Jump to content

Talk:Lestat de Lioncourt/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

comments

Isn't the song "Moon over Bourbon Street" by Sting about Lestat?

Should this be added to the page? Somebody should find a citation. :)

From what I remember, Moon over Bourbon Street is based upon Interview with the Vampire as a whole. And the song doesn't sound like it's about Lestat, since he in that book was portrayed in a very different manner compared to the later books, as well as the song. --Hallonboat 12:28, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

"Moon over Bourbon Street" is not about Lestat, the song is about Louis and even mentions his encounter with Babette. Sting himself said he wasn't interested in Lestat but on Louis' moral dilemma about being a vampire and that's why he wrote that song. Source: https://www.sting.com/discography/index/album/albumId/185/tagName/studio_albums

Should Marius be mentioned in this article?

no I REALLY don't think so

Marius created Lestat, and thusly he is mentioned here. Juno Loire 03:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Magnus created Lestat, not Marius. However, Marius should of course be mentioned here anyway, being an important part of Lestats history. --Hallonboat 12:28, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

'He is a vampire'

I don't think mentioning that Lestat is a vampire is appropriate for the introduction. Lestat did not begin life as a vampire; like all vampires, he was originally mortal. I originally decided to delete any mention of it at all from the introduction, but I have since decided to replace it with 'He began his life as a mortal man, but he later became a vampire'.

FractaL 19:35, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

In that case, every one of Anne Rice's vampires shoudl say the same thing. It's common sense dear. He IS a vampire. He WAS a mrotal man, but now IS a vampire. Got what I'm trying to say?--The Brat Princess (talk) 09:04, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

A question about Lestat's "children", and a statement by Armand

In 'The Vampire Lestat' Armand says to Lestat "Each time the death and the awakening will ravage the mortal spirit, so that one will hate you for taking his life, another will run to excesses that you scorn. A third will emerge mad and raving, another a monster ou cannot control. One will be jealous of your superiority, another shut you out."

Do each of these statements refer to a specific vampire that Lestat sires?

  • To my knowledge, Lestat sired five vampires: Gabrielle, Nicholas, Louis, Claudia and David (although I've not read all of the chronicles). I'm not sure that Armand is referring to Lestat's children with each remark, he might just be listing the different possible reactions of those who are turned into vampires. FractaL 18:43, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
"Each time the death and awakening will ravage the mortal spirit, so that one will hate you for taking his life, another will run to excesses that you scorn. A third will emerge mad and raving, another a beast you cannot control. One will be jealous of your superiority, another shut you out (Armand turned and looked at Gabrielle). And the veil will always come down between you. Make a legion. You will be always and forever alone!" -Armand from The Vampire Lestat
  • I personally think that each one talks about one of Lestat's fledgling. Gabrielle is "Another shut you out", Armand looked at her when he said that part. Nicolas is "will emerge mad and raving". I think Louis is "so that one will hate you taking his life". Claudia I believe is "A beast you cannot control". Claudia I think kinda fills multiple possible ones soo I was a little torn on hers, but the lack of control I thought was the best choice. Leaving for 2 more fledgling to be filled Im still reading the series soo I havent got David yet. But I did find it interesting that "The Musician" from Interview with the Vampire doesnt seem to be mentioned. When he was said to be a vampire. And that at the end of Interview with the vampire there was a vampire helping Lestat, that made a impression on me to have been made by Lestat. I also found it weird I didnt really see to much info about Armand's curse when I googled about it. Since I found this pretty interesting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.203.43.171 (talk) 03:08, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Wolf Pack

Local peasents report the problem of the wolves to Lestat. They estimate the pack to be five strong. However, when Lestat comes upon the pack he discovers it is actually eight strong. This is important because the preparations he has made are insufficent. This results in the heroic struggle between Lestat and the pack. Should this not read, Lestat hunted eight wolves? 90.202.27.32 21:07, 24 September 2007 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Browners83 (talk • contribs) 22:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Sexual relationship between Lestat and Louis/or other vampires

"There was a certain element of sexual attraction implicit in their relationship, but whether it was actually consummated is a matter of debate."

This should be deleted, as it is often stated in the Chronicles that sex is something that, while not impossible, is not a thing that vampires do, apparently because they do not get any pleasure out of it, as well as being incapable of reproducing in that way. The vampiric equivalent would be the drinking of blood, in both the case of pleasure and creating new vampires. Hallonboat 21:30, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

  • I agree with you to an extent, in that I don't think that Lestat or Louis were particularly interested in having sex. However, the relationship between Armand and Marius was undoubtedly a sexual one, so I wouldn't be so bold as to claim that vampires are entirely uninterested in sex. I'm not so sure about this to support any deletion. FractaL 21:21, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • While there was a sexual relationship between Armand and Marius, I seem to recall that it took place before Armand was given the Blood. When it comes to sexual relations between vampires and mortals, it seems to me that vampires give pleasure rather than recieve it. Physical pleasure, that is. I believe that there is a serious lack of evidence regarding sex between vampires, unless the act of drinking blood might be classified as such. And if that is the case, it should at least be mentioned in the article that if any sexual relationship between Lestat and Louis has existed, it had nothing to do with what might be called regular male/male sexual practices. Hallonboat 20:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

As it says in The Vampire Chronicles over and over. Vampires cannot have sex. They lack the organs. Armand and Marius coudl never have had sexual relatoins because Marius had been a vampire for 1,500 years before he created Armand. That is why Marius constantly told Armand that he should go get the pleasure of a man and a woman. Louis and Lestat coulnd't have had any sexual relations either because Lestat had been made vampire over 20 years before Louis was, and that he had met Louis that night and made him a vampire.72.177.178.215 19:15, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

But surely there doesn't have to be penetrative sex for their relationship to be 'consummated'? In the vampiric sense, it could just mean a certain degree of affection, and Lestat does call Louis his 'lover' twice in Tale of the Body Thief.

I believe Anne Rice's vampires are mostly amorals (not bond by morals, including sexual) and homosexual sex relations could have taked place (the fact there is more male vampire than female just reflect Anne Rice's preferences). There is nothing (in Anne Rice's works) saying they have "lack or organs", as far as I know. Nor it say vampire dont get pleasure through sex. I think you guys speculate too much. Please, quote the arguments in the books (or point it) in Vampire Chronicles wich specifically says vampires dont have sex. --SSPecteR
I agree on this point.

I think that as the vampires cant reproduce in the sense that humans can that they realy dont have the samne male/female biological genders. To them gender is just what they look like rather than their biological make-up. So in my opinion they cant actualy have homosexual sex or heterosexual sex, but rather just vampire sex. Daemon415 01:37, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Anne Rice's vampires don't have sex because they don't have the physical urge to. I recall in one of the novels, perhaps "Queen of the Damned" mentioning that point exactly. Also, I think that in "The Vampire Armand," the sex between Marius and Armand was purely for Armand's benefit. --Badass-boi 20:25, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

In Queen of the Damned Lestat is stood infront of a mirror, examining his body. When he gets to his penis he states "And the organ, the organ we don't need, poised as if ready for what it would never again know how to do or want to do, marble, a Priapus at the gate." If it were possible for vampires to have sex I believe they would get round to it in the books, I hold this belief because in Tale of the Body Theif, while Lestat is in his temporary mortal body he is excited about again having the ability to do so. Ribenaberry 13:48, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

In Pandora, Pandora and Marius have sex when she is a vampire. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.76.229.17 (talk) 22:33, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

In Armand the Vampire, Marius has sex with Bianca (page 189), and, I quote, Armand thinks "That was the miracle, I realized, that a human could be brought to this higher temperature, and thereby give forth all of her sweet scents and even a strong invisible shimmer of emotions; it was rather like stoking a fire until it became a blaze." I think it happens not only because Marius desired and loved Bianca, but also to teach this to Armand who was recently turned into a vampire. PetuNia Pi (talk) 13:38, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Clarifications

Anne Rice's vampires don't have literal sex. The novel The Vampire Lestat and Tale of the body thief confirm that certain reproductive organs simply do not work with vampirs though characters such as Lestat were bisexual before ever being made a vampire.

No, Moon over Burboun Street is NOT about Lestat. It's about Louis. It was written in regard to Interview with the vampire, not The Vampire Lestat.

And finally (And this just hurts my head) NO, Marius did NOT make Lestat a vampire except in the horrible film, Queen of the damned. In the novels, musical adaptations, graphic novels, comic books, audio books and Vampire companion book it all states that Lestat was made by the mad vampire Magnus, NOT Marius.

Rewrite

I've tried to rewrite and organize this article as per Wiki guidelines and the MoS. Nothing has really been deleted, although some text has been shuffled into appropriate sections. Hope it works for everyone. Best, DanielEng (talk) 07:49, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Deleting image from article For those that are deleting the Townsend photograph from this article: there are no official illustrations of Lestat from the novels, and the photo depicts one of the versions of the character. Questions of quality aside, the QotD film is also far more well known than the Broadway version. It should not be deleted unless a substitute can be provided, such as a sketch of Lestat from Rice's files, a photo of the costumed Lestat from the Coven Ball or something else that would be more accurate. DanielEng (talk) 11:50, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation

In my Blackwood Farm edition, Quinn says that Lestat "prounced his name Les-dot, stressing the last syllable". Is the pronunciation put in the article the same as the one I gave?--The Brat Princess (talk) 09:02, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I tried to add to the External links the Lestat & Marius fan site of mine, but the link was deleted with reason that it should be an in-depth fan site about Lestat all in all to serve the article. That does not make sense and I wish the site would be added back. On the site in question I have tons of in-depth information, and analyzing as well, about their relationship, which IS a very vital part of The Vampire Chronicles and thus of Lestat as a character - and why so becomes very clear from the in-depth information on the site. I really thought it would be good, in-depth external information on the character itself, through that relationship because his relationship with Marius such a vital part of him.

Also, yes, the article IS about Lestat as a character all in all. But why should in-depth fan sites linked be all in all about him too, why can't there be several links that each go in-depth with some specific part of him and his story? It would serve the purpose even if in pieces. After all IS there an in-depth fan site about Lestat all in all as a character? And I mean, what's the harm done if external links included sites that focus on some parts of the character? It's not as if it affected the quality of the article or the fan site's information in any but positive way, or as if it was any less educational than all-in-all Lestat site's might be. And as said, the in-depth educational Lestat & Marius fan site I think would be important and suitable add for reasons I mention in the first paragraph of this post.

Besides, you link to IMDB's movie pages too - like, how are THOSE any use when it comes to the character? And then in-depth educational fan sites on vital relationships are rejected? What's going on?

TheVampireOutlaw (talk)-25 May 2009

The link to the "official" Tom Cruise Website is dead. Somebody should renew it. I didn't cause I don't like Tom Cruise anymore and I would remove the link. Ichbinder (talk) 19:23, 21 October 2010 (UTC) 


 == Not Technically Bisexual==

______________________________________________________________________________________________ Can you really Classify a creature that cannot have sex as bisexual? Their relationships are on an personal level like a persons sexual relationship but being that sex is not even possible it is misleading and inaccurate to call it such. 65.183.214.150 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:34, 14 October 2011 (UTC).

Aristocrats are not always wealthy

Aristocrats are defined by blood and inheritance, not money. Lestat's family are not "Technically aristocrats", they are aristocrats. The loss of the family fortune - assuming there was one - does not end that status. Was there evidence that the "de Lioncourt family's fortune has been squandered", or were they simply no longer as wealthy as before?125.237.105.102 (talk) 21:32, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lestat de Lioncourt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:34, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lestat de Lioncourt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:26, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lestat_de_Lioncourt/Archive_1&oldid=1242505265"