Madonna Louis and child baby Claudia.
Lestat’s vibe is absolutely rancid so she also hates his guts here.
Mike Driver
NASA

Andulka
almost home
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
ojovivo

tannertan36
AnasAbdin
$LAYYYTER

No title available

titsay
will byers stan first human second
RMH
YOU ARE THE REASON
Xuebing Du
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her

shark vs the universe
d e v o n
sheepfilms
Stranger Things
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia

seen from Italy
seen from Singapore

seen from United States
seen from Italy
seen from United States
seen from Netherlands
seen from Singapore
seen from Moldova

seen from Australia
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia

seen from United States
seen from Finland

seen from France
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
@diva1divawho
Madonna Louis and child baby Claudia.
Lestat’s vibe is absolutely rancid so she also hates his guts here.
Baddest bitch in town
bat at hornets nest maybe but "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism" refers to low income communities needing to choose between survival vs being eco friendly. not you continuing to watch the harry potter movies
See also: death of the author is a form of literary theory and analysis not an excuse to give J.K. Rowling money
I want to reiterate this addition, because it's something that's been bothering me a lot about this discussion: death of the author is a tool of literary analysis. It means that you are putting aside authorial intent in your analysis. So saying "you can't apply death of the author to J. K. Rowling" is very wrong. You can and should apply death of the author to Harry Potter, otherwise we would not be able to discuss all the racism, misogyny, antisemitism, transmisogyny, orientalism and classism baked into the text, since 1) she, the author, would never admit to reproducing these biases in her text intentionally and 2) since she would not admit intent, an analysis that prioritized authorial intent wouldn't be able even consider these issues, since it would have to recognise them as unintentional, subconscious biases, and therefore, according to the authorial intent criteria, dismiss them altogether. This is why death of the author is so instrumental to literary analysis. It allows us to stop arguing endlessly about what the author wanted to do with a text, and focus on what the text actually achieved. And in the realm of an author's biases, it allows us to criticize, firmly. Because if you say, "Well, J. K. Rowling didn't mean for the goblin bankers to be antisemitic caricatures," I can say, death of the author; her intent is irrelevant. The goblin bankers are antisemitic caricatures.
What death of the author theory isn't, is your permission slip to buy Harry Potter merch and make fandom content promoting it without sparing a single though to the trans people, and especially trans women, that you are helping fund the disenfranchisement of in the process. And it definitely isn't, as too many people have come to use it since it got attached to Rowling's name, its opposite: a reader's permission, no, right, no, imperative to interact with any text they like completely uncritically. That, I would more aptly call death of the reader.
I just had a thought… Armand’s gonna torture Nicolas, oh yeah… And maybe love him too, who knows.
But he’s also the master creator of spells in the minds of others…
And by the time Nicolas eventually goes into the fire, might not Armand give him some vision of his mortal life to ease his last moments & give him a last experience as he dies of something sweeter?
‘Cause by that point, Armand will surely know the fullness of their story. And he’s dying anyway.
Imagine Armand giving Nicolas a vision, say of Lestat & he lying in an Apple Orchard as Nicolas burns… I would cry for Armand’s beauty were he to do this as much as for Nicolas.
And we could also see Armand giving Daniel some version of his visions of paradise as he eases Daniel into rebirth…
I love thinking everything into making me cry!
I love it when our characters go to their full extremes! Their full terribleness. Their full beauty. The full gamut. All the beauty & the terror that they all are.
buttoning up this dress and singing and smiling while the mortals laugh and point, i relive every condescending look or fucking comment i have ever had to suffer.
there's something broken in me.
Jacob Anderson as LOUIS DE POINTE DU LAC
INTERVIEW WITH THE VAMPIRE (2022) 1.05 - A Vile Hunger for Your Hammering Heart
I love her
some book armand descriptions that tickled me
One of Lestat's default states (when it comes to Louis).
But does Louis de Pointe du Lac most iconic monsterfucker of all time have sex with his boss who is a vampire? I know he acts very classy, very demure but I bet his fantasies are just as filthy as Lestat's. Because he is the most iconic monsterfucker of all time
yeah.
imagine you're a priest and you know this local family pretty well, you've watched their kids grow up, you were at the daughter's wedding and you end up officiating at the youngest son's funeral following his defintely-not-a-suicide. then the night of said funeral the eldest son shows up drunk off his fucking ass, SCREAMING about how he needs a confession asap, and when you finally get him in the booth he delivers a Shakespearan monologue of apocalyptic self-loathing, capped with the revelation that he's a) homosexual and b) fully convinced he's fucked the Literal Devil. and before you can even wrap your head around that let alone figure out a solution, the "devil" in question breaks into your church, sets it on fire, rips you out of your confession booth, and fucking eats you in front of the altar, right before he and the guy you were trying to help get gay married over your still-warm corpse. rip Father Matthias, you were a real one.
I’m a huge fan of yours (requested by Anonymous)
For context: In that production of King Lear by the Royal Shakespeare Company, Sir Ian McKellen, playing the titular character in a scene where Lear has essentially gone round the bend, strips completely naked right there on stage. New York critic Michael Portantiere, noted in his review, “Special note for those who care about such things: In a brief nude scene, McKellen amply demonstrates the truth of Lear’s statement that he is ‘every inch a king’.”
#wow go ian mckellan #also a+ flirting there taron
The above scene is amazing but I also feel we need to take a moment to appreciate the fact that a respected theatre critic took time to mention in their review of this production of King Lear that Ian McKellen has a truly impressive penis
@bucklikethedollar why would you hide poetry like this in the notes
I’m begging ON MY HANDS AND KNEES for IWTV artists to PLEASE draw Lestat as some of my personal favourite looks of Billy Idols and ESPECIALLY to draw Lestat and Akasha as the pic of Billy and Elvira
exchange of blood.
“Now why the Hell do you want me, of all people,” he asked, “to come with you to France?”
“You know why. You know damned good and well why. Because you were there when I was just Born to Darkness. You were there when I stumbled onto these shores and sought to find a companion, and found you; and you were there when we lived all those decades together, you and me and Claudia, and you are the only one living who remembers the sound of her happy voice, her young voice, or the ring of her laugh. And you were there when I almost died at her hands, and when the pair of you fought me again and left me in the flames. And you were there when I was humiliated and ruined at the Théâtre des Vampires, and they murdered her due to my crimes, my weakness, my blunder, my ignorance, my failure to steer one fragile little bark in the right direction, and you were there when I rose from the dead and had my shabby little moment of triumph on the rock music stage, my cheap little hour as Freddie Mercury before the footlights, you were there. You came. You were there. And you were there when I took the spirit of Amel into me, and when all around me were telling me I had to be the Prince whether I wanted to be or not, you were there. You were there when all these streets ran with mud and river water, and when you and I went to see Macbeth onstage, and I couldn’t stop dancing under the streetlamps afterwards reciting the words, ‘Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow,’ and Claudia thought I was so handsome and so witty and so clever, and we would all of us always be safe, you were there.”
In a way, he made me think of a child doll, with brilliant faintly red-brown glass eyes—a doll that had been found in an attic. I wanted to polish him with kisses, clean him up, make him even more radiant than he was.
“That’s what you always want,” he said softly. His voice shocked me. If he had any French or Italian accent left, I couldn’t hear it. His tone was melancholy and had no meanness in it at all. “When you found me under Les Innocents,” he said, “you wanted to bathe me with perfume and dress me in velvet with great embroidered sleeves.”
“Yes,” I said, “and comb your hair, your beautiful russet hair.” My tone was angry. “You look good to me, you damnable little devil, good to embrace and good to love.”
Memnoch the Devil (1995) — Anne Rice