#using the arun/maitre dynamic?

[mousehousediary]

ever think about how when louis was asking armand to witness madeleine's turning, he was basically inviting him into the family by asking him to attend his daughter's wedding/hold his hand in the delivery room. and when armand essentially replies "i will not go unless you force me to" he tells him he doesn't have to and reassures him. and then what goes on in their respective heads in that exact moment are:

louis: oh damn the maitre stuff is not just a sex thing he actually like can't hold a conversation like a human being. oh but he's so sad... there there loser boyfriend... why does nobody ever want to have babies with me :/

armand: *has just sentenced louis to death*

[divorceblogger]

erotic tension in bdsm powerplay is often informed by and derived from prevalent social constructions - power differentials in a particular sociocultural environment are essential for helping construct fantasies where these forces fuel, instead of crushing, erotic feelings. it’s no coincidence that in paris the coven (as the institution that enforces the law of the city for vampires) and the environment of submission and domination that it cultivates ends up offering louis and armand the opportunity to repurpose its hierarchal system to their advantage and develop a mutually satisfactory relationship and sexual dynamic (maitre/arun).

armand roleplaying as ‘rashid’ with louis (‘mr. du lac’), in dubai, now gives us a glimpse into a sexual dynamic that’s evolved in response to prevailing cultural attitudes - their sexual practices have now been shaped in response to capitalism, where the relationship between a servant and an employer helps manufacture sexual tension instead, and this is also partly informed by the dynamic that plays out in the apartment at large, where humans offer service to their vampire lords by means of paid domestic labour. the undertones of worship and service inherent to the roles are also overdramatised for their personal benefit, because they’re participating in a sexual theatre; their interactions with damek and real rashid are otherwise largely impersonal because there’s no real emotional attachment between them otherwise.

[danlous]

Months of reading how Armand is the Big Bad man behind the curtain manipulating and mindcontrolling everyone with his godlike powers, and now suddenly in one day it switched to cruel Pimp Louis manipulating and enslaving Armand and Armand being his poor victim. I'm begging you to look at these characters and their relationships with some nuance. I'm not denying that Louis is trying to manipulate Armand in some moments (Jacob said it himself in the post-episode bit) but seeing that park scene as Louis intentionally evoking Armand's trauma and a pimp and slave assuming their old roles is in my opinion a stretch and i didn't read it that way. Tbh i also find it pretty offensive that some people are acting like when Louis was a pimp he was doing something similar to people who subjected Armand to literal sexual slavery because they're vastly different situations.

Arun isn't Armand's 'slave name' or 'prostitute name', it was his actual birth name before he was sold and abused, and he lost that name due to abuse. If Louis had actually wanted to push a master-slave dynamic he would've probably called Armand Amadeo, because that was the name Armand's abuser, who Armand served and in some way still loves, gave to him. When Louis was a pimp he notably also didn't actually act particularly domineering with sex workers, on the contrary he was usually friendly to them, because he felt guilty for exploiting women and tried to convince himself he was just helping and working with them and that they were equals. He made sex workers like Bricktop Williams minority owners of his business and they felt comfortable with criticizing him. If Louis had actually 'treated Armand like one of his prostitutes' in this episode he would've acted completely differently. Remember also that Armand has a remarkable mind gift and that Louis is bad at hiding his thoughts: if Louis had actually been trying to manipulate Armand in this specific way, Armand would very likely know it.

In the beginning of the episode Armand is frustrated that Louis doesn't acknowledge that they're companions, and Louis expresses that they don't really know each other. Later at the restaurant Armand gets angry and uses his powers dramatically which upsets Louis. He also talks to Louis rather harshly, saying that he and Santiago are acting like fledglings (children) and angrily tells Louis to come back when he leaves. Later Armand comes to apologize bringing flowers. All this reminds Louis of Lestat, and reveals how apprehensive he still is about Armand. Armand deciding to tell Louis his story is a conscious effort to show vulnerability and convince Louis of what he promised: that Armand isn't like Lestat and he isn't going to hurt him. Jacob said that dreamstat represents not only Lestat but Louis' doubts about Armand. In the museum scene this is particularly obvious when Louis feels deep sympathy for Armand, but at the same time dreamstat - a part of Louis - looks angry and distrustful. According to Jacob in the park scene as Louis lets go of Lestat he's also letting go of those doubts and accepting Armand as he is and for who he is.

So when Louis calls Armand by his birth name that could be considered his 'real' name even though no one has called him that for centuries, i see it as him saying 'Do we see each other now? Are we honest about things now? Can i trust that you are who you say you are?' When Armand calls Louis maitre he's trying to establish an impression of equality, because as they both know Armand is the maitre and the leader of the coven and the one with much more power. For Armand the ideal of love is the one of mutual worship and servitude. Like many things with Armand, his actions in this episode are both sincere and manipulative, and his seeming submissiveness is also certain kind of domination that helps him to get what he wants.

I just don't think their relationship is anything like Louis being a master and Armand being a slave at all. It's a very, very complicated and mercurial relationship that is not easily defined and where the dynamics are constantly shifting. As Jacob said, they're constantly flip-flopping between who's the dominant one and who's the submissive one, and who needs what out of the other. He also said that at the end of this episode their relationship takes on this almost BDSM kind of role playing where their roles switch, which implies that a) it's a play and not what their relationship is actually like and b) there was earlier a different dynamic where Armand was more dominant. Their Rashid role play in Dubai was also that, a role play.

When talking about those Louis' 'manipulative instincts' as Jacob called them, it needs to be considered they're something that Louis developed having to live in a racist society for all his life ("using his weakness to rise") and being in an abusive relationship for decades. For Louis that kind of soft power has often been the only power he has, and of course he's resorting to it when in a relationship with much older and much more powerful person he doesn't fully trust. The way i perceive Louis and Armand's relationship, it's a fragile, carefully crafted design built on contradictions, performances and illusions, where they both seek to maintain a fantasy where they both feel sufficiently in control and the relief of releasing that control at the same time

[iwtv-theories]

Iwtv and the motif of “enduring” (analysis)

Throughout the show the word “enduring” has been used for several characters and there’s a lot of symbolic weight in that word . For one “enduring “ can mean “something that lasts a long time” but also another definition is “ to carry on through, or tolerate, something despite suffering" . In essence the word encapsulates vampire existence in its totality but in tandem it also illustrated the suffering the characters cause to one another in their interpersonal relationships .

-Lestat : “ I thought… I can’t drink hot blood. I can’t feed on others. I cried. I called to god. I didn’t want this (vampirism) . But I have a capacity for enduring . “

-Lestat to Claudia : “we endure each other for Louis' happiness .”

-Louis asking Claudia how she'll compromise to make the relationship with lestat work. L: "I'm drinking the blood, he killed the singer. What are you doing? " Claudia: I'm enduring. L: "do more "

-After Claudia leaves, Louis contemplates ending his life on the park bench, but changes his mind : "And so I endured home back to the crypt, back to the undeserving Lestat."

-Louis about the relationship between Claudia , Lestat, and himself : “we spent our hours enduring, with little pretense for getting a long. Locked together in hatred."

-Louis to Lestat: " Here's your death Lestat. He and I are going to spend the rest of our lives together. And wherever you're miserable life takes you, whoever you find to endure time with... I'll be with him."

-Louis to Armand : “ I need this one to live out the night as a testament to our companionship . Of its endurance.”

Their (prior) huge fight in this episode already alluded to it. But this is obviously a double entendre: Louis’ literally talking about the relationship’s longevity but BOTH are “enduring “ (suffering) in their relationship to one another . Similar to the prior dynamic of Louis/Lestat/Claudia (all suffering/enduring each other). And similar to how Louis contemplated ending his life (because of losing Claudia) only to go back to his romantic partner and “endure”.Not to mention Louis says this line while Armand is in the head-space of “Arun .” Armand to Louis: “ who am I Louis? I am the past I’ve endured ?”

Hmm …Armand discussed sleeping with most of the coven as “ repertory theatre it’s how one endures” . That may have a darker meaning, than he’s letting on . Even the play Sam writes is called "Endurance for Guido" which Armand called a "flaccid play about vampire existence and enduring" . The term 'flaccid" being used could symbolically hint that he wasn't really into sleeping with his theatre coven- similar to his experiences in the br*thel (he just ‘endured’ and suffered through it) . It’s a trauma response just like the whole “maitre/arun “ dynamic probably is . Deep down I don’t think he likes it at all ,he’s just enduring (cause it’s what’s familiar to him) . He’s essentially just being an actor on a stage .

I mean...what does Armand say in the books when Marius forced him to kiss someone , and what does Marius say in turn when he objects?Armand: “I can’t endure this.” Marius : “Then how will you endure eternity? “ And what does Santino say to Armand , after he forces him to join the 'children of satan': " No one comes to LOVE PAIN. We can only hope to endure it." And as Sam said the main message of ‘enduring for guido’ is : “there can be no hope.” That’s sadly how Armand and most of the vamps probably feel .

And finally the last time the term enduring was used was in the s2 finale. Louis to Lestat: “ you enduring here all this time? Lestat: “not enduring , living . “ On one hand this line illustrates that many of these vampires aren’t actually “living” but enduring (suffering and simply trucking through their immortal lives). They should all “do more” than simply endure. And of course Lestat is lying he isn’t “living” he’s been suffering (enduring) ever since Claudia died and Louis left .

[userarmand]

Jacob and Assad acknowledge that Louis’ use of Arun is fucked up idk why you all feel the need to defend it so hard. Louis is not a saint and it’s fine if you like the Arun/Maitre dynamic but it’s also okay to criticize it.

the problematic element in that dynamic comes from louis calling armand a name he associates with being a child in order to appeal to his submission. whether he's appealing to the abused child specifically is obviously up to interpretation, but i see it as him trying to connect with the armand that existed before all the traumatic shit happened. and tbh i don't like the notion that 'arun' is armand's slave name because it's the one he had during his time at the brothel, it's just his name, he existed before he was trafficked.

[murfpersonalblog]

IWTV Musings - BDSM: Loumand, Agency & Abuse

IMO the reason people either blame either Armand or Louis for their failmarriage is cuz A) folks don't understand BDSM (esp. the characters themselves); and B) folks assume victim = weak/blameless (esp. the characters themselves), thinking victims have no agency; victim blaming people who do exert agency to protect themselves.

Despite what he told Daniel, Louis IS a victim of abuse. Armand abused his power over Lou by taking advantage of his trust. Loumand's entire relationship after 1949 was based on Armand's Seismic Lie about "Banishment:" WHO saved Lou's life in the Trial. But Louis is NOT a braindead puppet ventriloquized by Armand--obvs, cuz if he was, NEITHER interview would've never happened at all (1973/2022). Louis has a HUGE amount of agency. Armand WANTS Lou to take charge, so he doesn't HAVE to be the leader making all the decisions anymore. But their Dom/Sub dynamic is nowhere near as cut as cut & dry as people love assuming; cuz vampires are mimics. Loumand mimicked/approximated what they thought was a (healthy) BDSM dynamic; the same way Loustat mimicked/approximated what they thought a (heteronormative) traditional nuclear family dynamic was. BOTH of the couples' mistakes/failures were based on the misconceptions these men had about power & control--who should have it and who shouldn't; and what it means to submit to or dominate one's partner--which neither Loustat nor Loumand were in the right mental state to healthily/properly engage in at all.

BDSM, Consent, & Power Dynamics: Agency vs Abuse

3A: "Almost like" hints to us that although Loumand's relationship is SIMILAR to BDSM, it is NOT in fact BDSM; just a bastardization/mimicry/approximation of it; due to the consequences of unprocessed traumas, unhealthy/toxic projections of gender/power norms, under-negotiated kinks, and dubious consent.

3B: The status quo is that Armand is the dom/master/Maitre apex predator, and Louis is the submissive lower one in the vampiric hierarchy, just like Carol Cutshall said. There's an ironclad power imbalance that neither of them can truly escape, let alone change.

3C: Role "play" is, just like in BDSM, only a SCENE--it's staged, theatre, playing pretend, make-believe; temporary, unreal, a POWER FANTASY. The only REAL "switch" is that Louis becomes a Service Dom/Top; but he gains no TRUE power/authority/control over Armand whatsoever. Daniel called it out for what it is really was "Maitre only when it's hot or convenient," but people keep using JA's EW interview as proof that Lou was abusing helpless Armand; taking at face value the Arun/Maitre in 2x4 & "face-down in the coffin" in 2x6; without ever contextualizing how Armand refused to turn Madz in 2x6 and sold out Louis & his daughters to the coven to be killed in 2x7 in a Trial/PLAY where "everything you're about to see is fake," and then lied about it in 2x8 to keep Lou with him; despite how Armand led Lou to suicide & tortured Daniel out of jealousy in 2x5.

Convos about Louis' agency are a slippery slope, cuz some folks argue that Lou had ALL the agency in Loumand's relationship, to the extent that Louis was the abuser & Armand the victim. It totally misses the point of 2x8 revealing that Armand was the only one in control the entire time, and that Lou's agency/awareness/autonomy was complicated at best. Folk hatefully condemn Lou & say he'd be kicked out of any healthy IRL kink community for being a terrible Dom to Armand (x x), but ignore how Armand would ALSO be kicked out of the same kink community for being a terrible Sub to Louis. They BOTH had toxic red flags that they BOTH ignored & paid for.

Armand's problem is that he associates submissiveness with slavery, and TELLS HIMSELF that he has no say ("Why is it, Louis, those with the most power are often the weakest?; I could not prevent it"). Lou's problem is that he's never had real power, but TELLS HIMSELF that he was "good at running things," when all he's ever "run" is away.

Folks hyper-focus on Armand's backstory in 2x4, and completely miss how Loumand's park scene was kink (under-)negotiation; Louis giving Armand the OPTION to CHOSE whether to give up control of the coven to Santiago and control of his sexual dynamic to Louis.

Armand: The center isn't holding. Mutiny brewing. Everyone doing what they want, when they want.... I'm not sure I can keep obedience any longer. Louis: I used to be real good at running things.... Santiago wants to be coven leader.... Let him feel like he's your heir apparent.... And that's when you can decide if you want it back. Or you want something else. Armand: I want you. I want you more than anything in the world. Louis: You sure about that, Arun? Armand: Yes, Maitre.

Anti-Louis viewers get so PISSED about pimp!Louis bossing Armand around, "I'm a little wet; face down in the coffin," without realizing that in a consensual partnership, Doms give commands & WAIT for the Sub to either comply or flat-out refuse--cuz Subs are supposed to have just as much control & say in the dynamic as Doms.

People keep slinging around "Abuse!" accusations without even understanding wtf abuse entails. In kink, assertiveness, dirty talk, and bossiness can be consensual. No, we don't see/hear this negotiation take place on screen, but we DO see that Armand is given all the time in the world to refuse to take his clothes off & get in the coffin; esp. since he's the most powerful vampire in the entire effing COUNTRY of France (the only one with the Time/Fire Gifts), AND he's also in an office surrounded by 14 vamps who hate Lou's guts & told him they want Lou dead. Y'all honestly think that if Armand felt in any type of danger he wouldn'tve been able to let the whole coven descend on Louis right then & there?! 🤨Louis was on Armand's turf, NOT the other way around; and Armand NEVER expresses any indication that he was ever threatened by Louis Domming him. What we DO see is Armand saying No and Louis not being able to do eff all to FORCE him to do anything Armand explicitly says "repulses" him--Lou can't force hm to Turn Madz in the 1940s; Lou can't force him join his sexcapades in the 1970s. While it's definitely indicative of poor communication & under-negotiated kink, this is NOT evidence that Armand's agency's been taken from him and that he fears for his safety & is unable to deny or leave Lou.

When 2 Subs Collide: Under-Negotiated Kink

Mutual consent is key, cuz Loumand's D/S power dynamic was sorely under-negotiated, a shaky AF agreement neither man was truly comfortable with (all the 2 Bottoms/subs memes) ("you asked me to do it / are you asking me, Maitre?"). Cuz they're BOTH naturally Submissive men whose life circumstances have forced them to become Dominant; to the point where it's hard for them to (feel safe/comfortable enough to) let that control go. As a result, they "fumble each other, impotent lovers" in the books, film, AND show. Canonically, Loumand's just way too incompatible to ever work out, cuz they're NOT what the other wants or needs, despite how hard they genuinely tried to fill e/o's hole void or not.

Anne Rice described book!Loumand as masochist submissives:

For book!Loustat, Lou's "passive nature makes him a perfect submissive. He searches for a way to be dominant in his relationship with Lestat." AMC amplified that by adding the racial component of black!Louis chafing under being white!Lestat's control during Jim Crow, after having had so many other white men take advantage of him & abuse their power over him (the Alderman, Tom, cops, etc). Lou is domesticated during his marriage, then as his depression worsens he becomes unhealthily submissive to the point of disassociating. During the Murder Plot, Lou plays up the submissive role to lull Lestat into a false state of security, distracting Les so that Claudia can get the drop on Les. They're BOTH femme fatales; taking power in their submission ("Because what scientist would look for an organ found only in Black men who use their weakness to rise?").

For book!Armand, you can't fully talk about him without also talking about Lestat & Marius; and how they both shaped/affected/worsened his increasingly psycho-sexual codependent tendencies. "Armand especially wants to be dependent on someone else, to be dominated, and he sets out to force other vampires into that role;" constantly using the Mind Gift & Spell Gift to "rape" Lestat into falling for him, both in 1700s Paris and 1900s NOLA. (We'll have to wait & see what AMC does with Lesmand & Marimand in S3, to see how the cycles of abuse actually play out or not).

AMC's highlighted Armand's religious fanaticism & over-dependence on the Great Laws and the structure of coven life that gave him purpose: serving as Coven Master over the Children of Satan ("I serve a God. It is my honor to serve."). Even his role as Master/leader is couched in his need to still submit to a higher cause--I didn't choose the coven life, the coven life chose me! (Literally, cuz the coven kidnapped Armand & forced him to be their leader after brainwashing him for hundreds of years.) So when Lou arrives in Paris, it's Armand's JOB to either force/recruit Lou into the coven, or kill Lou if he refuses to join. But Armand learned long ago how to weaponize his sexuality, back when he was a human kidnapped & sold into sex slavery; so he "barters with desire" by seducing Lou; catching more flies with honey than vinegar; "I will not harm you."

According to AR, the ambiguity of power imbalances "increases the passion of the relationships;" but AMC flips it so that the ambiguity is what destroys passion. Loumand's relationship isn't loveless--they DO obvs hold genuine affection & attraction for e/o. But the Bed Death in 1973 was cuz their relationship is passionless, despite all the kinky toys all over the penthouse's bedroom. Jacob Anderson said Louis needs "friction;" Loustat challenges e/o, the "spark" Les saw, where Lou still had bite to him, not entirely rolling over & doing everything Les wanted; that's boring & downright pathetic to Les (x x x). Loustat's BOTH brats to e/o, not even necessarily in a kink way.

Armand treats Lou like he's fragile, like he needs to be "hyped up, coddled, lied to;" not out of MALICE, but out of the genuine intent to NOT hurt Lou. But he failed to realize that this is NOT actually what Lou wants. Lou eventually grew bored to death with vanilla AF Armand, the flavorless colorless softest beigest pillow who's just WAY too submissive for Lou--who actually needs/wants a Dom (read: Lestat), even saying Armand acts like a eunuch who forgot he has a working penis (implying how much Lou dislikes topping).

Armand's submissiveness is most obvs in his Service Sub ruse/roleplay as Fake Rashid). But the infamous Cuck Chair is another indicator (x x). Infidelity's a huge theme in S1 (Lou's deeply hurt being cucked by Les constantly cheating on him--another under-negotiated kink since they BOTH hated the open relationship; "I don't like sharing"). But in S2, the roles have switched, where instead Armand is the one constantly being cucked by Louis. The way Armand talks about their Paris sexcapades seems like at first Loumand both enjoyed their open relationship in the 1940s; Louis banging the men & Armand killing the men; Lou's exhibitionism & Armand's voyeurism; where Armand enjoyed & consented to being cucked; it's kink Loumand did together.

By 1973, things have obvs drastically changed. Armand accompanies Lou to gay bars where Lou cruises for men, and Lou outright asks Armand "is it OK with you" when Lou picks men to go home with, and Armand gives Lou permission to "go have your fun" alone. Meanwhile, Armand's BIG MAD, at home "picking lint off the sofa," deeply resenting Lou's sexcapades & having to "clean up the mess" when Lou sloppily kills the men on his own, not caring if he gets caught (he's been increasingly suicidal ever since Claudia died). Armand resents Lou's independence, agency, & autonomy, and outright STOPS Lou from leaving him--he stops Lou from killing himself, and then cuts Lestat off from talking to Lou in the 3-way call ARMAND initiated when Lou said NO; meanwhile guilt-tripping Louis by accusing him of feeling like Armand had trapped him in a "prison of empathy." 🤦Triggered after hearing from Lestat when he wasn't ready to face his former abuser yet, and also shaken after seeing Armand torture Daniel & almost kill him, Lou reasserts "dominance" by re-establishing Loumand's deal/agreement--BEGGING Armand not to kill Dan, just like how he BEGGED Les to Turn Claudia.

But it's a facade, the illusion of power. Lou had no REAL power to MAKE either Lestat/Armand do anything; their relationship at rock bottom. All he CAN do is beg & hope they love him enough to say Yes--and Armand already told him NO b4 w/ Madz. And once again, Armand goes behind Louis' back to Turn Daniel once their deal is officially over; not the least bit scared or bothered by Lou's threat to kill him if he harmed Dan--Armand knows Lou can't do eff all to him.

But they've "switched" AGAIN, cuz allegedly Louis "asked" Armand to mind-wipe Lou's memory of San Fran, and no one but Armand can ever corroborate if that's the truth or not. Going by Lou's horrified reaction in 2x6, it's unlikely that Lou would've ever asked Armand to take that from him if he'd been mentally healthy & LUCID enough to properly consent; lobotomies not being something that should seriously be considered 3 days after an effing suicide attempt. This is what the abuse of power means; taking advantage of a bad situation in the short-term and doing more long-term harm than good.

"I Will Not Harm You"

IWTV is all about abuse, "a sexy pilgrimage across space, time and trauma." Armand has CONSTANTLY tried to contrast himself with Lestat, the villain in Louis' story who abused him & his daughter; making himself seem like the better, safer, more loving option. But that requires dulling his own fangs, to not spook Louis away, or trigger Lou so he lashes out/"acts out," offense as defense. Jacob said Lou needed the side of Armand that was "gentle and sweet and seemingly the opposite of any of the relationships that he’s had so far," cuz the alternative behavior was way too close to abusive Lestat. In SanFran & Dubai, Armand's become as seemingly submissive as possible, to not be compared to that p.o.s. Les; the man of BOTH of their dreams/nightmares/delusions (x x).

But AMC!Lou wants to be dominated too--DEEP down, he wants to submit & be vulnerable & open himself to another man he can trust to not harm him. Lou forgave Les for hurting him in Ep5, even when they both knew Les didn't deserve it ("You took him back!"). HARM is different though ("When I return, you need to be gone!").

For AMC!Loumand, Lou'd already established that they were NOT companions (read: vamp married) in Paris when Santiago asked. Wanting to reclaim his agency from his abusive relationship with Lestat, Louis didn't wanna be tied down in another committed relationship, and he told Armand so over & over ("Everyone's asking, 'What's next, what's next?' Not, 'Where were you?' Or, 'Be careful.' I had enough of that back home. I'm out here finding myself."). He esp. didn't wanna be answerable to Coven Master Armand; another powerful & old AF vampire dominating & controlling him in any way. And rather than doing his effing JOB and killing/banishing the rogue vampires who stubbornly refuse to leave his territory, Armand chooses to let Louis gallivant all over Paris, knowing how much it pisses his coven off to allow Louis that much independence; overcompensating by treating Claudia worse than trash.

AMC gives Santiago a MUCH bigger than in the book; the whole question of who exactly is the REAL "Maitre" in Paris wrapped up in Santiago's coup & Loumand's BDSM deal in 2x04. But the anti-Louis side of the fandom still blames Lou for domming Armand, calling him a dirty disgusting pimp taking advantage of Armand trauma-dumping his backstory as a sex slave 300 years ago to diffuse Lou's anger scolding him for abusing & pimping out Claudia as Baby LouLou just to exert & maintain his dominance as Coven Master.

Louis: It's not the art, the apology. Flex your power one night and follow it with grand groveling the next. Vintage Lioncourt. Armand: I don't enjoy using my powers like that, Louis. Louis: Seemed like you did. Armand: That was for coven discipline, for the situation.

Louis had sex with Armand in 2x3 to protect CLAUDIA from the coven he's scared will hurt her. Loumand's relationship was always transactional; also why Lou insisted that they weren't companions.

Louis: I didn't like seeing Claudia made a puppet. Armand: I treated her as a member of my coven. Louis: I don't like you parading her around in that baby doll dress either. And if I may say, it all makes you look weak. Armand: I'm not Lestat, Louis.

Although Santiago & Louis are both called Maitre after 2x4, the only one who actually held REAL power was Armand, which he kept for 77 years, all the way till Daniel exposed him in 2x8. Armand gets frustrated with Lou every time he has to step in and "clean up the mess" (1973); taking charge AGAIN whenever Lou "acts out" (2022); and forgets what they agreed about their "proper roles; we had it figured out, didn't we?" (circa 1947); going behind Lou's back to help plan Lou & Claudeleine's deaths ("They gave me a choice; I chose.").

TL;DR: Accountability

So yes, Louis definitely has more agency than some would assume when labeling him as a victim of abuse. Not all victims are mindless vegetables or punching bags that sit back & just get dishragged, never fighting back or speaking up--let alone never contributing to their own demise. Louis actively participated in Loumand's effed up power dynamic with his own brand of toxicity & pisspoor communication & negotiations.

But let's not pretend that Louis has MORE agency & power than Armand (let alone Lestat). That's when I start looking sideways at people rushing to Armand (& Lestat's) defense, when the convo starts leaning too far into territory that minimizes or outright denies the FACT that Louis' mind & memories were actually tampered with by Armand WITHOUT his consent AT LEAST ONCE, and that Armand actually lied to Louis' face on multiple occasions with seismic consequences that dominoed into everything that happened in San Fran & Dubai, had Armand been honest about "Banishment" & explained the situation when Louis asked him point blank "When did you start lying to me?" Boohoo, mean Louis cussed Armand TF out in SanFran & called him a boring eunuch? Welp, that's what happens when you're not honest about wanting your lover and his kids dead.

[raven-undergrove]

I think the reason why I sympathize with Louis the least out of every character in AMC's IWTV is because his toxic traits don't typically come from his trauma. I'm not saying nothing traumatic ever happened to Louis. The death of his brother was absolutely traumatic, being dropped out of the sky by Lestat was absolutely traumatic, losing Claudia was absolutely traumatic, enduring racism was absolutely traumatic. But his toxic traits? Those primarily all tie back to him being a pimp. When he drags Claudia across the floor begging Lestat to turn her and feels entitled to her throughout the rest of her life, that's Louis the Pimp viewing Claudia as nothing more than a doll rather than an individual with her own life and agency. When he initiates the Maitre-Arun dynamic between him and Armand and casts Armand into the role of Rashid while Daniel is in the penthouse, (he even continues to call him Rashid and order him around when Daniel is asleep), that's Louis the Pimp viewing Armand the former child sex slave as someone he can manipulate and control, not as a person with feelings. Meanwhile, Lestat's toxic traits come from the trauma of having an abusive family growing up, being kidnapped and turned into a vampire against his will, and being abandoned by his maker. Claudia's toxic traits come from the trauma of an abusive mortal family in poverty, a controlling and abusive vampire family, infantilization and being trapped in a teenage body forever, being raped by Bruce, almost being burned alive while she was still a mortal child during a race war Louis incited, and experiencing racism. Armand's toxic traits come from the trauma of an abusive family, being kidnapped and sex trafficked, being raped by multiple people and viewed as a commodity to be sold, being purchased by Marius and groomed by him, experiencing racism as seen by the whitewashed paintings of him and the slur Nicki used to refer to him, and then being abducted by a cult that he believes killed Marius, burned his brothers alive, and then tortured him into compliance. Whenever Lestat, Claudia, or Armand do something that could be considered toxic/abusive/evil, I can always tie it back to their unique traumas. But Louis? Very little of his abusive behavior can be tied back to the traumas he has experienced. Most of it can easily be tied back to his work as a pimp, and his seeming belief that some people are just beneath him and not worthy of the same respect and humanity he applies to himself and others. Claudia is a Black woman from a poor family, just like the people he exploited. Armand was forced into sex work, just like the people he exploited. As a result, he doesn't seem to view them as individuals who matter, just as something for him to possess and own. This doesn't mean he didn't love them, but he clearly did not know how to love them properly, and as a result, Claudia left him and Armand betrayed him to the coven. The only way Louis's actual trauma seems to come into play is in his relationship with Lestat - the one character who isn't like the people who Louis exploited - and that comes from his inability to tell Lestat he loves him, as that was the last thing he said to Paul.

[casually-slips-into-coma]

spoilers for iwtv s2e4

my thoughts after a rewatch:

i know claudia hates the baby loves window play but she ate up that little song

the lulu role really is so humiliating :(

louis’ expressions whenever he watches these plays always kills me lmao he hates theater kids

louis and armand talking over each other to daniel

armands theater notes lol

claudia no eyebrow big eyeliner look is kinda cunty ngl

im a fan of sam the irish vampire

making claudia be lulu all the time oooh armand i hate u so bad

almost threw up watching louis and armand give different answers to the companion question IN FRONT OF THE COVEN that shit was so embarrassing

i wouldve kms if i was armand

vamp catfight

armand stuck in this situationship dont worry king we’ve all been there😔

literally telling each other i love you and still having the what are we conversation

“do you notice how hot the room gets when you two talk about the secret” plsssss

louis only able to use the fire gift when hes angry👀👀 gee i wonder if thats gonna come back👀👀👀👀👀

louis going🤨🤨 to the schizophrenia question like it came out of nowhere

armands face while louis talked about dreamstat why not just shoot me in the head

loving these dutch angles whenever daniel dissociates and gets an armand memory

santiago looks so good in the gold suit? robe thing??

claudia santiago friendship is killing me santiago i know what u are

claudia killing the guy singing baby lu

i like that you can tell claudias french has gotten better. nice small detail

i love scenes of louis and claudia just talking about non vampire things

santiago mimicking louis was pretty cool

buffoon sighting!!!

whole dinner scene bangs

the guy saying theres smth “fragile” about armand in the photo louis took and louis saying “no he’s anything but” and then the guy saying “you’ve captured the soul he hides” 🤌🤌

louis would never survive a 4 hour art school critique

daniel telling a girl he’d only do her if she had a paper bag over her head??????

claudeline truthers how are we feeling

context for the eating paper clip in the trailer

romeo!!

armand is so down bad its sick

madeline tailoring a yellow dress for claudia😟😟

the whole claudeline interaction was great

amadeo☹️🔫

MARIUS KILL YOURSELF!!!!!!!

the way armand talks about marius

MARIUS KILL YOURSELF x2!!!!!!

“no one has painted me in 400 years” fuck

madeline period blood moment. theres so much here about femininity and maturing might make a separate post about this scene

armand pinning claudia against a wall armand i hate you so bad

we already know that armand is powerful but seeing him choke and manhandle santiago really solidified that i think

picked another one over me!!

delainey is ACTINGGGGG

louis not believing claudia about armand ooooh louis i hate you so bad

love makes you stupid clock it

louis still referring to claudia as his daughter in his head (thru dreamstat)

louis just actively talking to himself girl do that in your head

park bench moment <3

“wanker” i giggled sorry

that suit is his favorite on him :(

“im a little wet” and armand instantly pulling out an umbrella, armand lighting his cigarette, armand calling him maitre

louis calling him arun and armand calling him maitre and then louis throwing away the lighter this fucking scene is cinematic art

the other coven members calling santiago maitre

i kinda like that daniel can hear them arguing from another room. i feel like its a very human experience? really domestic? even given the circumstances

armands eyes were never brown!!!

san francisco flashback episode might kill me im not kidding

insane way to end the episode

ok this was much longer than i thought it would be but this episode has a lot in it. each episode gets better and better and this is definitely my favorite of the season so far.

i am LOVING louis and armands relationship and also both of their story arcs and characterizations. their dynamic is kind of the opposite of what i, and i think a lot of other people, expected but it still makes total sense and im enjoying it a lot

god i love this show

[whatspastisprologue-blr]

This is more for the books than the show (buy maybe also for the show, just not as much) but.... I always wished Armand would have an arc where he'd choose his own name.

Again, this is mostly for the books and not as much for the show (and maybe not for the show at all).

In the books, as a very young child, Andrei was caught between a controlling father and some monks, both of whom seemed to care more about how he should use his artistic talents ("not made by human hands", therefore dehumanizing Andrei even when he was human) than about him as a person. Woven into this is a lot of religious issues that ended up contributing to his trauma and lack of a sense of self once he got kidnapped and ended up in Venice.

Then Marius gets him and renames him Amadeo and Marius is, well, Marius. For all that I 100% agree that they're all monsters, all hurt people who hurt other people, and that none of them are worse than any other, I also think that Marius is basically The Worst(tm) and, if not him, then it's Magnus.

Then the CoS/CoD kidnap Amadeo and rename him Armand and that's a name change that is, again, separation from who he was, as though Amadeo (and Andrei) are entirely different people. They also specifically say that the meaning of "Andrei" doesn't fit who they want him to be and explicitly choose the name Armand, not at random, but because its meaning aligns with their purpose for him. It's purposefully disassociative.

So, I kept waiting and hoping for a time when Armand decided on a name for himself, not a name someone else gave him to help mold him into whoever they wanted him to be. A name not connected to his father, the church, Marius, or the cult. I thought it would be symbolic of him finally being able to define himself, that he would figure out who he is as his own independent person and demonstrate that newfound understanding with a name change.

Now, with the show, I get there's already a lot of Discourse about Armand's name and what the Arun/Maitre dynamic means. Some people say that since Arun is (as far as he knows) the name he had as a slave, it's deeply concerning for Louis to use it, especially given his background as a pimp. Some people say that since it's his birth name and that it's tied to his birth culture/heritage, so it's totally okay for Louis to use it. I'm not here to weigh in on that. I just want to acknowledge it exists and that, therefore, whether Armand should pick a new name for himself would probably be impacted by this controversy.

What do you guys think? Should book!Armand have changed his name? Should show!Armand? Is there a difference between book and show in this regard, where one should but the other shouldn't? Should show!Armand go back to using "Arun" or change his name to something else entirely?

[loumandivorce]

desperately want to send you a loumand prompt but i'm just going insane about the whole armand for you maitre is a coven endearment situation i have no thoughts just that look on armand's face when he says that. gnawing at my arm rattling the bars of my cage etc etc

YOU AND ME BOTH FOREVER! im really fascinated w whatever loumand had going on pre arun... the strange power dynamics and both of them trying to figure out where they fit w the other person...the boundaries that exist (in armand's case so he can walk over them). armand while he was def in control of that convo was using a very specific vocabulary "my dear american friend who has dominated my mind" and i wonder how often louis picked up on armand wanting to be more submissive in the bedroom? armand asking for something like louis hitting him and louis is like record scratch hold on. what? he didn't truly see armand as vulnerable until the "what am i" convo i believe so it'd be interesting to see how louis percieves armands struggles w power before their bdsm dynamic. sorry i just completely derailed from what you were originally talking ab

[robynator]

i am even less normal about it after the last ep louis what the fuck was that

i wasn't expecting them to actually do anything about that dynamic but holy shit they really leaned into it during that last paris loumand scene

louis telling armand that he "used to be real good at running things" before subtly directing him to hold the umbrella for him (and having him light the cigarettes later), telling him to set santiago up to fail by making him his successor even after armand told him he does not want to give santiago such power, questioning if armand really wants him while calling him arun, which is the name he had during his time in the brothel, and armand responding with "yes, maitre" what the fuuuuuck

something something louis used to be a pimp something something armand was sold to a brothel

i don't know where i'm going with this but this realisation came to me suddenly and i refuse to be normal about it

(that and daniel calling armand a rent boy in season 1 like WOW man come on now)

[danlous]

I could see them do something with DM in the past, but unlike the book nothing romantic or something that happened a lot/a relationship. As in, maybe Louis wanted to keep checking in to make sure Daniel is doing okay and maybe, using the Arun/maitre dynamic, sends Armand out to do it. And since he was still irked by how Daniel could be so interesting to Louis, he becomes obsessive from afar (although i could see them hooking up and Armand changing his memories of it afterwards). I just really hope we get a lot of good loumandiel, past or present, because their dynamic is by far my favorite from the show. (like, I really want to see them become sort of a unity against Marius and Lestat's worship of him). I'm still sad we didn't get more Dubai scenes.

Yeah i could see Armand keeping an eye on Daniel in the past without it being romantic at that point. And yes please more loumandiel scenes past or present

[raven-undergrove]

I mean, it actually makes a lot of sense how Santiago would have found out about that. Louis came to the theatre and told Armand to "get face down in the coffin" and "to read the pages while he fucked him." We know the coven was listening, and he probably called him Arun while doing that. Armand told Louis time and again that the coven was dangerous and Louis literally waltzed into the theatre and made Armand look weak in front of all of them by doing this. Of course Santiago found out about the Maitre-Arun dynamic, and he likely used that knowledge to his advantage in his efforts to usurp Armand.

Sorry this is really late but SANTIAGO CALLED ARMAND ARUN IN THE SCRIPT????? how.. do we know this....

YEAH HE DID it’s in the original script that was floating around on twitter i think i don’t have that hellhole.. but sick sick sick sick to my stomach. i wonder how he came to know about that

[murfpersonalblog]

Imma assume this is in reference to me.

To Nonny's comment:

NO. Firstly: I mentioned that Lestat owned the Azalea lest we forget that he and Tom Anderson ("a fulltime Bourbon Street gangster") were also participating in the exploitation of women that only Louis gets vilified for, as if he''s the ONLY abuser, and Lestat gets to walk away smelling like roses.

I never denied this--I've talked about book AND show Louis reflecting the exploitative & predatory nature of vampires over & over; and why the jump from slaveowner to pimp works so well (X X X X)--just like Lestat's lineage from French aristocrats ALSO reflects the exploitative & predatory nature of vampires (X X X). But unlike Lestat, "Louis the Pimp" is discussed wildly out of context as evidence that HE'S the abuser: abusing Lestat (most explicitly on stage during the Trial, which a lot of viewers have taken WAY too seriously, refusing to accept that the Trial was staged & scripted as a sham to justify why he was being lynched by the mob for crimes he didn't commit--or rather, trumped up charges & their abuse of power against him, just like IRL Black men experience every effing day); and most especially abusing Armand in Arun/Maitre convos.

Secondly: Jim Crow was NOT why Lestat owned the Azalea. OBVIOUSLY, Louis & other Black men could own businesses (and homes!) during Jim Crow--and get them all burned down by white men in race riots--get your historical facts straight before you come for me, Nonny. Louis couldn't AFFORD to buy the Fairplay/Azalea, so he took out a LOAN from Lestat--Tom & Alderman Fenwick were "happy to buy the property back from you. Say… 15 cents on the dollar." We see him AND Les sign the papers, agreeing that Les would be his partner & that Lou'd "pay him back, with interest."

So what's "blatantly insulting," Nonny, is you ignoring what AMC plainly showed on screen, which clearly flew right over your head, as you try some sort of racial dynamics gotcha! as if you care about Louis' "character and agency," when you didn't even pay attention to the episode or care to get Louis' story straight before insulting ME.

And now I'm a terf--that's new. Just cuz I said it's misogynist to reduce gender solely down to clothes--when the previous anon I was responding to implied through their over-emphasis of Lestat crossdressing & Louis not crossdressing was that wearing dresses is the only way to be accepted as a woman/female-coded; and only pants/suits/etc to be accepted as men/male-coded.

What I actually said:

I'm not saying that "a gay black man being domestically abused by a flamboyant white man revolves around the oppression of cis women"--I'm saying it REFLECTS/PARALLELS/CODES the oppression of women--trans or cis; if the power imbalance shoe fits, it fits. Even straight & gay men can be battered by their male or female spouses, which Loustat OBVIOUSLY demonstrates. NUANCE, however, requires looking DEEPER than the surface level. Ignoring the SUBLIMINAL message misses the social commentary that vampires as everything/nothing/both/other/neuter symbolize, as representations of the monsters within ALL OF US, as per Gothic literary tradition. Lestat even struggled to understand this when Gabrielle rejected HIS 18th century expectations of societal/familial/gender norms when SHE crossdressed--Marius was better about respecting Zenobia & Eudoxia's agency transcending gender in the friggin Late Antique/Byzantine period than Lestat was for his own effing mother in the Early Modern/Enlightenment period! And she heavily factored into his abandonment issues & expectations in the 20th century that his fledglings WILL stay with him & obey him--I AM YOUR MAKER. Lestat's a constant work in progress--but he's NOT as progressive as people like to imagine.

Hence why I NEVER said men can't be domestically abused--why would I, when I've been screaming that Louis' the one being abused by Lestat the whole time. "Mutual" abuse is moot when one vampire's 100 years older & killing people everyday, while the other's not even a century old and has an literal eating disorder that made him weak enough to get knocked TF out by Lestat & dragged out the courtyard by his jaw & dropped 2km in the sky.

This is literally what I've been saying though. That cuz of race, queerness, disability, etc, Louis (A MAN) can be abused by his partner--and Lestat can walk away smelling like roses by the Trial audience AND the IRL court of public opinion that will uwu blorbo yassify him and say it's LOUIS' fault what happened to him, and that it's karma cuz he was a pimp!

WOAH! Whoever believes that "black men can't be victims of abuse or violence without being somehow women" is clearly not Black; doesn't know any Black men IRL; and has never heard of police brutality, slavery, lynching, the KKK, Nazis, gang violence, nothing. That argument literally sounds made up on the spot. If you're going to talk about race, be serious about it.

And that's not even what this convo's about--it's about how Louis reflects Anne Rice's experiences with motherhood & loss & being a wife in a troubled marriage; and how she created Claudia, Louis & Lestat to represent those experiences, and various facets of herself.

Y'ALL brought up misogyny. I've never argued or suggested that Loustat discourse is about misogyny, internalized or otherwise--I flipped the accusations made against me to challenge assumptions about crossdressing making Lestat the embodiment of C*nt Queen femininity in the fandom. My argument is about the power imbalance between Loustat, based on a MULTITUDE of factors--I talk about RACE more, cuz that's what's MOST IMPORTANT. Gender norms/dynamics fluctuate with the age, but one's race NEVER changes, and racism against Bipocs by their white spouses always instills more HORROR in me than spousal abuse in general; cuz (white) society consistently gaslights the public to vilify the Black spouse in favor of the white one, regardless of the perpetrator or their gender--as even Black women get beat by cops as if they're men, cuz of ridiculous racist stereotypes about Black people being more physically fit than anyone else; when y'all kill us the most. 💀💀💀 (And the IWTV fandom proves me right every time y'all act like "godlike strength" Lestat "I'm not in the mood, I have the blood of Magnus & Akasha in me" de Lioncourt was ever in any real danger from Louis in Ep5 & the Trial's revisit). But ofc gender dynamics factor, too, and I just find it interesting how Les gets painted one way, and Lou by the other, when neither the book, film, nor show vilifies Louis the way Lestans do. And that IS racially motivated.

I've never said Lestat isn't feminine, or exudes femininity. I've said he's not female-CODED. Again, I've discussed Lestat wrt 18th century dandyism (X X) if anyone wants some IRL historical context for what men dressed & acted like at the time Lestat would've been born & raised--and how that is REFLECTED in what he wore in Ep5 when he beat the hell out Louis & dropped him 2km from the effing sky "to BREAK what he could not OWN." Cuz I do my research before I start talking, unlike a lot of y'all--as Nonny's demonstrated.

Agreed, actually. Cuz gender doesn't really matter.

Claudia's a woman. Women love her BECAUSE she's a BAMF who'll WRECK a man. Lestat, specifically.

Akasha's a woman. (Mekare's a woman, too.) And they're the 2 most powerful vamps in the entire TVC. And we're gonna see in living color just how capable Akasha is of dominating men--Lestat, specifically. (Plus there's Gabrielle, Pandora, Bianca, Zenobia, Eudoxia, Petronia, Mona, etc etc.)

So this argument doesn't actually hold up, unless you're only talking about people who've never seen ANY iterations of Claudia in IWTV, or any iterations of Akasha in TVL & QotD.

Agreed. But I'm not talking about femininity in general, I'm talking about gender dynamics wrt uneven power dynamics, and femininity within the context of power imbalances in an early 20th century nuclear family unit that was mimicing the 18th-20th century human households they were raised under & thus perpetuated the good AND bad aspects of--hence: cycles of abuse. Cuz vampires are MIMICS.

This show IS about abuse & trauma, which is why Rolin Jones even put SA & DV in Ep5, doubled-down on it in S2 with Claudia telling us exactly what Bruce/Killer did to her; confirmed the Loustat fight in the 2x7 revisit Louis-antis swore would prove Louis was a liar about being dropped & that Lestat didn't abuse him (sure, Jan)--he was tryna stop Louis from killing himself that night (LOL?)--and why AMC disagreed that it should have a trigger warning, has NEVER put a TW on Ep5 (only Ep6), & boldly said S3 will NOT have trigger warnings & to kiss their grits if y'all don't like it.

DKY y'all swear you're engaging with the story when Marquis de Lioncourt & Gabrielle are NEVER mentioned in relation to Loustat. Maybe you missed this part of my response, cuz you said you didn't read all of it cuz of the text/font.

All that matters is the Blood, and how much Lestat had, and how much Louis had, when Lestat decided to choke TF out of his "built-like-a-bird" daughter and her Daddy Lou who swooped in to protect her, even though he'd been starving himself on rats & raccoons for the past 7 years & was thus sorely under-levelled against his husband when he got beat to a effing pulp, dragged out the yard by his effing jawbone, and dropped 2km from the sky "like an egg from an airplane" by the white man who wanted to "break" him cuz he suddenly realized he couldn't OWN his Black spouse anymore. 😲 Imagine. But yes, let's talk about how much we care about Louis' "character and agency." 🤣

And like I've said elsewhere, Louis is NOT less of a man. His behavior is the product of him trying to NOT be treated as a lesser man (esp. by white men), because of his race (and sexuality). The uneven gender dynamic is a side effect of other expressions of power Massa Lestat used against him, to "break what you cannot own." And I literally said that in the response you admitted to not reading fully:

Duh. Louis AND Lestat are obvs men. You keep dancing around my terminology: FEMALE-CODED. Being female-coded isn't the same as being a woman, either. It's a literary device, which neither you nor Nonny has even mentioned--the lack of metaphor is striking.

Trying to DENY that Lestat reflects masculine & patriarchal ideals when he is literally repeating history through his verbal & physical abuse of his spouse & child a la Marquis de Lioncourt just cuz you insist that abuse has to fit into your narrow-minded view of what an abuser and a victim looks like is well, ILLITERATE. It's in the books!

Is Lestat the Gabrielle-coded here? NO!

Is Louis Gabrielle-coded? CONSTANTLY.

CYCLES ARE CYCLING.

I can't WAIT to see people spinning their wheels when Marquis de Lioncourt's on screen in S3 doing exactly what Lestat does in S1 & S2; as the same people who cuss Louis & Claudia out rush to Gabrielle & Lestat's defense, omg. Using all kinds of white!feminist rhetoric about men not being recognized as men (but only when attacking black!Louis)--before gallivanting off to post 1000 Lestat gifs of him in a dress & flipping his hair & wrists and tagging it as MOTHER~! and then saying I'm a gender essentialist terf homophobe for calling him a patriarchal overlord just like his no-good effing daddy.

The democracy of hypocrisy is what I'm responding against, how Louis is inevitably disqualified in the Uwu Olympics cuz of his outward appearance--no wonder Imane Khelif's effing SUING for discrimination & bullying against ACTUAL terfs like JK Rowling! Cuz y'all do this to us ALL the time, Jedi mind tricking everyone to pretend it's either NOT about race & we're looking too deep into it; or that you care so much about race while not even citing historical facts about racism properly, wtf.

it's so crazy that people are out here making literal terf arguments over a fictional gay couple

also it was taking me out how that reply was literally citing examples of Louis' textual racial oppression as evidence of him being a subtextual woman like is that really what we're doing now?? Lestat owns the Azalea on paper because Louis can't own it as a black man during Jim Crow not because Lestat is equally invested in running the business as The Man like it's 1000% Louis' thing, and ignoring the strategic ways he operates his business black man just bc you're uncomfortable with the moral nature of that business is so blatantly insulting to Louis character and agency it's ridiculous. Like if Louis is a woman the majority of these people are being unironically sexist towards her because they like the boring self-insert wattpad version of her they created in their heads rather than the actual character.

sorry for the rant you can feel free to ignore it but that was driving me crazy

don’t apologize for the rant I’m so happy u sent me the rant bcus now I feel like I’m not crazy 😭😭. I didn’t actually read that one reply bcus the weird font changes gave me a migraine, but I skimmed enough to know what their thesis was 💀.

the terf shit is genuinely insane. I think a lot of this interpretation comes down to cis women with internalized sexism and transphobia (and racism cough cough) choosing to interpret Louis and lestats relationship in a way that aligns with their heteronormative narrow minded view of relationships (especially abusive ones) bcus they r unable to interpret a story about a gay black man being domestically abused by a flamboyant white man in a way that doesn’t revolve around the oppression of cis women bcus they believe that cis women are the central and only victims of oppression and domestic violence.

even tho it is explicitly shown to us that Lestat is able to abuse louis bcus louis is socially oppressed as a black man and lestat has societal power over him, ppl feel the need to put this “he’s also a metaphor for women” angle on it bcus they don’t want to confront the reality that men, especially men who are oppressed bcus of race or queerness or disability or any number of things, can be abused by their partners, and often are. I’ve noticed a lot of cis women have a problem with acknowledging that men can and do experience oppression that is “for women”. Domestic violence is often leveraged against women, but men are also victimized by it too, and stories about men who r abused deserve to be told without being “secretly about women”. This is especially weird since Louis is a black man, and I think a lot of this interpretation is happening bcus a lot of ppl subconsciously believe that black men can’t be victims of abuse or violence without being somehow women. Which is fucked up, obviously. It also undermines the actual story being told about a black man trying to navigate abuse and power structures by suggesting it’s actually about misogyny, bcus the implication is that misogyny is more important or legitimate then a black man’s experience and therefore he is just a mouth piece for a “real issue”

this is also why I think ppl argue lestat can’t be feminine bcus he abused Louis. They think that a feminine person can’t be an abuser, so they think that when I say lestat is feminine, im actually invaliding that he’s an abuser and suggesting he’s actually not abusive (bcus he’s fem). Believe it or not, u can be feminine and flamboyant or be a woman and at the same time be domestically violent against ur partner. Lestat’s feminine self expression and behavior is completely irrelevant to him being abusive, and he can be abusive and leverage his privilege over Louis while still being a feminine person. I think cis women have a problem with this bcus they are frightened to admit that they are capable of being instigators of violence despite being women/feminine . So friendly reminder, femininity is not the same as being morally good or pure, and femininity and victimhood are not the same. Trying to paint lestat as this embodiment of masculine and patriarchal ideals when he is very much a feminine queer man just bcus u insist that abuse has to fit into ur narrow minded view of what an abuser and a victim looks like is well, ignorant.

so Ppl who r socially oppressed are often victimized, and women are often victimized bcus they are socially oppressed, but Louis is socially oppressed and and that does not make him a women. Got it? 💀

It’s also important to acknowledge that Louis is a pimp who uses the victimization of women to gain social status and money for himself. Equating his suffering with the suffering of women is just not accurate when the show explicitly demonstrates to us that Louis is able to use the victimization of women to his advantage. Louis still operates within the patriarchy as a man, and him being abused by another man doesn’t make him less of a man, doesn’t make him akin to a woman thematically, and doesn’t mean he experiences misogyny the way women do in the narrative

(also, just a disclaimer, I’m not talking about ppl who headcanon Louis as trans or gnc or feminine, that is all awesome and a great way to express urself and how u relate to him. What I’m talking about is ppl who say that iwtv is thematically about domestic abuse against women bcus Louis is presented as the woman in the relationship since he’s abused by lestat )

[murfpersonalblog]

Your tags are valid, OP.

There's a lot of blink and you miss it things about this show that legit fly over people's heads. And unfortunately, a lot of them pertain to Armand/Amadeo/Arun.

I made a whole post about Armand's magnolias--which the show never actually tells us is a magnolia tree--you'd just have to know, and piece it together when Armand mentions his cutting in 2x6.

And the show does this constantly--expecting the audience to either know things in advance by reading the books Rolin keeps waving around on press junkets, or just hash it out on social media with metas & such. Meanwhile AMC has the most surface-level asinine interviews ever, with safe/soft journalists who don't DARE ask anything with deeper nuance or context, just teeheeing about crap.

Like, I've seen SO MANY people talk about his "slave name," mistakenly thinking it's Arun, when ARMAND is his real slave name--the name his vampire kidnappers thrust on him when they forced him to join their religious cult & killed his brothers and burned his Maker. 99% of folk had no idea that "Arun" is a local Indian name--which would NEVER be given to an Indian captive being sold into slavery overseas by foreigners, his identity/humanity/past stripped away--what white slavemasters gave their Black slaves African names? XD But do these fans get that? Wtf do they know about slavery, let alone Indian culture, let alone antiquity-renaissance sex/gender/age dynamics, let alone race pre-1492/Enlightenment/etc, let alone the particulars of book!Armand's actual captivity & cult indoctrination--that all color what the magnolia scene represents for him vs Louis, and what "Maitre" represents for him vs Louis.

Like, the show doesn't explain ANY of these nuances wrt Armand. They just gave suspicious fanfic in 2x3 & out-of-place trauma-dumps in 2x4; with the most spotty allusions to his backstory--with more holes & contradictions & discombobulating visual disconnects (that whitewashed effing painting omfg) than anything so-called liar!Louis(TM) gave Daniel--then they get mad when their audience totally misinterprets everything and doesn't perceive scenes/episodes/ships the way the writers/showrunners expected them to, LOL.

They made Armand the ultimate schemer, with not one but TWO big gotcha! plot twists about his duplicitousness in both season finales. But they left so many doors open for racists to blame/doubt Louis on one hand & Armand on the other; ultimately throwing them under the bus for the sake of redeeming effing Lestat (which we saw in living color with the poll results--even SANTIAGO got a pass!). So people are torn over which direction to even approach Armand from, let alone understand wtf was going on with the magnolia & the rocks & Maitre & the script/rehearsal & SanFran & DM & Marius & Rashid etc.

I keep meaning to finish my drafted post/RANT about how miffed I've been about AMC's take on Armand, and the weird AF way they've handled him, and the contradictory/skewed way Assad talks about him. Cuz I've been confused since 2x3 / 2x4. Armand's my fave book character, but I feel he's been used as this huge misdirect for the show to specifically keep book readers on our toes, by obfuscating everything about this dude and his motives, so we can't even anticipate anything about him without a frikkin microscope and a crystal ball, so they can rug-pull us whenever they want. They're not gonna SHOW us--heck, they're not even TELLING us! They axed Night Island cuz I'm convinced they legit didn't know wtf to do with Armand. Rolin wanted this to be the Louis-&-Lestat show--esp. the Lestat show--so who knows how much more they'll give us about the most opaque character!?! U_U

One of the things they really should have actually shown on screen.