".... "my plan is I love you" the unapologetic melodrama of it all!! the deleted voice message is?? crazy?? (eli goated character btw, the cheese lobby episode is still one of my favourite episodes of anything ever.) that lift scene is peak romance... when she leaves the firm and he feels so betrayed... his tantrum!! "I took you in when nobody wanted you"!! "you were POISON"!! "you're awful and you don't even know how awful you are"!! he's so pathetic and angry for half a season that he's resorting to just arguing with her in his head!!! always with their failed communications via phone and lift doors and loaded gazes across office spaces and delicate finger touches... the romance of it all, how they really could have worked but it's also so glaringly obvious why they kept falling apart... in the end all these repressed losers create their own misery... elite

[hekateinhell]

what's the lost VC canon that haunts you the most? like something that Anne never wrote that you just, cannot cope with.

This one sent me into a temper tantrum because there's so much I need to know that I never will! Let me get my binder (it's all Armand-centric, nobody's shocked).

Daniel:

???????

I need a timeline here of when things started to sour. I assume it's around TotBT. Armand gives Lestat the excuse later on that he wasn't there for him because he desperately wanted him to succeed in regaining his humanity, but what if it was because things were falling apart colossally with Daniel? And it would match up to the events of MtD, which Armand says Daniel had left him prior to.

Did Armand actually ever recognize that Something Wasn't Quite Right with Daniel, or was he so deep in denial---like a parent refusing to acknowledge when their child is falling through the cracks? Let's remember that Armand has never seen a vampire descent into madness that didn't end the way of Allesandra and Nicolas (suicide by fire).

How did Daniel end up in Marius's care? Was Armand part of this or did he find out later--and if so, how much later?

Speaking of...

Nicolas:

Armand mentions him once in TVA, in the very beginning when he's listing Lestat's fledglings, and then... that's it!

I talk a lot about the possibility of Nicki being the precursor to Louis for Armand, not entirely that different as he was for Lestat. Even Lestat considers in TVL that Armand, "the little monster", thought he was helping Nicki by handling him the way he did. I want Armand's POV!

Was there a moment where Armand was hopeful, where he fell in love with Nicolas only to have it snatched away by the inventible? Did he know from day one they were on borrowed time? Was he just being a menace to Lestat in the tower when he read his mind and told Lestat that Lestat wanted Nicki destroyed, or did he actually know that would be the final outcome?

Eleni did tell Lestat that Armand held a "great affection" for Nicki... so how great?

The Pets™️

I've talked about The Pets before in headcanons and meta, but once again:

How soon after Nicolas's death did this start?

What was Armand's selection criteria? Did he even have one? Did he have any affection or fondness for them at all, beyond the superficial, as we see with Denis? Did he genuinely care for him and see it as mercy-killing, knowing a human exposed to vampires for the duration Denis had been wouldn't survive on his own? Was it just cruelty and callousness?

Which brings me to...

Louis & The Claudia Issue:

I have to accept the TVA-version of events because it's the last word on the topic, but it's just so convoluted. Armand literally says that he could never tell this to Louis, and yet he's spilling the beans to David for Benji and Sybelle to know. Secret's going to get out, my guy.

I have to presume that Claudia was addressed with both Lestat and Louis at some point because everyone's happy-go-lucky now, but when was that? At the compound when they all thought they were going to die and it was time for a final confession? Night Island? Post-Merrick?

Taking that into consideration, how exactly did Trinity Gate happen? What was the conversation like? "I know I let your child vampire daughter die, but my Baby Daddy just left me with two kids; please help? 🥺👉🏻 👈🏻"

Honorable Mentions

Marius: what happens between Marius and Armand post-BC? I don't trust either Lestat nor Marius to be experts on Armand (they have proven that they are very much not), but it's a bit of an eye-opening moment when Lestat reacts with such surprise to hear Marius suggest the distance between himself and Armand is coming from Armand. Armand has never been a fan of the maker/fledgling dynamic from either side of it (a direct opposite of Lestat). I think Anne was going for a Choose Your Own Adventure here but... no???

Santino: where was this man after Armand went to Paris to lead the coven? Did he follow up with him in Les Innocents? At what point did he drop off the face of the earth?

Bianca: what did it look like when she and Armand actually had a chance for a private conversation after they were properly reunited? Did she get to tell him that she tried to convince Marius to go back for him? What's their relationship like now in the present day? She was once Armand's confidant, his lover, his nurse, so many things; aside from Marius, she's the only one who knew him (the only one who understood him) as a mortal boy. I needed this!

[quelsentiment]

🌳 2023 writing year in review 🌳

Thanks @feeisamarshmallow for tagging me!!

1. Number of stories posted to AO3: 10

2. Word count posted for the year:  172,831

3. Fandoms I wrote for: Video blogging RPF (Dream Team) and One Direction

4. Pairings:

dteam: every combination of dnn (both romantically and platonically) but with a preference for snf; dream & callahan

1d: zayn/louis

5. Story with the most:

Kudos: Wild Card (641)

Bookmarks: Wild Card (345)

Comment threads: Wild Card (77)

6. Work I’m most proud of (and why):

It's probably a tie between Wild Card and In Bloom. The first one because I managed to go past my insecurities and write whatever the hell I wanted to write even if it meant that the characters weren't always likeable, and the second one because I think it contains some of my favourite writing, especially in the first chapter, and I think it's one of my most memorable and personal stories

7. Work I’m least proud of (and why):

Maybe my Zouis fic because it's a band AU and I would have wanted it to be longer and more intricate, but at that point I had lost most of my interest in the fandom so I just did what I could then called it a day :/ I don't really know if I'll ever write for 1d again, although Zayn will always be close to my heart and I suspect I might still get a Zouis brainrot at some point, so who knows

8. Share or describe a favorite review you received:

I was so lucky to get a lot of lovely comments this year, and have people connect with my stories even though I'm new to the dteam fandom. Some of them were really meaningful and honestly made my day. On the lighter side of things, one of my favourite things that happened was someone bookmarking my fic In Bloom with the note 'trees', and also people losing their shit in the comments after I posted chapter 5 of Wild Card

9. A time when writing was really, really hard:

... over the past few weeks. tbh I haven't even tried writing because I've been too busy dealing with chronic illness and anxiety + the holidays. Hoping that it gets better progressively and I'm able to get back to it.

Otherwise I wrote pretty consistently and productively throughout 2023, with a break in August when I spent time with family.

10. A scene or character you wrote that surprised you: 

In general, writing Wild Card was a kind of epiphany because it was my first time writing from Sapnap's POV and it made me realize how fun it was for me. I guess he's really impulsive and proud while also being loving and kind of shy, and I just love that combination.

11. A favorite excerpt of your writing:

From In Bloom:

“But you loved him?”

George turns to look at him but Sapnap is still staring at the view, acting like he didn’t just ask that incredibly personal question. George guesses they’re past that anyway. There’s something about today that just doesn’t make sense, like their meeting is an anomaly that shouldn’t have even happened, and this is probably what makes it easier to share some things that George usually keeps close to his chest. That, plus the fact that Sapnap will disappear tomorrow along with the last remnants of winter.

“I did love him,” George says quietly as he sits down on the floor, soon followed by Sapnap. “I loved him the way someone loves their first boyfriend or girlfriend, you know? Thinking it’ll last forever and all that, even when all signs pointed to the fact that it wouldn’t. But he made me feel grown-up, like I had my life together or something, which is pretty dumb because we were only nineteen when we got together. It’s weird, though, because I feel much more like a kid now than I did back then.”

He lights up another cigarette and offers Sapnap the first puff, a cheap excuse to feel the cold tip of his fingers again.

“So from what I’m understanding, you’re regressing,” Sapnap says. The smoke surrounds him like a halo before the wind makes it fade into the city below.

“Yeah, exactly. God, I need a job or something. Like, an actual job. Maybe then I’ll feel like an adult.”

He extends his hand, wanting the cigarette back, but Sapnap holds onto it. Maybe he is addicted already.

“But what about trees, though?” Sapnap says, taking another puff. “You can’t give up on trees.”

“No, you’re right, I can’t,” George sighs dramatically. “That’s the tragedy.”

Sapnap finally gives him the cig back and they fall into silence for a while, just enjoying the distant rumbling of the streets below, and the quiet sound of their breathing.

For the first time since they locked eyes in Kensington Gardens, Sapnap suddenly removes his cap so he can run a hand through his hair. The hat is back on before George can even process it, and he curses himself for not having been able to take a mental photograph of how Sapnap looked without that shield of his.

He offers the cigarette again. This time, Sapnap’s fingers linger on his for half a second longer.

“I’ve been in love for a long time, and it’s never made me feel like I was an adult,” Sapnap says, breaking the silence. “More like the opposite, actually. Sometimes I feel like a little kid who won’t take no for an answer, who clings on to the idea that maybe if I ask in the right way just once, he’ll change his mind.”

12. How did you grow as a writer this year: 

I think one of my goals last year was to explore darker themes, and I think I kind of did that by having morally grey characters who sometimes act like assholes and act in questionable ways, particularly in Wild Card, Light The Fuse, Fade Away and an anon fic. Also I'm still on my way to getting more and more comfortable with writing (semi-)explicit scenes, and it's been fun to work on that again this year.

13. How do you hope to grow next year:

I don't really know. Things have been pretty hard lately so all I want is to be able to go back to writing and have fun with it.

14. Who was your greatest positive influence this year as a writer (could be another writer or beta or cheerleader or muse etc etc): 

In terms of other writers, definitely Selvish (I'm too awkward to tag him lol). I think we kind of have similar writing styles which is very comforting for me, and I just love how much thought he puts into the characters and their actions, and writes about stuff that's quite unique in the fandom, without shying away from darker themes

Other sources of inspiration were nature, especially trees, music as always (a lot of Susanne Sundfør and Paramore), films (Before Sunrise, Past Lives, That Summer Feeling) and tv (BBC Merlin and Bridgerton), plus probably other stuff that I'm forgetting about

15. Anything from your real life show up in your writing this year:

Yes!! As I said In Bloom is very personal, and a lot of the thoughts George has regarding his degree and his uncertainty about where his life is going were directly inspired by what I felt (also the fact that he goes on exchange in America). On top of that, some of the chapters of this fic are named after some of my favourite trees I encountered in the Pacific Northwest, and the first sentence about walking home from the library came to me as I walked home from the library

16. Any new wisdom you can share with other writers:

Something that I already knew but was definitely reinforced this year was that it's impossible and useless to try and predict how 'popular' your fic is going to be in terms of stats. Like Wild Card kind of blew up (in my standards lol) and I genuinely didn't expect it to because I thought that pairing was pretty unpopular. And then I thought a fic like Fade Away would get much more engagement because of the exes to lovers trope, but it didn't happen. So in the end, even though stats didn't influence me that much to begin with, now I'm just like 'whatever, I'll write what I'll write and see what happens'

17. Any projects you’re looking forward to starting (or finishing) in the new year:

I have one snf wip that I'm hoping to get back to soon. Otherwise we'll see where the year takes me

18. Tag some writers whose answers you’d like to read.

If you see this and want to do it please do!

[alarrytale]

Hello! I would like to add my pov when you and other fans all calling Louis out for his drugs/alcohol/cigarettes use and mentioning it. I´ve been a fan of The 1975 since their debut in 2013 so I basically saw their rise from quite unknown indie band playing small venues to being this huge and world-known. I am very aware that Matty Healy is not popular in this fandom and I totally respect it because I know he´s problematic and even quitted the fandom back in 2018.

Writing how I saw their rise of fame I also saw Matty´s poor mental health back then and dealing with fame - my first show of them was in Oct 2014 and all I saw was a totally stoned/drunk person on stage who barely knew what he´s doing there. Few months after my show he had a big breakdown during one show and his bandmates needed to take him off the stage and I think that show ended premature. When I saw them second time in 2016 Matty came to the stage being annoyed af, he just came there looking like he´s way too bothered he´s been taken out of bed that day because of some show and didn´t even act that he´s enjoying that show. In 2017 he also looked quite off and not enjoying the show and I started to think he´s on drugs again (even when he was in "happy" long term relationship and fans were obsessed pointing out how happy he was) and of course - few month after that he ended on rehab because of being addicted on heroine. I saw them again this summer and I need to say that after 10 years of being their fan (I don´t count the time when I quitted the fandom because I still liked their old music) it was finally a good show and Matty looked the best.

Also for those who don´t know him - Matty is very well known for liking to get stoned, their famous song Chocolate is about weed, other songs mention cocaine or heroine, he´s been spotted with joint milion times, he posted stories where he´s saying his wannabe intelectual bs being stoned and there was even an affair when back in 2015 fans spotted him on the street and he took bong with them. He also used to drink and smoke on stage. And even after everything that happend, nobody cancelled him, called him out, there was no huge fandom exodus because of his behaviour and the band is still very very popular and Matty is loved by his fans.

I´m not writing this as an excuse for Louis what he´s doing and that we should just take it as a normal thing and not calling him out for being unprofessional but comparing him with Matty I just wanted to point out that there are musicians who are much worse than Louis trying to fit into his lad image (or why the hell is he like this) and yes, Matty is problematic af but look at him and compare him with Louis - there are so many lines Louis can crossed and so what he´s doing is nothing compare what I witnessed with Matty. I still think that this is his 2nd solo tour and he´s getting used to having shows which are only about him. Maybe I´m optimistic but I just think he´ll need to get comfortable and get used to routine and find out drinking/getting stoned every other night is not sustainable for long run of being on tour for months. And yes, realize that his wannabe lad image is hurting him - but that´s maybe what will come when he´ll get more comfortable and realize he don´t need to fit into anything to be loved.

Hello, anon!

Thank you for your perspective! I've now learned more about mat*y hea*y than i'd ever care to know lol.

We can agree that mat*y is far worse than Louis, but why are we comparing the two? I don't see any similarities, not in their upbringing, their career, challenges they've faced or target audience/fandom? The only thing they have in common is shit coping mechanisms.

Matty seems like a nepo baby who grew up rich, maybe without getting attention from his parents, which led him to craving attention, any attention. He probably faced pressure to be cool. His mental health suffered from that and it lead him to drugs and acting out. His band is currently taking an indefinate hiatus because he's widely disliked and currently 'cancelled' for being deeply problematic.

Louis' issues stems from being told he's not good enough and from supressing his sexuality, against his will. In addition he's had some devastating losses and now probably feels a responsibility to provide for his family. He's also faking being a dad, while knowing his fandom doesn’t buy it. He's living under enormous pressure. He is pushing himself more than is healthy and is drowning his sorrows in drinks and drugs. Louis is not generally problematic, and him starting to not giving his all as an artist is a new development. He's not doing it for attention, but out of insecurity. He's also not intentionally trying to harm others with his actions. So i think their cases are a bit too different to be compared.

[thelioncourts]

TWITTER PEOPLE ISTG

just had a post pop up on my twitter feed that was the clip of louis and claudia first talking in each other's heads in ep. 4 and the caption was something like, "imagine being with the love of your life for years and suddenly you're the "other"" and someone commented and was like," I know, how isolating" and like --

DO NOT GET ME WRONG

i 100000000000000000% do think it was isolating and no doubt, if we get any of that time from lestat's pov, it's going to be devastating because the feeling of people in your own house teaming up on you is awful

however

it's also kind of one of those 'well well well, if it isn't the consequences of my own actions' kind of moments because, yes, louis is the love of lestat's life, and vice versa, but lestat definitely wasn't acting like it, leading louis to also not act like it !

like? isn't it isolating to have to watch your husband fuck someone else in front of you, seemingly on some whim, expect, at the very least, him to kill said person, only to realize he kept her alive, then ask him, insecurely, if you're enough and he laughs in your face and declares an open marriage, only for him to keep fucking the same woman and then screaming at you when you decide to act on this now open marriage as well, all before belittling the racism going on around you and acting like it doesn't matter, when it does matter so very much to you???

and this isn't me trying to pull a 'louis is a saint and lestat is the worst' because of course louis fucks up. and part of what make loustat so intoxicating to us as an audience is their ability to hurt each other, something they both do, because no one can hurt you as much as someone you love, and they do love each other tremendously.

and i'm also not saying that i don't see where lestat is coming from with certain things re: his own trauma. like i get that he laughed at louis because he always laughs at the worst moments and he also is laughing because he finds louis' question incredulous given that louis is everything to him, in his own mind. and i get that his sleeping with antoinette was meant to be a statement to louis about his eating habits hurting both of them, mostly louis though, and i get that lestat finds it much easier to separate sex from love than louis does so him being with jonah was an "OH fuck" kind of moment. but your own trauma/personality isn't an excuse to do what all he did and ALSO he never explained his trauma and life to louis which, totally his call but also you can't expect someone to understand where you're coming from if you keep them entirely in the dark.

anyway, idk, maybe it's because lestat-stans have been rubbing me the wrong way for a while which is something that sucks SO bad because 1) i fucking am in love with sam reid and his portrayal of lestat is the most perfect thing to exist and 2) idk if we're criticizing one, we have to criticize both to a point because the whole point of this series is that no one is a moral beacon, they all kind of suck??? at least a little??? and 3) lestat is, for lack of anything, maybe not the villain of interview, but one of the antagonists for sure??? so to think he's like. a little cinnamon roll is wildin' to me, lestat is awful, even as a protagonist, and that's kind of the point??

[faith--in-the-future]

Oh yeah, to larries maybe Louis deserved his fractured elbow after they heard boyfriends but no, WAOYF, and Defenceless for that matter, are just difficulties! They’re not communicating! Louis described Defenceless as a cry for help in his track by track but well, I guess that doesn’t matter. The situation described in WAOYF would be a terrible relationship. Because this also means the situation is happening often enough that Louis already knows how it is going to go, that it has happened a lot before. Emotionally distant and cold boyfriends for the win, amirite? Also in both of these songs, Louis just wants to feel/be loved again. You should not have to plead for love in a good relationship. So by thinking it’s about Harry, i can say if it was, he wasn’t a good partner! And I would know because I had a boyfriend who really reminds me of the person/people described in some of Louis’ lyrics and leaving him was the best decision I could make for myself. Then there are the ones who think if Louis is talking about a partner being not great, he’s actually talking to himself. When the “you” he addresses is being complimented though, then it’s about Harry. Most larries don’t even try to hide how they actually feel about Louis.

please when they use the "miscommunication" excuse it's so 😭😭😭😭😭😭 and like don't get me wrong I'm not saying waoyf is def about louis bc he did say he wrote with more imagination for this album but even if it is made up then it's still a mad up toxic relationship narrated from the victims pov like denying that after listening to the song would be lowkey problematic imo bc if someone is treating you like that it is definitely not ok, and in louis' case I tend to say it's more personal bc like u said there are many points in common with things he's sang in the past.

anyways I said it even with defenseless, a partner that makes u feel like asking to be loved is asking for too much is not a good partner, larries are just incapable of considering harry as someone with agency who makes his own (often bad) choices, he's always just a victim!

[causticsunshine]

pls why does harry getting called beefy upset y’all so much 😭 it’s not a big deal

aight i wasn't gonna answer this because i got shit to work on rn but lemme break this down from my pov so i can come full circle later on.

it's the people using it as his sole physical descriptor, and how they use it that grinds my gears. it's just...annoying, lmao. find a better suited word?? like i'm not upset by it, i'm just over it—like when people learn a new word and throw it around as much as they can even when they're not using it right half the time.

plus: those who tend to pull the 'break my back like a glowstick beefcake daddy harry uwu' and adjacent cards—yeah i'm calling out larries that do this to emphasize louis' 'smolness' too; please stop trying to make irl queer people fit weird tropes that bad BL manga from the 2000's ingrained into your head?—to strictly emphasize features of his that are traditionally coded as being masculine—most commonly his muscle definition—as well as trying to diminish the parts of himself, both by way of actual physical traits he has and choices of aesthetic expression, that contest traditional masculinity, are not just derivative and dismissive—like it's the inverse argument that people who are obsessed with painting louis as a strictly fat-assed, curvy submissive twink; same soup just reheated—but also gross that they have to constantly try and convince people who are simply celebrating the parts of this person that are often downplayed, made non-related excuses for, and even ignored by large parts of his fanbase and the GP, because they're not rooted in socially accepted, binary-coded masculinity.

anyone ignoring the full scope of harry's physicality is just picking and choosing what they want to see, or what they want him to be.

(i'm not going to bring this back to the gatekeeping femininity from amab people conversation just because that's not quite what my point is with these posts, but there's a definitive connection to make there, too.)

and my dude, did you even see the notes i made here? or in the last ask i got? in no way do i dismiss harry's build. he clearly has broad shoulders and a broad ribcage! he has toned arms and legs! he has defined abdominals and his chest is definitely pronounced! did i like, not make that clear enough before? because if not, here you go—harry's in shape and he has pronounced muscular structures!

really all i'm aiming to point out in these posts is that people obsessed with what they deem are harry's masculine and thus more 'desirable' traits, calling people who give other traits and features of his attention 'freaks', are not just using specific angles and posing to push their points forward—which will be the focus of an in-depth post i'll be making when i have some more time—but their arguments are also dismissive, derivative, and can be indirectly hurtful to a lot of amab people/people built like harry, who may try to emphasize traits of theirs that are socially deemed feminine or less masculine, be more comfortable expressing femininity regardless of their gender identity, etc.

the way they try to get their message out there, it's all picking and choosing and usually done in poor taste. and the wording they use is just a part of that, not the primary issue.

tldr; the whole 'beefcake' thing is just annoying because of how and why so people use it—at least, to me. harry is most definitely in shape and strong! but even so...he's not stacked on stacked. i wouldn't confuse him for someone who partakes in specific physical activities wherein 'beefy' body structures are common due to the training and work being done—like body building or wrestling. and maybe because there's plenty of people out there who better fit the actual beefcake body archetype, not just athletic types but other kinds of people within the acting/music industry, i don't use that word in relation to him? just food for thought.