Loving The Raw Dark of the Soul
This post doesn't really have any point, but these things have been swirling around my head. I had hoped that the thing I'd feel compelled to write on was the construction of women among the fandom, but it was not to be. I need to write this one down lest I obsess the whole day. And I have better things to do. Oh, and before I forget - True Blood ( Read more... )
Comments 43
I loved DITF. This quote about Eric in particular struck me as chilling, and shows what a long way Sookie has come in understanding, if not accepting the vamp world, while certainly not condoning it.
Appius is the scariest mofo in all of SVM, and how anyone can't see that is beyond me.
Reply
I thought DITF was wonderful. Of course, it gives so much insight into what it takes to get through a thousand years and doesn't pull any punches. I think that there isn't really any journey to understanding it as such, but more learning how to form that dichotomy within yourself.
I read people saying all the time "Pfft. Appius wasn't so scary." It makes me shake my head - and also understand why the offenders I read about get away with what they do - they don't do howler monkey evil either. Appius made me shit my pants for Sookie and Eric with his narcissism and his jealousy.
Reply
This post made me think about another you had made a while back, about good vs. bad vampire or Eric vs. Bubba. While Bubba's condition has great perks - going into homes uninvited, ability to follow orders to a fault... - that render him very useful to other vamps, Alexei is every maker's nightmare. He carried such a great burden that made him so dysfunctional he ultimately lead to his maker's downfall.
... And i forgot to sign yesterday
~ Toonmum
Reply
I think that Bubba's perks are only possible because he's not like other vampires. I don't know that you'd want Alexei to have those powers, at all. And Alexei is so used up and mistreated that I think Appius couldn't understand how much of that damage he'd caused. And the fact that he looks like a boy only helped him with the stealth attacks.
Lol - most anons forget, particularly if you're used to being logged in places. :D
Reply
Reply
Reply
My poorly expressed point about the paedophilia was more that it seems to be about the power he has over his children, whether actual children or not. Another interesting thought - a 13 year old in the Viking age would probably be moving into adulthood; I'd read the references to the boy as not being about physical age as much as emotional age.
Reply
:D I think though that Appius has more control over his vampire children than any parent ever has over an actual child. So it's not just as easy as a parental human relationship. And certainly, I think Eric has shown that he can change enough to see Alexei as a boy now, when he wouldn't have in his own time.
Reply
Sookie's always known Eric has plenty of 'raw darks' in his soul. In DuD she gets a glimpse of the thoughts that live there - the 'pit of snakes' as she calls it. She must have had many, many glimpses like that into a lot of people.
She's in a unique position of knowing, really knowing, that everyone is capable of the same kind of thoughts in relation to the Appius/Alexei/Eric situation.
If you skip the messy bits you don't get to see all the layers to the characters. I'm OK if people want to do that - just don't say CH doesn't know what she's doing! Give me imperfect Eric any day.
Reply
Reply
He was a viking. Vikings had sex with men, and as long as you were the "male" part that was OK, claim that somebody was "a woman" was an insult.
I laughed at the part in TB were Lafayette is nasty to Bill because Bill was a slaveowner or had neighbours who were, then went to work with ERIC, who not only had slaves, but probably stole people himself and traded in them. He probably raped women on raids as well. That is what men "In viking" did.
Thralls could be beaten, killed, sacrificed and raped, I am not sure were the limits of apropriate behaviour were. Damaging other people's property was not OK, and not people who were free men, belonged to you own group, but "kill an Englishman for free, no fine", so changing this into "Vampires First" probably was not very hard for Eric.
One could probably also argue that Eric probably raped Pam, he kills her and when she wakes upp he has sex with her, "seduction" or not he definitely never asked her consent.
Reply
Reply
Pam does not give any details, and you are right about her right to decide what it was. At the same time, being made a vampire strikes me a bit, more than a bit, like being drugged and brainwashed, enslaved to your maker. Eric clearly was nicer than Ocella, but Eric still loved him, a very mixed bag of feelings there ...
Reply
She says that Eric gave her a choice, and that she made the decision. But yeah - the connection, the newness of the state, and for Pam, the intoxicating freedom make it not quite so clear cut. And Pam still skips over Sookie pointing out that Eric murdered her - which to me tells me that she hasn't quite resolved that one. She may enjoy what she is now, and looking at Victorian England for women, I don't blame her. But that doesn't absolve Eric who did it because he was lonely.
Reply
Reply
I agree that her ability to make him an attractive prospect is what makes him appealing to most readers. For myself, I just want to get in there and poke around in that sort of criminal mind. That's like the Holy Grail for me - 1000 years of justifying fucking other people over - and I think I would find him repellent and fascinating.
Reply
He’d make a great case study. "Poor Eric," under the microscope like that. ;)
Reply
Lol - he would drain me in a heartbeat. I ask enough questions to make poor Mr. Minty blush, let alone badgering a thousand year old vampire with the toddler like "But why?" :D
Reply
Leave a comment