ArabellaWrites

mostly Good Omens and Interview with the Vampire Armand girlie through and through #devilsminion queer, 30s, chronically sick ao3: arabellas_court and arabellawrites bluesky: arabellawrites This is an 18+ space

[arabellatheauthor]

Masterlist

edit: Every time someone likes or reblogs this it reminds me that it's out of date 😅 I will update it sometime, but my ao3 is up to date, so that's a good place to find my writing.

Hi, I'm Arabella. I'm a queer writer who started writing fanfic in 2020 for the HP fandom and now has a lot of unfinished fics because JKR is a fucking monster, so...do with that what you will.

These days I mostly write for Good Omens and Interview with the Vampire. My love for Devil's Minion knows no bounds. I also really like Queer As Folk (US) and Heated Rivalry. And my love for Sherlock has recently been rekindled. I didn't realize that I mostly read and write m/m slash until I was already deep in the trenches, but I'm not complaining. I'm most active on here and Bluesky (arabellawrites) so feel free to dm me questions, prompts, or just to say hi!

I am a full adult so please don't follow and or interact if you're a minor. The majority of my works are 18+ and I reblog a lot of 18+ artwork as well. Thank you for respecting this space!

Padlet (visual organization of my fics) Bluesky Facebook Tiktok AO3 FFN Instagram

Good Omens

Aziraphale x Crowley

Interview with the Vampire

Devil's Minion

A Court of Thorns and Roses

Feyre x Lucien

A Touch of Darkness

Hades x Persephone x Hermes

Harry Potter

Dramione

Snamione

Harmony

Regmione

Wolfstar

Snarry

Dreomione

Thyra

Snape Gen

Snape x Regulus

NottPott

Sevlumione

I'm also open to ideas for drabbles and for questions. Thanks for being here.

- Arabella

p.s. Blanket statement that exploring something in writing doesn't mean I condone it in real life. I try my best to make sure everything is tagged properly but if there are ships or dynamics or ideas that you find upsetting, I am never offended by you choosing not to read a particular work of mine and I'm happy to add tags as needed. I do this for fun, and I want everyone else to be having a good time too.

[lesbiansidney]

the reason i need the weirdo armand who blends drinks based on nothing but colour and feeds garbage disposals and makes weird home movies in the show is because as much as i talk about armand and the cycles of amadeo and marius they're like...the ultimate proof that he is not what anyone has tried to make him. he's not an eternal sex slave or child bride or cult leader or abusive figure. he tries to be all these things because they're how he experienced the world in his most formative years but at the end of the day he has a big heart and he wants to be loved and he wants to experience the world as it is and he wants to watch the same movie over and over again and he wants to protect those he cares about and he wants to ride jet skis and he wants to make a human boy coffee in the mornings and he wants to build a terrible consumerist island and and he wants to be a good father and

[dalliancekay]

Crowley and Aziraphale didn't kill anyone. Michael destroyed the universe. Yes. But.

If they let Adam destroy the world in S1 or their superiors to start a war, it would not have been them doing it either. But it would be a weird conclusion to a story about a bunch of characters who try to save the world to - not save it.

What some of us (everyone did before S3, surely?) expected was that they will save the humanity they had lived among. Not die and hope god, who is a cruel heartless mean asshole, will start a new one like they asked. I see no point in this. I see no reason I should believe it. I would never have chosen for a God to start a new universe. In my fantasy show that is satire on religion. It would have been 'better' if they killed/eliminated God and disappeared because of that and from their death/decision/sacrifice the new universe started. But I still would not like it. There could be a multiverse of other universes where someone with my face lives in each one and good for them I guess, I hope they are happy, but it makes no difference to me.

Just the same as it makes no difference to me that people have a million other beliefs about what is happening after we die or outside of what we know.

Jesus deserved explanations. Adam deserved to live the life he chose. Anathema and Newt deserved a long life after their bravery. Madame Tracy deserved a long retirement. The Them deserved adulthood they fought for.

Aziraphale and Crowley deserved to breathe and be safe and tell each other everything they never could and deserved the longest hug in the existence of anything and they deserved a quiet cottage with nightingales and a future full of bickering and exchange the softest, sweetest glances that turn water into syrup.

Angels and demons deserved to be free from their shackles and go off to do whatever they wanted in the vast universe.

Nina and Maggie deserved happiness in wherever they were off to. Mr Brown deserved luck in his next adventure. And Mrs Sandwich deserved to be told that the angel she berated saved her from eternal flames.

All the kids and animals and plants deserved to keep on living in their universe. They did not deserve to be wiped by flood because someone didn't like them. It does not matter that new ones were brought in. It does not make it a good ending to me.

The charm and beauty of Good Omens was the commentary of how even two supernatural powerful beings can't do much about any large events but we watch them choosing the right thing where they can. And then they stumble on the Big One and make the right decisions. Because they have hearts in right places.

I can't stop big oil or armies, I can't build a house for everyone, but even if never perfect, I can and should and will - try and do small things where I can. Because - you never know how big a difference it makes to someone. That's the message. Fight for the world we have, now.

That's what I expected to see in the Finale.

I wrote this as a comment on someone's post but decided not to post it to them directly.

[arabellatheauthor]

i can't draw so if any artists out there want to draw post-turning daniel and armand at the beach and armand is wearing one of those 1940s bathing suits for women, i would give you a big forehead kiss through the screen

[lexdelioncourt]

Who the fuck is Enzo

[arabellatheauthor]

THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING

[rozriver]

the tampa hotel scene is so insane like talk about #mybraveshane…. ilya is being so fucking meannnn here.. for him to look shane in the face and say “it’s simple for me” implying “idk about you but yeah this whole thing between us is so not a big deal to me and i definitely am not deeply invested in it like you but best of luck” I WOULD BE MOOOOORTIFIED and then die but shane is like. “☝️Bullshit. Also i like you way too much and ik you feel the same. do u wanna be something with me” HES CRAAAAAZY I LOVE YOU MY SHANE BOY

[arabellatheauthor]

me: realizing that I only really watch read and write stories that are primarily mlm

me: which could mean nothing

[lexdelioncourt]

You know what, I think some of us moved on too quickly from the idea that TVL was Lestat's POV and all the characters were being filtered through him. People were very quick to remind us all of this when they wanted to deny that Armand and Daniel had a unique bond or that DM was even real at all, but somehow this argument got forgotten along the way.

And there's something I've been reflecting on with regard to this when it comes to Daniel and the argument that he's been flattened.

Now I thought of this when I saw this interview with Jacob:

Now if Lestat's POV is influencing the portrayal of Louis, why wouldn't that be true of other characters, particularly ones that he doesn't really like very much? Why wouldn't he portray Daniel—a two-time Pulitzer prize winner who was always on his ass, pissed him off, and then cut off his head—in a terrible and unsympathetic light? Why wouldn't he portray Daniel—the annoying fledgling of the guy who killed his daughter—as a stroppy teenager who uses Gen Z slang and straight up says that Lestat might be smarter than him (Daniel Molloy would NEVER).

I'm not saying that certain events never happened, because see this post, however what I am saying is that the Lestat filter, if it can colour Louis, then it's going to colour the others.

Lestat uses cringey slang in episode 1, a lot. So is Daniel really the one saying things like "yaoi manther" or did Lestat put those words in his mouth? Is Armand really saying "armends" and "girlies" or is that a Lestatification of all that? Armand mispronounces Amhurst when he emphasises the "H", just like Lestat with Worcester (notably, Daniel corrects Lestat but not Armand). He also says he's going to "lob" Regina's head off when the phrase is actually to "lop" something off. You could even argue that Armand speaking in his French accent and Daniel not questioning it is a part of this (although there could easily be other reasons for this too).

Now none of this explains why they made Daniel say so many offensive things—maybe he's just that much of an evil boomer. And none of this is to say that all the writing is perfect. But I do think that some of the things (particularly language things) that are being written off as OOC are actually like that on purpose.

[fyhk]

We didn’t need the Armand tortures an apology from Louis scene, because although things are sour between Loumand, but they can definitely sit it out and talk, like yes Louis didn’t know Armand lied about saving him, but this doesn’t change the fact he didn’t save Claudia, exactly like how Lestat saving Louis doesn’t change the fact he played the main role in the play that’s her execution, like, at one point Lestat says he told Louis about one (1) of the great laws, so one could say he never told her about the great laws, Lestat just sits there trying not to get criminated further… (and yes TVL makes it clear why he didn’t see her as his worthy of saving daughter).

So you’re telling me Lestat and Louis can sit down, talk and joke about their dead daughter, but Loumand can’t talk about their relationship?

[arabellatheauthor]

unfortunately the distinction here is louis and lestat love each other, louis and armand do not. we forgive a lot in the people we love, we hold them to different standards. i do not think it was possible for louis and armand to sit down and talk it out because there was too much pain (a seismic 100 year lie) and no love to bandaid the wounds

[fyhk]

who’s we? Personally if someone I love hurts me, I’d be 10x times more hurt than if someone I’m apathetic to does… because it won’t be just whatever wrong they’d done, it would be the ghost of betraying our love on top of the wrongness.

like the one time my friend of 20 years tried to insinuate I’m not ace, that shit still cuts me, but another person literally said I’d go to hell and outed me in my pervious work place, the only work place which wasn’t so bad, that person didn’t even want to hear my opinion on what they accused me of, but I couldn’t give a fuck about what they said and did, got another job and never spoke about myself to people who know me at work… I still didn’t forgive my friend, I just avoid bringing the topic again, while that young lady at work? I’d careless if she faces the consequences of her actions or not…

Maybe I’m not like Louis, and this is fine, but it makes writing such a scene even worse! Like hey guys we baked a torture scene for Louis to show you how much he loves Lestat! Yey let’s party 🥳

Don’t let me start on the implication that the torture scene is therefore Louis’ fault because he won’t sit and talk to Armand…

[arabellatheauthor]

yes i understand the point you're making, and i was using the general "we" but i think we can safely assume that they weren't apathetic towards each other, it's impossible to be in a relationship for 80 years and be apathetic towards each other. i just said that they don't have the same pathways to moving forward because they don't have the same grace towards each other that louis and lestat have, and i do believe that's because loustat is in love.

as for the implication:

also the torture scene was never about louis and lestat, it was about louis and armand. it was armand reaching a breaking point and the consequences that followed from their relationship and the catastrophic damage they did to each other

[bifauxnenarmand]

there are thoughts to be thunk about this

[arabellatheauthor]

i wonder if this will come back more in s4. but i don't think that the show doesn't address it at all, it's more like it's a starting point for the season-long humiliation and dehumanization that armand goes through, culminating in him having a breakdown when he's had enough

[fyhk]

We didn’t need the Armand tortures an apology from Louis scene, because although things are sour between Loumand, but they can definitely sit it out and talk, like yes Louis didn’t know Armand lied about saving him, but this doesn’t change the fact he didn’t save Claudia, exactly like how Lestat saving Louis doesn’t change the fact he played the main role in the play that’s her execution, like, at one point Lestat says he told Louis about one (1) of the great laws, so one could say he never told her about the great laws, Lestat just sits there trying not to get criminated further… (and yes TVL makes it clear why he didn’t see her as his worthy of saving daughter).

So you’re telling me Lestat and Louis can sit down, talk and joke about their dead daughter, but Loumand can’t talk about their relationship?

[arabellatheauthor]

unfortunately the distinction here is louis and lestat love each other, louis and armand do not. we forgive a lot in the people we love, we hold them to different standards. i do not think it was possible for louis and armand to sit down and talk it out because there was too much pain (a seismic 100 year lie) and no love to bandaid the wounds

[lexdelioncourt]

From his vampire loneliness face in the first few episodes to this?

"I'm seeing someone." Yeah I bet.

Who's the bottom now, Daniel?

[arabellatheauthor]

Louis: *admits his wrongdoing*

some of y'all: "Um aCtUaLlY louis has NEVER done anything wrong"

people are so desperate to remove agency from the characters in this show like they're about to win a prize for it, it's exhausting

[theatredeslestat]

For those who didn’t quite understand what was happening during this part of the scene:

LESTAT DID NOT KILL PAUL

Paul was there because, as Lestat said earlier in the scene, the people who were present were either:

His victims

People he loved

People he traumatized

People who had an impact on him

It’s been established for a little while now that Lestat DID NOT kill Paul. This is made even more known by the fact that Paul was being seen as some kind of guide into the potential afterlife for Lestat. He wasn’t there to make him feel sad or upset, he was there almost as a comfort which wouldn’t happen if he had killed him.

Yes, Lestat did in some way traumatize Paul but he did not kill him.

[lexdelioncourt]

The way I'd die laughing if the finale opens back at the auction and Daniel walks in and sits next to Armand and it's confirmed that he is actually alive and has been this whole time but Lestat's bitchy theatre kid ass is just like... technically he's fine but he's dead to me

[arabellatheauthor]

i see so many people comparing Heated Rivalry to IWTV and not one of y'all is doing it in good faith. we've become so accustomed to queer stories only ever showing queer pain that people are hating on HR for being essentially the gay version of any other rom-com (a lauded, profitable genre).

and I just wish that some of these people would realize that people don't like HR just because it's the softcore hockey show (even if that's why they started). They like it because queer people NEVER get to see queer joy on screen, especially not sexual joy.

Saying stuff like Ilya is not Lestat feels asinine. The comparison makes as much sense as saying Dexter is not Sherlock. Like, okay? No one is claiming the shows are even remotely similar. They're just two gay shows and we don't have many so ofc ppl watch both.

As an artist, I loathe the concept that popular media is by definition a lower art form than art that has a cult following. And that opinion is so pervasive. Something doesn't have to be Shakespeare to be enjoyable and for it to be good art. HR doesn't have to be IWTV to be good tv.

And even if you hate HR, it still actually is really fucking important that it exists right now and that queer people are being portrayed as 1) sexual beings and 2) people who get to be happy. Representation matters! You don't have to like HR but don't pretend it's because IWTV broke your brain.

[arabellatheauthor]

got me suddenly wishing TVL was made in canada maybe we would've allowed the men to kiss

[arabellatheauthor]

So Armand was definitely still concocting plans to stop the great conversion through all of that. We know he has a little cult following again of 100 people. We know that he’s afraid Lestat is going to get them all killed. We know he’ll do anything to protect Daniel.

The scene between him and Louis is so powerful and poignant. Don’t you think it’s interesting Armand chooses to mark Louis *after* they make amends? What if the A is protection? Like the amulet he gives Daniel in the book. What if Armand is marking the vampires who he wants left alone?

It would make a hell of a lot more sense to me than “omg they just redeemed this guy and showed the audience he’s not the big bad wolf only for him to go tee hee let’s be evil again.” Like that makes no sense to me. So yeah, I think it would be nice if it’s a protective thing. If the reason Armand and Louis can look act each at the auction amiably is because they were on the same side.