ferencka

🌾history nerd artist | currently in her iwtv era | multifandom | hp | > Critically analysing my hyperfixations < 💫

[cbrownjc]

I just read an article by entertainment weekly where they talked with Rolin and he mentions in the finale that Armand knew he had to get out of the butcher shop quick, for reasons unspecified I think, but that before he did, he wanted to leave a mark on Louis in regards to the initial he carved, and seemingly Rolin didn’t want to explain farther for what it may mean in regards to the future, and a little bit after he talks a little about how they’re gonna explore how Louis and Armand got to the first scene of this seasons where they’re in the same room together seemingly at least tolerant of each other, idk but from that I have a feeling(maybe a far reaching one) that Armand did that with intention of maybe protecting Louis from the vamps(or maybe something/someone else) he seems to be collecting for reasons still yet to be uncovered fully(most likely great conversion related), also I heard somewhere that apparently the mark is at the very least semi permanent and not going away anytime soon, but I can’t confirm who said that, but if that’s true then maybe the mark has a bigger purpose than just malice from Armand and it’ll have some importance next season, and maybe that and/or other actions Armand takes next season in regards to Louis somewhat repairs their relationship to the degree of at least being able to be in the same room, maybe frenemies, or maybe I’m reaching idk. I’m just trying to make sense of it all…apologies if none of this makes sense.

Hey! 👋🏾

So first off, no apologies needed. The final episode itself was kind of confusing in many respects anyway, so the question was fine.

So to start, I actually saw a mention on @nalyra-dreaming last night about that mark on Louis being permanent. And look, if that is so, I am not thrilled about it.

And that is because I have a feeling that, if Armand did do it for protection, as you say? And which I freely admit is not only possible, but even probable? And which I fully admit right now is something that I thought of myself as to why Armand did it when I first saw he did it?

Then that means it is something that the show directly stole from Devil's Minion and might have given to Louis here if that does turn out to be the reason why Armand did it.

Just like many of the character dynamics between Louis and Armand in that torture scene were taken from the dynamics between Lestat and Armand, that 'A' carved into Louis' chest would be imagery taken directly from Armand and Daniel's dynamic and story together.

So yes, if it really was something Armand did for that reason, for protection, that means it is just another instance of the show giving Louis' character things that are unique to Armand's dynamic with another character and giving it to Louis first.

And that honestly ticks me off.

Because the blood amulet necklace that Armand gives to Daniel for protection -- that has Armand's 'A' initial carved into it -- is one of the top things I have been waiting to see adapted when they finally adapt the Devil's Minion story.

And now, because of this, Armand giving Daniel that amulet won't even be all that unique anymore.

Yes, Armand would have given that amulet with its 'A' protection imagery to Daniel first because he gave it to him in the past, back during their original time together (and I hope the show keeps that about it at the very least). And we might get the full explanation when he gives it to Daniel (which, yes, I also hope we see!) that it is something for protection, which would tie back into what we saw here with Louis, giving it that same explanation.

But the uniqueness of it all to Daniel and Armand will now be completely gone if this turns out to be the case for why Armand did it.

And look, a lot of what made the dynamic between Lestat and Armand compelling and unique also got somewhat appropriated to Louis and Armand as well, as others like @nalyra-dreaming and @virginiaisforvampires have said, and I noted above.

And you know? Louis and Armand actually had a unique dynamic of their own during the first two seasons of the show. With them having really fleshed out even more what had been their dynamic in the first book.

However, with one episode, this show appears to have basically reduced the whole thing by stealing a dynamic Armand has with Lestat.

And now, it is also very possible that they also stole some imagery Armand uniquely had with Daniel, if Armand's branding of Louis in that way does end up being for protection.

Yeah, you know what ticks me off the most when it comes to bad writing?

When it's just lazy.

Because I can handle bad writing that was clearly trying to do something original and just missed the mark.

But taking the imagery and dynamics Armand has with other characters and just throwing them in here with Louis to make something happen/work?

What I said about Hannah yesterday was basically me being nice when it comes to her writing of that episode:

Post by @cbrownjc · 1 link

💬 0  🔁 3  ❤️ 31 · Post by @cbrownjc · 1 link · I kept asking myself why Rolin didn't write the finale himself. He only wrote 3x01 and that w

Because, in all honesty? I already had a sneaking suspicion in my gut about what might have been really going on with that 'A' that Armand was revealed to have carved into Louis' chest, but I just didn't want to say it.

Because I didn't want to believe that Hannah appeared to have taken that whole protection imagery that Armand had with Daniel and given it to, and technically revealed it here first, with Louis.

But that very much could be what is going on with it.

And I don't like it.

What do the kids today like to say? "Reheated nachos?" Well, that is very much what Louis and Armand's dynamic became in that finale episode -- things stolen and "reheated" from other dynamics just to make that scene work and give it an out-of-context setup for next season.

Especially if this does turn out to be the reason for the branding Armand gave Louis.

That, in the end, only came off looking like a slave branding given the conversation Armand and Louis were having just before it was revealed.

Like, I will never love that they had Armand do that, even if the protection reveal of it does happen, because it very much does steal something from Armand and Daniel, in my opinion.

But if she was going to write Armand doing it at all, then she should have had him do it during the torture, not right before he left the room, if they really were not, at the very least, trying to link it back into what Claudia had said in the episode right before about Louis having the word slave etched onto his rib.

So yeah. Sloppy, muddled, and now also possibly lazy, too, when it comes to that final episode, if that does end up being what is really behind why Armand branded Louis in that way.

With it coming across to many people right now as it did because you didn't really think about the convo the two of them were having before it was finally shown, did you, Hannah? 🙄

[ferencka]

i absolutely adore jacob’s music taste. like in one moment it’s Sarah Vaughan in the other it’s Ceechyna ⭐️

i love the way he envisions louis so muchhhh

[ferencka]

Butcher Shop Scene Theory - TVL ep7 was brilliant and here's why (#2)

Ground rules:

>Posting it under the #tvl critical or #iwtv critical tags to intentionally provoke thought and to experiment with angles. If you wanna see which ep7 bits I've covered previously, check out the other parts, you might find an answer to a seemingly missing piece of information in past posts~

>I'm gonna view the 3 seasons together, as a coherent body of work that is able to stand on its own, naturally, as an adaptation of the chronicles. RJ and Anne's logic is sometimes hard to decipher, but I'm giving it my best shot. If something isn't making sense, I'm gonna call that out as well.

>I love musing on creative works; I'm also a silly rl cultural history and modern english lit academic and an aspiring professional lit critic. This doesn't mean that my thoughts are always immaculate and I'm incapable of saying shit, but trust me, one thing is for sure: my thoughts were formed by employing critical thinking and are, hopefully, not just based on personal feelings nor on parroted identity politics narratives.

My my, the first part (#1) blew up (in a sense lol), so let's continue.

Question: Why was the Louis/Armand scene set in a kosher butcher shop?

Answer 1: 'Because the writers are racist, insult religions and faith, and their sole purpose was to make a villanized Brown character torture a Black mc in a Jewish space.'

Answer 2: 'I agree with the criticism saying the setting was a bit bizzare and unexpected, but it really made me ponder. Nothing in this show is without hidden meaning, so let's try to puzzle it together. A kosher shop sounds too specific to be a random choice for an apology scene.'

Abrahamic religions all share the story of Prophet Abraham (Ibrahim) and his son Isaac (Ishmael) where the attempted blood sacrifice equals a test of devotion and gratitute. The Quran rejects the idea that physical blood has inherent spiritual value or directly atones for sins committed; even so, blood is categorised as impure (najis) and its consumption is strictly prohibited. An Sunnah tradition, Aqiqah is a goat or sheep sacrifice to celebrate a newborn baby, usually performed on the 7th day after birth, the meat being shared with the community afterwards. Ancient Judaism also practiced animal blood sacrifices for the same reasons, identical with the practices mentioned in the Christian interpretation of the Old Testament. Special dietaries also accompany several religions (eg. kosher or halal) and focus on consuming purified or clean foods which are prepared according to strict regulations, typically having one thing in common: the blood must be drained from the animal bodies in order to purify them. This strangely reflects vampiric practices. Vampires are, by human definition, unnatural or supernatural beings, and the slaughter of a thing already deceased is an unthinkably abject and liminal experience noted by Julia Kristeva, neither objective or subjective, but existing in between, just like blood or gore.

Ep6 and 7 take place during Allhallowtide, a three-day Christian observance period beginning with Halloween on October 31 and ending with All Soul's Day on November 2. While November 1, All Saint's Day is dedicated those who have officially reached heaven, the latter honours all the faithful departed who are being purified before entering heaven. Lestat's purgatory is taking place in a mental sphere, while Louis' in the butcher shop that is a dedicated human space for spiritual purification, like a church, a synagogue or a mosque.

Abstractly speaking, Lestat and Louis weren't 'properly slaughtered, yet, because Armand has got to still extract an apology out of them, especially Louis. They're momentarily immobilized, just like Isaac being tied to the pyre. Armand was desperate to conjure, to 'bleed' an apology out of Louis in his singular, godly way (seeing his history of attributing a godlike imagery to himself in order to shield his vast trauma and protect himself), wanted to gain Louis's abstract devotion, possessedly yet rightfully craving the due, loud admittance of all the pain Louis has caused him. He bleeds him out to artifically induce this state. We saw previously that both Armand and Louis have strong yet very particular and personal ties to their human religions which also shaped the eras and its conventions, worldviews they were brought up in, including the Kievan Rus, the Indian Penninsula in the 15th century or the Italian Rennaissance period. Religion is a natural, unquestionable net hanging above their identities at all times.

Armand has placed a metal pan under Louis's severed head to collect his blood and his outpouring apology that he expects from him. This is his purgatory, too, in a sense, because if Louis finally admits the hurt, the misalignment he caused him during their companionship, some of his actions can be excused as self-defense. Note that the majority of hurt we see in the show is the result of severe trauma responses, not actual physical hurt. The devotion is attempted to be forcefully extracted - even if Armand succeeds so, would it be a genuine win???

Also, it's important to emphasize that IF the characters have religious sympathies worth to analyse, these connections are largely personal, private and very unlikely to exactly conform real life Christian, Muslim or Jewish practices.

This is just my theory, but would be curious to hear from official sources touching up on this 'controversy'.

Religious symbolism in s3 is just as heavy as in past seasons, just think of the twin witches, Merrick's chants and Paul's 'Yes Ma'am' at the end of the ep.~

[ferencka]

TVL ep7 was brilliant and here's why (#1)

For some reason, tvl seems to invite a wave of dislike from the fandom none of the previous seasons did and i geniuenly. Don't. Get. Why. Yes, the season has its flops because shrinking the material into 7 episodes while still including and giving significance to characters who aren't in the book takes a lot of pondering. BUT. But. but.

First, let's get something straight: iwtv is a NOT A GOTHIC ROMANCE. For god's sake, please stop calling it like that. Let's not mix up period styles, 'romance' (~early novel) components and the adjectives 'romantic' (loveable) and 'gothic' (eerie) as qualificatives etc. It is a supernatural horror. Like Hannibal level of horror. I would add, psychological (or queer). Most aspects I'm gonna touch on are psychological. The sole purpose is not loustat, loumand or dm, so crying or complaining about not getting any 'saucy scenes' or kisses this season show a lot about misaligned viewer attitudes. Yes, and these are usually the same people that criticise the show's realistic SA rep, saying it's not needed or deeming it distasteful towards survivors. Just because you don't want something this disturbing to exist, it won't disappear from the world. Quite frankly, consent becomes very blurry in the vampiric context, so I would argue that most sexual encounters we see in the show would be considered plain violations in the real world. See? Pretty horrific, and not romantic at all. And yet again, so horribly realistic.

(I’m gonna view the 3 seasons together, as a coherent body of work that is able to stand on its own, naturally, as an adaptation of the chronicles. RJ’s logic is sometimes hard to decipher but I’m giving it my best shot. If something isn’t making sense, I’m gonna call that out as well.)

but humbly, let's dive in, let's continue.

#1/ Eternalized human experience: It is human experience that inherently shapes all vampire into the form they're going to be trapped in enternity in. For example, Louis is often mocked for being sentimental, melanchonic, too attached to his humanistic (!) humanity by Lestat and others. Ep7 showed us that no vampires are able to overstep the limitations they faced as humans, almost all cases getting more serious with the amounts of trauma they've inherited and accumulated since their turning. Selfishness, pimping, domestic and sexual abuse, rape, sexual slavery, a fear of loneliness or sickness or death, possessiveness, thirst for appreciation, love, recognition, reassurance, guidance. An obsession to control, to rein, to gain the upper, decisive hand, to dominate, to use, to eternalize the 'rotten experience' Marius uses to conquer his own narrative because, in their vampiric minds, there is no o-t-h-e-r option. Failure falls on top of failure. At the end, all vampires remain humans. No transformation took place. We have yet to encounter a sane, independent one. That's why Lestat's purgatory especially important: he, and not others we thought as better equipped for an inner therapy process like this, took the FIRST STEP.

#2/ Louis's pimp identity: As I have propagated for YEARS, Louis's human identity as a 'collaborative' Black pimp is essential to his character and now it is finally canonically proved. The practice of human Louis conforming white standards in order to satisfy his desire of ambition, personal significance, wealth and status is historically inevitable, since minorities were forced to compete within the colonial economy or market. Louis abstractly or quite literally 'enslaved' his own community, the residents of his new orleans quarter in order to rise up on the social ladder. Once, turning, he refused to conform anymore, because he partly got out of the human 'oppressed-oppressor cycle'. At the same time, he didn't consider that his newfound immunity didn't extend to his community (the lynching leading to Claudia's turning). Obviously, during the process of conforming, he's hurt just like any Black person. He's a vamp but his pimp identity influences his relationship dynamics. He knows it and what's more important, consciously utilizes it to get the upper hand, like we saw in the kitchen scene with Armand.

#3/ Armand's breakdown: Armand's character is the most realistic and painful SA representation I've seen on screen so far. No miraculous recovery, no sudden realisation, no 'speaking-out' for himself. He was born in 1481. He knows, recognizes modern terms, but cannot internalize them, cannot understand them the way we do. The abuse is normalized by not being recognized by the very people he claims to have made him happy in the past (Louis, Lestat) or even people who are capable of contextualising the vocabulary needed for voicing the experience (Daniel). The uncomfortable power-exchange hierarchy in loumand briefly touched on in previous seasons becomes obvious and very frontal. As Assad said "Armand has given up on others understanding him". Each vampire is basically a solitary confinement and Armand doesn't have a voice, doesn't have a vocabulary to express what has happened to him. Louis tips him over the edge once again. His primal instincts: "how I make this right quickly so I can avoid forthcoming punishment?" "oh god, I need to set everything right in this instant to escape the retaliation." "please, I'll do anything, quickly, just don't hurt me anymore." Complete fawning. For a traumatized individual, no clear thoughts exist in that moment. Just the frantic need to escape and to redo any mistakes they've made. All other sectors of their reality are blocked, floating, drifting, slowing down, shutting down. Armand is so deep down in this, he can only act out of hurt because that is the sole emotion capable of occassionally outmatching the burden he carries within. But make no mistake, this does NOT make him a disney level sole villain, nor villainistic.

Let's train back our minds into critically engaging with a viewed material.

Let me know your thoughts whatever they may be~🫶

[starlitsequins]

i dont mean to victim blame but why do these vampires keep talking to daniel molloy when they know he's daniel molloy

[ferencka]

the killer quartet 🎶~

louis’s gear based on kendrick’s

lestat’s just being himself lol

alice in chains must be dan’s no1 depression artist to cure his transformational trauma

armand’s outfit is based on trent reznor’s from the peel it back 2025 tour cuz i have this wild headcanon that he would be completely mesmerised by electro-industrial noises

[v0idwraith]

I’m ngl there are some things to legitimately criticize about this show but i feel like a lot of you aren’t engaging with it in a genuine manner

[ferencka]

this!!!

thoughts are coming next week

in short: visually/physically speaking, the weakest, but mentally/psychologically speaking, the strongest. lestat just overcame what literally no vamp could and said no to further trauma damage. attention: we have not yet seen a truly independent vampire existing in this universe - if thats even possible.

that being said, my favourite finale remains the s2 one but this follows as a very close second

[ferencka]

a little tease hehe

reveal: im also an artist ~ at least my bio says so

[ferencka]

eric, quoting assad "wait 'till i get my hands on you" zaman's subtle foreshadowing in past interviews

this mf pic from e7 preview ???????:

everybody, stay calm. apparently, armand has just carved his initial into his beloved's FUCKING CHEST???

[knifelesbianjo]

evil dan and phil

[ferencka]

opinion on tvl ep6 "dialogue controversy"

i've been seeing posts criticising "montreal" using "slave" in the dialogue when claudia finally confronts louis, actually mirroring a scene from s1 when she and he are trapped in a 'house arrest' state following lestat's domestic terror. please y'all, what about exercising some cinematic critical thinking and diving into the possible whys (*since we know that both jacob and delainey were involved in scripting!!*)

slave means that somebody is entirely robbed of their agency, legally owned by others and is forced to work without freedom or fair pay. it is a substantial ingredient of colonisation. the word is drenched in discrimination, racism and oppression the black community had to endure. that's why it's important to lean a little back into the era in question and look at the reasons why could the use be relevant in claudia's context.

going back to s1, many people miss out on the fact that human louis was a bloody dirty-handed opportunist, willing and forced to micro-conform white standards, which kept him, as a Black person, utterly discriminated and hopelessly trapped, but it also served a further personal step towards satisfying his sense of ambition and status. both aspects are a survival strategy for him and his family, the price to upkeep their lifestyle. that is the meaning of moral ambiguity, of morally grey characters. he's severely traumatized, like all his contemporaries, but eventually commits to bury his hurt to gain an entrance into the slum's underworld which is controlled by, once again, white criminals. we see later that once he's turned, he's absolutely ruthless toward any whites discriminating him or questioning his competence or worth (go lou get 'em!). he's instantly refusing to conform any more. but beware, this doesn't mean, he'll be oblivious to the discriminational trauma he experienced as a human, as white vampires are not cured of racism the minute they get turned. the human power dynamic is still very much there, hence the absolutely brilliant subtext of the abuse louis and claudia endured in s1.

as a human, louis wasn't a just man, he was, once again, a figure of new orleans underworld. to elevate and preserve his status within that hierarchy, he had an iron hold on his quarter, pimping black women and exploiting black men and black families in his gambling facilities. various historical researches focus on how white america forced the black population to basically conserve their own systemic oppression by making them dependent on an economic framework designed to serve colonial/oppressor interest. this is a base principle of colonial rule: to lure or force ambitious collaborators under its influence by promising money, position or the illusion of a 'different treatment'. this is exactly what happened in louis's case. it's not louis's fault, nor the fault of many other black men. the system was created such so only those could flourish with greater chance of success who collaborated with the oppressors. it is a widely-applied tactic to divide the oppressed, as recognized by postcolonial studies.

louis viewed himself as an 'independent businessman', not a collaborator, consciously and unconsciously trying to construst a sense of agency for himself, when, in fact, he had none.

when claudia uses the word "slave", she's speaking from the perspective of someone who had been exploited by louis's business the same way louis was exploited by white businesses. the lynching leading to her turning was inflicted by whites in order to punish louis's defiance. louis had psychical immunity due to his vampiric nature by then, but claudia and her family did not.

that's how her misery started.

from a historical perspective, claudia calling louis's a slave refers to the phenomenon described above. in claudia's eyes, louis was, in fact, a slave to white people as long as she saw him conforming them, may they be humans or vampires. in tvl's ep6 we see claudia completely demolishing the idyllic father-daughter picture we were presented with before. claudia knows what will hurt louis the most and explicitly reminding him of his 'collaborator era', however forced was that, is a card she's not gonna let go to waste.

it is a reminder of her beginning, of how she came to be, how she caught up with a death that, in truth, just had been postponed by four decades. she plainly and simply forces louis to face his own role in her misery and to acknowledge the immense responsibility he had in her tragedy, an aspect he had tried to redirect to all others during the past interview.

Let me know your thoughts.