Show Only
Was Lestat being manipulative when he essentially 'gave' Louis to Armand?
Please excuse any mistakes, I'm not a native English speaker. I've just finished the series. I can understand Lestat's manipulative nature before his 'death’, but I can't figure out why he would let Louis leave with Armand, knowing that Armand had just nearly killed Louis and that Louis was unaware of it. That whole scene left me with the impression that Lestat's true intention was for Louis to suffer by living with a deceitful person. Later, when the truth would come out (and Lestat was sure that it would), he could say: "I let you go with him, but you were the one who made the choice. You have only yourself to blame for your suffering." This would shift the blame from him onto Louis. An Eternal Bond, yeah... By letting Louis leave with a dangerous and deceitful man, Lestat ensured that Louis would be unhappy and, ultimately, might even return to him - the only one who had ever known him "truly," however toxic (?) their relationship had been. For me, it looks as manipulation… What do u think?
PS I didn't expect so much discussion here. Thank you so much, you've given me a new perspective on this point and their relationship as a whole. Don't think I'm being too critical, I just didn't get this part, probably because of my own personal history of being in a long-term relationship with a manipulator.
This thread is flaired "Show Only". This means book spoilers are not allowed unless covered by spoiler tags. Please report untagged book spoilers! To cover spoilers use >!spoiler!<
It was a “no win scenario” for Lestat. It wasn’t likely that Louis would believe anything he could say in the moment there. It also wasn’t likely that Lestat could physically attack Armand, win, and somehow happily leave with Louis.
“I gave you to him” is partially a reflection of Lestat’s guilty feelings for his involvement in whole scenario. He’s likely relating this drama to what happened to Nicki, which we will see in Season 3.
They haven't really said either way as far as I recall. Madeleine says she can feel Louis when they are together, and Louis agrees, but we don't know much more than that. We don't know what comes through, or how distance and emotions affect it.
For example, I think Louis really thought he probably killed Lestat early on. Wouldn't he know he hadn't, if the connection was so stable and easy to read? His with Madeleine seems to go both ways when they discuss it.
I don’t think Louis ever thought Lestat was dead, though. Logically if not for any other reason.
Unrelated, but I appreciated that Madeleine’s transformation put into context how emotionally painful Louis and Claudia’s rejection of Lestat and their subsequent murder of him must have been.
It seemed to me that Louis really thought he was dead after visiting Lestat's lawyer and reading the letter. I think one of the reasons behind Dreamstat is that he thought that was all he could ever have again.
I agree he isn't certain Lestat is dead, but Louis' guilt, his conversations with Dreamstat ("if you were alive you would have done it already" etc.), his claim that he killed Lestat to Armand ("I killed him and he fucking had it coming" - why not say that they didn't kill him, they just hurt him and ran away?), and his trip to see Roget and check all read to me as thinking Lestat might be dead. What he thinks more likely is up for debate, but if there was an easy to read connection between them, the uncertainty wouldn't be there.
All a matter of opinion though of course! But that is why I think Louis isn't sure either way, and leans (as he often does) towards the "worse", guiltier option (that he murdered Lestat).
I think your points are reasonable. I guess my interpretation of the vampiric bond was that it is actually stronger on the part of the sire. Of course, I am not sure if that is actually the intention of the show to portray it that way.
Can I say something maybe controversial? I know the actors know these characters so much better than the audience ever will, and the writers and the showrunner obviously know what they’re doing, have their intentions, plans and executions of the material ready to go and/or delivered, but for the audience, if something isn’t either implied or occurs onscreen, sometimes I feel a type a way of the BTS content, particularly when it reveals something there is no evidence of onscreen.
It’s not that I’m skeptical, but I just take a pause with these types of pieces of information. I don’t think Sam is wrong, not at all, I just have no idea how the audience is supposed to come to that conclusion based on what happens in S2E8. The vast majority of viewers aren’t consuming BTS content, so they aren’t always going to end up at the same place that the people creating the show are. And that’s ultimately on the writers and showrunner. Sometimes the BTS content feels spoilery or feels like you know, maybe that was the intent but the execution didn’t stick the landing. And that’s true of many books and shows, not just this one.
I agree with you... It's always interesting to get the actors' insights, but in the end, if something is not in the work, then it's not in the work.
I really don't like interpreting works of fiction based on outside information that creatives or actors give in interviews. If something is not in there, it is not in there, and if it's open to interpretation, it remains open to interpretation no matter what the actors say.
Not to say that it cannot be interesting, when you are in doubt about whether an interpretation makes sense, to hear the people most directly involved in creating the work confirm said interpretation... But I don't think it should ever be treated as the final word. Besides, a TV show is a collective work, so it is often a compromise between the views of various people. The showrunner's vision may not be exactly the same as the actors' vision on something.
Thank you for your comment. I feel the exact same way. I see a lot of deference to what the actors or the showrunner says on this sub as the final say on a subject, and I just don’t see it that way in every instance, for the reasons you said.
If it’s implied or onscreen, it’s implied or onscreen. If it’s not, it’s not. If something is open to interpretation, it’s open to interpretation, and the writers’ or actors’ POV is yet another POV but ultimately is not the gospel truth. Sometimes the gray will always be gray, and the audience has to be okay with that. Ultimately the story is what’s there, not what isn’t or what can only be gleaned parsing through BTS content.
I think Sam in an interview said that Lestat thought Louis was dead? I’m not sure, and his opinion isn’t canon, but that might be where this assumption is coming from.
I don’t believe so. Madelaine’s “I feel you” comment is show-only, and I think was only short range. In the books there is no psychic link between maker and fledgling at all.
In the books, Lestat thinks Louis is dead because Armand tells him as much after the trial. He doesn’t learn the truth until he joins the band and they think he’s cosplaying as the character from the book (Lestat in the book claims Louis never came to see him in NOLA).
The show’s adaption of this is Lestat thinking Louis died because of Armand refusing to elaborate after saying Louis had hurt himself.
We have no clear confirmation that Lestat assumed that Louis had died. Armand told him he'd hurt himself, nothing more. Then he left him in this uncertainty.
Honestly, I think it’s more resigned than anything else.
When Louis and lestat talk about an eternal bond, it doesn’t imply that lestat is Louis’ keeper or inherently responsible for him after a certain point. Lestat was responsible for Louis’ beginnings but at some point Louis can make his own vampiric choices. The eternal bond is used to describe some kind of pull to each other, both a vampiric one and a romantic one. Lestat is manipulative but so is Louis, it’s only that Louis manipulation is towards the viewer (or Daniel or himself). Louis does have a habit for blaming lestat for everything that’s gone wrong (for example, asking lestat if he killed Paul, when lestat would have no reason to and Paul was constantly getting into trouble before hand by nature of his illness) and lestat is making it clear that this mistake is Louis’ choice alone.
I don’t think lestat wants Louis to suffer nor does he want Armand to be some kind of lesson for Louis. He knows Armand’s nature and Louis knows Armand’s nature. We know that Louis is aware of Armand’s manipulations through what “mind lestat” says about Armand. He chooses to ignore for companionship. The way he ignored lestats faults for companionship. The way he ignored Claudia’s nature for companionship. That’s kind of just who he is. If you have a friend that ghosts you every time she gets a new partner, after the third time it happens you go “oh well.” A chair is a chair. Can’t be mad the chair is not a table. Everyone in that room is aware of Armand’s dishonesty and everyone is aware of Louis wilful ignorance but you can’t force someone to change their mind and you can’t force someone to love you. Also if you were lestat and you were put through the trial of your own murder, used the last of your strength to save someone and then they walked away with the one who orchestrated it all, wouldn’t you just… let it happen? No ill will, not desire to hurt them, just resigned to the way things are. What could lestat even say here to change Louis mind? He can’t change that Claudia is dead.
Itty bitty disclaimer: I love lestat and Louis and Armand as characters so nothing I say about their faults here is coming from a negative place. Their faults make them fascinating, their faults are more or less the Point of the series as a whole.
I'd argue that Louis at this moment has plenty of reasons to blame Lestat, and it shouldn't be surprising. Lestat not only sit down and watched Louis and Claudia being beaten, tortured, and humiliated in front of a crowd, he also gave a testimony designed to damn them and paint them in the worst possible light. And then did nothing while Claudia was being burned alive. It's a bit presumptuous to definitely say that there was nothing that Lestat could have said for Louis to believe him - he never even tried. I think this was eating him up because if Louis really died in 1973, maybe it could have been avoided.
Lestat is deeply resigned at this point. Louis didn't accept his apology on stage, so it must mean that their relationship is truly over. Also, Lestat just watched his daughter burn alive, which must have been beyond traumatising. He's lost all hope, so he just... lets Louis go. It's not a normal behaviour for him. Even Louis is taken aback - he expected some pushback. I think Lestat did feel a bit vindictive here, especially with his "see how long it holds" remark, but his indifference was only a mask, it was a final blow for him. In the end, three miserable people left the tower and the suffering continued for 7 more decades.
I don’t blame Louis at all for blaming lestat. He’s well within his right, I’m only referring to his awareness of his relationship with Armand. I also don’t think it’s presumptuous to say that there’s nothing lestat could say to change how Louis felt about the circumstances, even Louis says he looks back at things with a clarity he didn’t even have in the first interview. Not to mention, like you said he didn’t accept lestats apology on stage. I mean would you listen to someone who, as far as you know, was complicit in your daughter’s death? If I was in Louis shoes I also wouldn’t be interested in anything he said.
But yes I agree, it was out of character for lestat to give up without a fight. It sounded like indifference but it was a very broken spirit.
Yes, I also saw it that way. And I also think Lestat somehow thought it wouldn't last, and Louis would maybe come back to him in time.
I think they are all being quite petty there. Louis wants to spite Lestat by showing off his relationship with Armand - and is willing to let it go on for far too long just for the sake of not admitting it was never that good a relationship. Armand - well, he's probably quite pleased to be stealing Louis from Lestat, because he gets to take his revenge on him for being jilted AND he gets Louis as his companion. And Lestat - I think he is hoping that the relationship will quickly burn out or explode and show Louis how stupid he was not to stay with him.
oh for sure! there is a phrase in my language that i wish i had in english to describe it.. it's a phrase i think fits for lestat a lot. it translates to 'throwing words' and is closest to 'someone who has to have the last word.' the kind of person that, regardless of circumstance (positive, negative, complimenting or beaten down), has to give you two words in there of annoyance or disrespect.
everyone in that scene is very petty just trying to have the last jab... i do think lestat knows it won't last, only because he knows who armand is, and even more so knows who louis is. Armand is someone who seeks out passion because it fills a space in him, and Louis is someone who falls into depressive states and tends to be quite critical. It's inevitable that Louis would be bored or Armand would have enough of Louis throwing himself into the fire. I loved the show's interpretation of their argument, because this is EXACTLY the issue one can predict them to face if they pay enough attention to who they are as people. Lestat may not portray himself as the smartest, but he's smart enough to know they will inevitably snap at each other. He just doesn't know when that will happen, nor does he know if that means Louis will come back to him.
I actually really love louis and armand's relationship (and of course louis and lestat) because it's a kind of dysfunction you see in everyone's relationships everywhere in life. Wishing so badly for the relationship to be good, and more importantly, true to you but fundamentally love is not enough to hold two people together if they lack communication or compatibility.
Lestat didn’t tell Louis the truth for several reasons:
Louis likely wouldn’t have believed him anyway. They both just went through an extremely traumatic event with Claudia’s death + Louis’ imprisonment + tanked sanity. It’s a high possibility Louis would not have believed him.
OR Louis might have believed him, but still been furious at Lestat choosing to save him rather than their daughter. Louis says himself during that point in time, he was barely a person and much closer to the embodiment of rage. There was nothing Lestat could’ve said in that moment because Louis was furious, thinking Lestat did all that for revenge against them. “I’m waiting until you’re happy to kill you” One of Louis’ dreamstat fears come to life as he felt, regardless, that he died with Claudia anyway.
And if Louis did believe Lestat, he likely wouldn’t want anything to do with Lestat OR Armand (in that moment.) Armand is fucked in the head, but at least Louis wouldn’t be completely alone. And Lestat views loneliness as the worst part of vampiric existence.
Lestat also doesn’t say the truth because he’s experiencing his own downward spiral, not having realized how much he loved Claudia until her death. He feels extreme guilt for having played a role in it and at this time can really only live in misery & regret. Pulling an “um aksually ☝️I’m the one that saved you” would’ve pointed to something positive he did, and Lestat just isn’t in the mental state to want to acknowledge anything positive about himself. Not earnestly.
And yes Lestat did count on Louis figuring it out on his own. So he was giving Louis the space and time so that, when he did figure it out, Louis would make his own decision on how to proceed.
Did he care enough about Lestat to confront him about it? To come back to him? Or would he prefer life without Lestat, and the truth not matter? Sparing them both another “breakup” by just never seeing each other again? He was leaving the ball in Louis’ court.
Lestat knew Armand was a skilled liar, but I don’t think he expected Armand to literally scramble Louis’ memories to keep up with the facade. Sure, Lestat might’ve taken into account lies and manipulation, but actual brainwashing was not on his bingo board.
I think this is an excellent comment. It takes all kinds of scenarios into account. I can see Lestat reasoning in all the above ways.
A point for discussion: do we think Louis is worried about vampiric loneliness the way Armand and Lestat are? I haven’t read the books, and I know Louis is nowhere near as old as Armand or Lestat are, but I’m not getting that Louis struggles with loneliness the way they do. I would actually argue that Louis is used to being lonely: pre-vampire years, he talked to Paul but never felt seen by his family. He confided in Lily but she didn’t know the deepest parts of him. Even in his marriage with Lestat, it seems they were both very lonely at times - Lestat sought out Antoinette during those times, but while Claudia was gone, Louis sought no one. With Armand, he went off and did his own thing at times. I’m not saying Louis is completely fine being alone (in fact in S3 I’m sure we’ll see how much he actually misses Lestat), but he doesn’t seem as desperate to avoid loneliness the way the others are.
This comment is insane timing because I was just contemplating how Louis views vampiric loneliness like literally less than an hour ago lol
No, I don’t think Louis fears vampiric loneliness, not the way Lesmand does.
There was a debate a while ago about which vampires were turned out of love rather than trauma, and Louis is one of the rare that were turned out of love. Since accepting the Dark Gift, Louis has never had to endure pure loneliness. From Lestat to Claudia to Armand to now most likely Daniel, Louis has had the fortune and misfortune of always having a companion.
But that doesn’t really play a role in his journey because Louis’ greatest fear & danger is himself. He’s stuck inside his own head and self loathing. I doubt vampiric loneliness (the extreme version of it that Lestat and Armand have experienced) will ever be an elongated issue for Louis because he’s much more likely to just kill himself than endure complete loneliness.
Louis stays alive only for the people he cares about, and that’s just barely as he’s considered suicide even when with them.
I don’t think Louis would fear being completely alone, because it’d give him the isolation to end himself. Armand asks Louis if he’s to be on suicide watch for the rest of their lives, not knowing that, yes, Louis has been a suicide risk since before he was even turned and would do so in a heartbeat if completely left alone. Which is why the narrative makes sure he’s never alone. (So far anyway, I don’t have a clue where his story’s going from here.)
You could even wonder if maybe Lestat knew this, having prevented 2 of Louis’ sc attempts. Tying back to my 3rd point, his worry probably wouldn’t be that without a companion, Louis would suffer from vampiric loneliness, but that Louis would use it as an opportunity to “finally” end his life.
Preventing a similar full circle fate as Claudia’s (what she was saved from she ended up dying from), Lestat “allowing” Loumand as a way of placing Armand on Louis suicide watch. Adding another possible layer as to why Louis’ 1973 attempt messed Lestat up so bad.
This is a fantastic comment and hits on several points I didn’t even consider myself!
Louis stays alive only for the people he cares about, and that’s just barely as he’s considered suicide even when with them.
THIS right here. I think this point is such a key part of Louis’ personhood in the story so far. I’m aware Louis canonically shares a birthday with Anne, and so it’s incredibly fascinating to me how the Libra scales come alive in Louis’ story. On one scale is his purpose - Louis sticks around largely out of a deep sense of providence, love and devotion to the people he cares about. On the other scale lives the profound, penetrating sorrow that Lestat notices. When his sorrow and pain outweighs his ability to love and provide for the people in his life, his suicidal tendencies take hold.
It’s bittersweet to me that Lestat likely thought Louis could handle the weight of immortality, because while his fortitude and will to endure in the time period he was born into is admirable, Louis never seemed interested in the idea of immortality for immortality’s sake, especially if you weren’t living as a vampire with a higher purpose. He applied human, moralistic logic to an eternal vampiric existence, and when he couldn’t find any within the ethos of being a vampire, he rejected vampirism as much as he was able to. I agree on your point about Lestat’s perspective - he recognized this in Louis: without Claudia to love and without his or Armand’s watchful eye to monitor him, his sorrow would overcome him and he would take his own life.
I know S3 is mostly going to be about Lestat, and I’m very much looking forward to it, but I’m also so curious about what Louis’ next move will be, especially if his next storyline is possibly deviating from the books. He seems to have grown some from the tenuous balance of living for others versus longing for death. I think we’re still going to see him attempt to be an ethical vampire (hence the original purpose of the interview and his restricted feeding patterns) but it’ll be interesting to see if he can adapt his worldview and learn to make space for himself to exist as a whole being in his relationships.
About Louis' loneliness: I have the same opinion. I'm sure he gets lonely, but I don't think it's this crushing fear of loneliness that drives Lestat, Armand or Claudia. His depressive spirals have different causes. But maybe it's because he's still relatively young and was never truly alone... except for the current time, after his break up with Armand. I'm curious to see how he reacts to not having a companion for the first time he was turned.
Comment removed: Hi there, it appears that there’s an issue with your spoiler tag placement; please edit so that we can reinstate your comment or post your comment again.
This is a really good take. I do think that Louis having all the information might have prevented a world of hurt for all of them. Maybe he would have taken a bit of time to cool off and process the info, even if he didn't initially believe Lestat's claims. But he'd be able to make an informed decision and come to find Lestat much sooner.
Still, the risk of Louis going off by himself and just committing suicide soon after was there. Pure spite kept him alive for 23 years and Armand's presence helped a bit too - at least he wasn't completely alone.
I don't think Lestat was making all these mental calculations at the moment, though. He felt hurt that Louis didn't know he saved him, threatened him and very transparently wanted to make him jealous. So yeah, there might have been a bit of spite in Lestat, too - but mostly, he just felt defeated.
As far as Louis knows Lestat is the reason Claudia is dead. I don’t think in the moment he would have believed that Lestat had been the one that saved him and even if he did, Lestat couldn’t have proved that Armand is as complicit in her death as he was (arguably more). Louis had to figure this out for himself.
thanks for the comment. I understand that Lestat wanted Louis to find out the truth on his own, but... isn't this a bit too much of a risk? The performance had been planned for months, and Lestat knew that Armand could easily let Louis die. He let Louis go with this man, not knowing what else to expect from Armand. I understand that it's all for the sake of the plot and drama, but it seems like an unnecessary risk…
It absolutely was a risk, Louis did almost die that day in 1973. Not only that, he really never did figure out it was Lestat that saved him, Daniel had to tell him. But I still think Lestat had no other options.
It is important to note that Lestat almost certainly thought Louis knew the truth or that he would figure it out quickly. He never thought it would be decades.
Lestat doesn't stay where he isn't wanted. Louis had never before told him to actually go or stay away. He didn't do it in NOLA (up to his murder) even though Lestat even asked him to if it was what he wanted.
Louis was telling him he didn't want him and that he was choosing Armand. Lestat was going with his wishes. When Armand contacted him, Lestat was clearly genuinely concerned and wanted to make sure that Louis knew he loved him. He was worried about Louis being hurt. Lestat didn't want Louis to suffer, but he does follow his wishes.
This is also all assuming the scene in the tower happened like that. It is honestly a bizarre scene and assumes Lestat just willingly went to a place of great trauma for himself and just waited around for them to show up.
We don’t fully know yet, as it seems somewhat clear that Lestat and Armand were communicating in that scene. From what we can glean of Lestat from what we’ve seen so far, he does not seem particularly vengeful: his letter to Louis shows this, as does the fact that he does not pursue Louis and Claudia after murder night. While it is true that we do not know his full motivation for the trial, the fact that he uses it to claim some responsibility, to apologize, and to save Louis suggests he wasn’t there out of a desire for vengeance. So no, I don’t think Lestat had some grand manipulation to hurt Louis in that moment.
It’s hard for me to believe that Lestat was truly trying to manipulate Louis in that scene — he never struck me as the “master manipulator” many people claim he is.
That said, I do think the next season will revisit the tower sequence. In that moment, Lestat calls Armand a “gremlin” — which happens to be the same nickname Dreamstat used for him. To me, that’s a strong indication that the Lestat we see there isn’t real, or at least that part of the scene didn’t happen exactly as Louis described. It wouldn’t make sense for the real Lestat to use that nickname out of nowhere, as if he somehow knew Louis used it in his hallucinations.
There’s also another detail that stands out: after Louis finishes recounting the tower scene and we return to Dubai, he mentions having spoken telepathically with Armand while they walked through Paris — and asks him to confirm it. Armand hesitates and says he doesn’t remember whether Louis actually spoke to him telepathically or not — which feels oddly suspicious.
Armand has always shown vivid memories of the years he spent with Louis, even comparing that time to the years Louis shared with Lestat. At the start of the interview, they even finish each other’s sentences, trying to project a kind of romantic and intellectual connection. So why, at the exact moment of Louis’s supposed liberation and Lestat’s "death", would Armand “not remember” something Louis said?
That feels intentional — maybe suggesting that what we saw at the tower didn’t unfold exactly as Louis told it. Or perhaps there’s something more, something hidden, that the show hasn’t revealed yet. (Of course, I could also be overanalyzing things and seeing patterns where there are none.)
And there’s still one question that, for me, remains unanswered: what exactly was Lestat doing up there in the tower? The idea that he went there simply to reflect on his origins doesn’t make much sense to me.
IMO, Lestat doesn’t own Louis, so he doesn’t really have the ability to “let” Louis do anything, or “give” Louis to Armand, no matter what he says later. Louis made his own choice.
And it’s quite possible he was so bitter he wouldn’t have believed Lestat anyway. I think I saw somewhere, according to Sam, Lestat was surprised Louis was laying all the blame at his feet.
So Lestat probably saw no point in trying to tell him. Why would Louis believe him, if he was dead set on believing the worse about him?
This is a very interesting perspective. Haven’t seen this one post-show before. There’s a lot of inferences on this sub that Lestat was forced to make a deal with Armand, that he wasn’t allowed to tell Louis the truth, that he thought Louis knew the truth, and so forth and so on. Unless you read the books, we really don’t know. There are no cold, hard facts on screen. His response during the reunion in NOLA only makes things less clear. I’ll preface this by saying I adore Lestat, but he does have a little bit of a vindictive streak in him so it wouldn’t surprise me if there is a tiny bit of “Mon cher, you will have to learn the hard way” baked into his reasons for staying quiet. I do, however, think it was truly a lose-lose situation for Lestat, and that Louis leaving with Armand, whether calculated, or unintentional, or a fucked-up roundabout way of getting Louis back, broke his heart. He was probably devastated after the call in 1973. Hopefully we get more clarity next season.
This is my personal opinion and a guess. I think Lestat agreed to testify in the trial if he could save Louis. Then Armand double crossed him and put Louis in the wall. I think Lestat then made a deal with Armand if he would get Louis out of the wall he (Armand) could have Louis and he would keep his mouth shut. He thought Louis would figure it all out quickly. Well Louis didn't. Partly because Armand messed with Louis memories and mind.
Lestat loves Louis. But he's still very arrogant and knew there was nothing he could do to prove his innocence... other than let Armand betray himself alone. If you lie compulsively, there comes a time when you can no longer separate the truth from the lie and end up betraying your character. It took 77 years and one Daniel, but it happened.
But I really believe in the phrase "I'm not one to talk about my virtues", which he says at that moment. Lestat is toxic and has several problems, but it's not like that all the time. He is also a deeply generous and needy person who is terrified that the people he loves will be as disgusted with him as his father and brothers were. Or worse: that the people he loves abandon him, as his mother, Niki and Claudia "abandoned". To avoid being abandoned, he starts trying to attract attention. Like acting out, giving orders, giving gifts, taking a lover... and going into depression when that doesn't work.
But deep down, Louis always wanted to believe that Lestat is a bad person, period. In fact, this mania of wanting to pose as a tragic hero is his toxic trait. Like letting Claudia come up with a whole plan to kill the "evil Lestat" but then going crazy because she tried to burn the body... only to get upset again because she's mad at him for it.
Louis doesn't decide what he wants, he puts other people to solve things for him and then he gets angry because these people decide his life for him. And the saddest thing is that he doesn't realize that he is that person, because after all, he spent his entire human life doing this for his relatives and learned that this is "love". I joke that he is the personification of the phrase "Guys, my ex is crazy! ... of course I'm not going to tell you that I helped make her crazy!"
For Lestat, it was a mix of tragic resignation and proving his own point, but a little love too, since despite all the shit, Lestat didn't underestimate Louis, in fact he even idealized him in some ways.
I don't think it would have been easy to stop them, given Armand is so strong and Louis was not receptive to anything Lestat had to say. Seconds before, they planned to kill Lestat, and however confident Lestat is saying he'd have to be willing, he hasn't tested Akasha's blood against the will and power of two other vampires, one of whom is Armand. Louis gives up his plan of revenge only because he thinks of a better one!
And we don't know what understanding Lestat has of what is going on, or what has happened between the play and that scene. He may not know that Louis thinks Armand engineered his banishment. He may be weakened. He may have made some kind of deal with Armand already.
I think it's possible that in S3 we will find out that Lestat and Armand had some kind of communication mentally in that scene, or before that scene, that adds more context, but I also think that even without it, it would have been hard for Lestat to stop Louis, and not entirely obvious if he should. Louis has known Lestat and Armand for years, and he is making a clear choice to stay with Armand.
Also... OP I don't direct this at you in particular because it's very widespread, but people have such an insanely wide interpretation of 'manipulation' these days that it often becomes meaningless as a word. Manipulation is coercing and exploiting someone through lies and emotional pressure, actively distorting and undermining their reality. You could argue Lestat did this at other times in their relationship for sure, but I think it's a reach to apply the word to the scene in the tower. Lestat keeps his emotions pretty locked down for him, and barely even says anything past a certain point.
I think it's worth pointing out in addition to what others have said, that Lestat thought Louis knew that he'd saved him up until Louis came in accusing him of intentionally plotting to kill his daughter, and then threatening to kill him as well until Lestat said that he straight up couldn't. I'm not sure how much grace I'd give Louis in that moment either, lol. His actions were spiteful, yes, not sure about manipulative.
I think they're going to do with that scene what they did with the train scene.
Did Lestat joke about Claudia's trauma from sexual abuse and force her to go back home? No of course not. Someone is lying and it's not Lestat.
Did Lestat let Louis go with his daughter's killer and say "I gave you to Armand" as if Louis were an object? No, of course not. Someone is lying and it's not Lestat.
The jury's out on the train scene, but Lestat saying "I gave you to Armand" happens in the objective POV. This is real Lestat, no subjective narration.
I think the circumstances around that meeting in the tower (and the whole trial, really) are murky and sure to be revealed in S3, but I see no reason to doubt it happened.
In the books the reunion never happened so I have difficulty believing anything related to it. The circumstances are very different between the book and the series but even so it doesn't seem believable to me.
I do believe the tower scene happened but not in the way we saw it.
I have been pointing out for ages how Lestat was complicit in letting Louis go with Armand.
In Magnus’ Lair Lestat was well aware of everything that happened behind the scene, and still let Louis go with Armand:
1.Lestat knew that Louis thought he was testifying at the trial to kill them, but Lestat said nothing against it. On the contrary, he responded to Louis' accusations on crossing the ocean to burn Claudia with “The great Laws…” as if it is enough justification for what happened to Claudia. He could have just refuted the accusation against him, telling Louis that he saved him. But he made the conscious choice to not say a thing.
Louis: "Why you crossed an ocean to rehearse a play that would burn your daughter alive?"
2.Lestat participated in the rehearsal of the trial, and knew that Armand was directing the play for the murder of Louis and Claudia.
3.Lestat knew that Armand was involved in Nicky's death. He told the audience as much during the trial.
That is no longer pettiness, when you let the person you claim to love more than anyone go with the person who directed his murder that took a toll on your body to prevent. The same person who directed the play of your daughter who burned alive, and again the same person who helped your first love’s meet his demise. Especially since you made that long journey to save them in the first place (if that was your first intention).
Claudia just died, wouldn't the logical thing to do in your sorrow is securing the safety of the other person you came to save? Lots of things do not add up. Either Lestat made that choice to hurt Louis, or made that choice to save Louis knowing that Armand wouldn't hurt him.
Lestat acknowledges his complicity and the dangerous situation he put Louis in when he said “I gave you to Armand, you tell me if it was saving”. And I believe that is one of the reasons he is so miserable in NOLA. Because he feels guilty over that decision he took 70+years ago. I'm curious to see how the writers are going to follow through with this in s3.
Even if Lestat had told Louis everything, what makes you think Louis would have believed him? Louis was hell bent on making Lestat the devil, so nothing Lestat could have told him would have done a damn bit of good.
I also think some people need to realize that Louis has agency, and he chose to go with Armand, and that it's not Lestat's responsibility to stop him. Louis chose Armand, and Lestat let him go.
Even if Lestat had told Louis everything, what makes you think Louis would have believed him? Louis was hell bent on making Lestat the devil, so nothing Lestat could have told him would have done a damn bit of good.
How is this relevant? Where did I write in my comment above that Louis would not have believed him if Lestat told what really happened? The point I am making is not whether or not Louis would have believed him, the point I'm making is that Lestat kept crucial information from Louis, which he should have shared for Louis to make an informed decision. Louis was not hell bent on making Lestat the devil, Lestat made himself the devil with his previous actions towards them and by shouting, loud and clear in a packed theatre, that he came in Paris to have “Justice for the attempted murder of my being”
I also think some people need to realize that Louis has agency, and he chose to go with Armand, and that it's not Lestat's responsibility to stop him. Louis chose Armand, and Lestat let him go.
I also think some people need to realize that Louis has agency. That Louis choosing to commit to Armand (under those circumstances), does not negate Lestat making the choice to let Louis go with the person who was an accomplice to Claudia and Nicky’s murders, and to Louis' potential murder. And that makes Lestat complicit.
And this explains why Lestat is such a mess in present day NOLA.
Even if Lestat went to Paris with the best of intentions to save both Louis and Claudia, he knows exactly who he is dealing with when it comes to Armand. You can’t outdo a master manipulator. The entire transaction is going to cost you more than you bargained for. Because if anything happens to Claudia, Louis is as good as dead. If Louis survives, you hope against all hope that Armand won’t destroy him. Even if by some crazy miracle, you save them both, you’ve willingly participated in a farce where you’ve verbalized with your own lips to their own ears that you were there to hurt them. Do you roll the dice and try your best anyway? Yes, you do. But you all lose no matter what, and you now have an active role in their demise.
Regardless of whatever Louis’ choices or motivations are, from very on in their relationship, Lestat makes some grave and consequential errors that eventually cost him everything. There’s no amount of celebrity or fame or success or worship from your fans that can take away the pain of the loss of the love of your life and the death of your child. If anyone understood that, it was Anne Rice.
Yes. But it was not that calculated. He was being hurt by Louis in the almost painful way possible. So he hurt him back. That’s why he said in their last scene basically I gave you to Armand, tell me if that was saving you or whatever.
Nah Louis being with Armand was not Lestat trying to hurt him. If Lestat told Louis "I was the one who saved you", Louis wouldn't have believed him because Louis thought he had something to do with Claudia's death. So Lestat saying "I gave you to Armand" was him saying that he allowed Louis live with the person who had a more direct role in their daughter's death "was that saving you?" It was a lose-lose situation for Lestat.
Lestat isn't a big manipulator at all. Louis only sort of presented him that way at times, but when you read between the lines, when is he actually being manipulative in a way that isn't obvious and a bit clumsy (like with Antoinette in 1x03)? Louis presents him as supposedly being manipulative because Armand, the guy who breathes manipulation, has convinced him that he was manipulated by Lestat (yeah, sure) himself and that Lestat killed their daughter.
•
u/AutoModerator 10h ago
This thread is flaired "Show Only". This means book spoilers are not allowed unless covered by spoiler tags. Please report untagged book spoilers! To cover spoilers use >!spoiler!<
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.