(no subject)
Alright, so with the new Twilight movie coming out and the kids at the Young Writers Workshop I recently helped teach talking all about how they wanted to be the next Stephanie Meyer, I've been thinking about the sort of books I used to read in high school. What were they? Harry Potter, sword and sorcery fantasy novels, and most importantly Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles. I first discovered them when I was a freshman in high school and by my junior year (whihch coincided with the release of the eleventh and final book in the series), I'd pretty much devoured them all, as well as some of Rice's other novels. It strikes me as funny that the same topic that is being obsessed over by teenagers now is the same thing that I was interested in when I was in high school. Granted, that was only five years ago... And Rice's books weren't necessarily popular with my peers.
Anyway, all of this, plus the Interview With the Vampire DVD my father recently purchased for me, have made me want to revisit these novels. I mean, I was obsessed with them. I made my friends read them, I printed out Lestat and Louis fanart to hang in my locker, I started a vampire story of my own. The effects of these books on me have lingered even today. One of the characteristics of my writing that my teachers and my classmates here in my MFA program talk about is its lyricism. I credit this directly to Anne Rice. Her writing is very ornate, her sentence structures complex. It's all really pretty, if not in some places overdone and maybe a little heavy. I'm not saying that I write in such an antiquated way, but I have definitely been influenced by her use of the language.
And so, I've started rereading them for the first time in seven years. I started this weekend and somehow am already through the first two and on to the third. I'm finding so much I didn't notice in them before. It's crazy. So I've decided to kind of review them all here as I finish them. I guess not review, so much as reflect. I'm assuming that everyone who wants to read them has, since the chronicles have been finished for seven years and the first book was published in 1976, so there will be spoilers. However, I'll put them under lj cuts, just in case.
The first book in the series has always been one of my favorites. Interestingly enough, it was the second book that I read, having picked up Blood and Gold (the 9th) first, not realizing it was part of a sequential series.
My love of this book actually didn't even start with the book, but with the movie, which I saw when it was only a couple of years old. I was really young, maybe ten, and it was on a tape some friend's of my grandma had loaned us because there were some Disney movies taped before it. Aladdin, I think. Anyway, I ended up being much less interested in the kids movies than in IwtV, which I probably watched a half dozen times that summer, much to the annoyance of my sister and cousins. When I realized that this book was the basis of the movie I'd practically forgotten about, I was thrilled.
Back to the book, though. The narrator is Louis, a Creole New Orleans plantation owner, who after the death of his younger brother fell into despair and was changed into a vampire by Lestat (the most famous of Rice's characters). He tells his story about his life with Lestat, who he paints as completely evil, and Claudia, a vampire changed at the age of five, who really is crazy evil. He introduces some people and places that are important throughout the entire series, like Armand and the Theater of the Vampires. More importantly, this introduces the idea of the thinking, feeling, suffering vampire that is so common within Rices work and I think, because of her, all of vampire lit since. Reading this book again, I liked it even more than I did originally.
The second book is The Vampire Lestat, the life story of the eponymous main character, Lestat. When I was younger, this one was my favorite. It tells of his life before becoming a vampire, details the dissolution of the coven at les Innocents and the foundation the the Theater of the Vampires. You get Armand's story, Marius' story, and the mythology and creation story of the vampires. It's chock full of info.
The most notable thing about this, is that it is in direct opposition to many of the things Louis said in IwtV. Apparently, there was much love between Louis and Lestat and regarding their final meeting in the 1980's, Louis was lying. The reason for this is that IwtV came out in 76 and TVL in 1983 or so. Between the release of the first and the writing of the second, the story grew from one book to a series. Rice became enamoured with the character of Lestat to the point that her second book venerated him and slandered Louis, a character remarkable in his goodness. Lestat WAS evil. Lestat WAS crazy. And with the publishing of TVL, Louis became a bitter liar and Lestat becomes the the more ethical of the two, the one who believes in goodness above all things (whereas Louis cares more about beauty as goodness) and only kills those who he knows to be evil. Shockingly, the boy Frenier from IwtV, the boy Louis fought so hard to save, was outed by Lestat as being a rapist, gambler, and murderer who would have shortly squandered his family's fortune had he not been killed.
This didn't bother me so much when I was younger. I think this is a case of by writing training interfering with my ability to enjoy literature. I was felt too much betrayed by the shift of Loius from reliable narrator to liar to completely enjoy the book. He was the foundation of everything and TVL changes who we tought he was and who we thought Lestat was. Even Armand changes, and not for the better, though I will say he does become more interesting here. I will say, though, the love Louis and Lestat feel for each other in this book really made me happy. Their reunion is one of the saddest, best things in this book.
Another thing that bugged me was the long insertion of the stories of other characters. There are blocks and blocks of text where one character is simply telling Lestat his life story. This doens't strike me as realistic, but I guess I can write it off as simply the fact that vampires have the patience to listen to long winded stories. It's not so much the unrealistic part that bothers me (all fantasy, horror, and sci-fi must be met with a certain suspension of belief) but that these stories are retold in Queen of the Damned,The Vampire Armand, and Blood and Gold.
Also, he's a rock star. Really. A rock star. The Queen of the Damned movie flopped for a reason, and though terrible casting, acting, and screenplay are part of it, the main is that it's just kind of cheesy. It fits with his character, I guess, since he was an actor, but seriously. It reeks of the 80's.
And another also, at the beginning he kind of gives a disclaimer saying that he talks like a Frenchman but uses regualar everyday slang, and also talks like Sam Spade. That bugs me. The reader is going to believe it or they aren't. If there is one thing I have learned from making my own mistakes, it's that if you have to make your characters explain why something is weird, that's a pretty good indication that it's weird enough that it's probably not a good idea. And though Lestat's voice works for me and I wouldn't change it (except in some strange places), I wouldn't have put the disclaimer. No, no.
Overall, it's good and I enjoyed it, but I didn't enjoy it with the fervor I did as a teenager. I liked IwtV better. Guess it's time to take The Vampire Lestat off my favorite books on Facebook. I've changed my mind.
It really is amazing how I didn't notice so much of the ethical, philosphical, and religious debate that goes on in these books. I must have been a moron.
Anyway, all of this, plus the Interview With the Vampire DVD my father recently purchased for me, have made me want to revisit these novels. I mean, I was obsessed with them. I made my friends read them, I printed out Lestat and Louis fanart to hang in my locker, I started a vampire story of my own. The effects of these books on me have lingered even today. One of the characteristics of my writing that my teachers and my classmates here in my MFA program talk about is its lyricism. I credit this directly to Anne Rice. Her writing is very ornate, her sentence structures complex. It's all really pretty, if not in some places overdone and maybe a little heavy. I'm not saying that I write in such an antiquated way, but I have definitely been influenced by her use of the language.
And so, I've started rereading them for the first time in seven years. I started this weekend and somehow am already through the first two and on to the third. I'm finding so much I didn't notice in them before. It's crazy. So I've decided to kind of review them all here as I finish them. I guess not review, so much as reflect. I'm assuming that everyone who wants to read them has, since the chronicles have been finished for seven years and the first book was published in 1976, so there will be spoilers. However, I'll put them under lj cuts, just in case.
The first book in the series has always been one of my favorites. Interestingly enough, it was the second book that I read, having picked up Blood and Gold (the 9th) first, not realizing it was part of a sequential series.
My love of this book actually didn't even start with the book, but with the movie, which I saw when it was only a couple of years old. I was really young, maybe ten, and it was on a tape some friend's of my grandma had loaned us because there were some Disney movies taped before it. Aladdin, I think. Anyway, I ended up being much less interested in the kids movies than in IwtV, which I probably watched a half dozen times that summer, much to the annoyance of my sister and cousins. When I realized that this book was the basis of the movie I'd practically forgotten about, I was thrilled.
Back to the book, though. The narrator is Louis, a Creole New Orleans plantation owner, who after the death of his younger brother fell into despair and was changed into a vampire by Lestat (the most famous of Rice's characters). He tells his story about his life with Lestat, who he paints as completely evil, and Claudia, a vampire changed at the age of five, who really is crazy evil. He introduces some people and places that are important throughout the entire series, like Armand and the Theater of the Vampires. More importantly, this introduces the idea of the thinking, feeling, suffering vampire that is so common within Rices work and I think, because of her, all of vampire lit since. Reading this book again, I liked it even more than I did originally.
The second book is The Vampire Lestat, the life story of the eponymous main character, Lestat. When I was younger, this one was my favorite. It tells of his life before becoming a vampire, details the dissolution of the coven at les Innocents and the foundation the the Theater of the Vampires. You get Armand's story, Marius' story, and the mythology and creation story of the vampires. It's chock full of info.
The most notable thing about this, is that it is in direct opposition to many of the things Louis said in IwtV. Apparently, there was much love between Louis and Lestat and regarding their final meeting in the 1980's, Louis was lying. The reason for this is that IwtV came out in 76 and TVL in 1983 or so. Between the release of the first and the writing of the second, the story grew from one book to a series. Rice became enamoured with the character of Lestat to the point that her second book venerated him and slandered Louis, a character remarkable in his goodness. Lestat WAS evil. Lestat WAS crazy. And with the publishing of TVL, Louis became a bitter liar and Lestat becomes the the more ethical of the two, the one who believes in goodness above all things (whereas Louis cares more about beauty as goodness) and only kills those who he knows to be evil. Shockingly, the boy Frenier from IwtV, the boy Louis fought so hard to save, was outed by Lestat as being a rapist, gambler, and murderer who would have shortly squandered his family's fortune had he not been killed.
This didn't bother me so much when I was younger. I think this is a case of by writing training interfering with my ability to enjoy literature. I was felt too much betrayed by the shift of Loius from reliable narrator to liar to completely enjoy the book. He was the foundation of everything and TVL changes who we tought he was and who we thought Lestat was. Even Armand changes, and not for the better, though I will say he does become more interesting here. I will say, though, the love Louis and Lestat feel for each other in this book really made me happy. Their reunion is one of the saddest, best things in this book.
Another thing that bugged me was the long insertion of the stories of other characters. There are blocks and blocks of text where one character is simply telling Lestat his life story. This doens't strike me as realistic, but I guess I can write it off as simply the fact that vampires have the patience to listen to long winded stories. It's not so much the unrealistic part that bothers me (all fantasy, horror, and sci-fi must be met with a certain suspension of belief) but that these stories are retold in Queen of the Damned,The Vampire Armand, and Blood and Gold.
Also, he's a rock star. Really. A rock star. The Queen of the Damned movie flopped for a reason, and though terrible casting, acting, and screenplay are part of it, the main is that it's just kind of cheesy. It fits with his character, I guess, since he was an actor, but seriously. It reeks of the 80's.
And another also, at the beginning he kind of gives a disclaimer saying that he talks like a Frenchman but uses regualar everyday slang, and also talks like Sam Spade. That bugs me. The reader is going to believe it or they aren't. If there is one thing I have learned from making my own mistakes, it's that if you have to make your characters explain why something is weird, that's a pretty good indication that it's weird enough that it's probably not a good idea. And though Lestat's voice works for me and I wouldn't change it (except in some strange places), I wouldn't have put the disclaimer. No, no.
Overall, it's good and I enjoyed it, but I didn't enjoy it with the fervor I did as a teenager. I liked IwtV better. Guess it's time to take The Vampire Lestat off my favorite books on Facebook. I've changed my mind.
It really is amazing how I didn't notice so much of the ethical, philosphical, and religious debate that goes on in these books. I must have been a moron.