Why Lestat has NPD, and not BPD
There's a conversation that keeps circulating in Interview with the Vampire and The Vampire Lestat fan spaces, that drives me absolutely insane. It is the idea that Lestat de Lioncourt is a textbook representation of Borderline Personality Disorder. And while that reading isn’t entirely without merit, it ultimately misses the complexities of Lestat’s character!
Still, the confusion between BPD and NPD in fandom spaces is not a neutral mistake, but really a reflection of the near-total erasure of NPD from mainstream psychological literacy, and its replacement with a caricature so distorted that even when a near-perfect representation appears in culture, people don't recognise it.
In my opinion, and with my own experience and diagnosis, Lestat is not a BPD representation. He is one of the most layered, and (dare I say!) sympathetic portrayals of Narcissistic Personality Disorder in fiction.
What BPD is, and why Lestat doesn't fit
Borderline Personality Disorder is (but not only, obviously) characterised by profound identity instability. People with BPD often describe not knowing who they are without their relationships, their sense of self is porous, shifting, dependent on the people around them.
Some core features include a terror of abandonment that can feel physically unbearable, intense and rapidly shifting emotions, a pattern of idealisation and devaluation in relationships (the "favourite person" dynamic), chronic emptiness, and impulsive self-destructive behaviour often used to regulate unbearable internal states. (if anything, I’d argue, and maybe will in another rant, how Armand fits the “quiet BPD” diagnosis better…)
Now let us consider Lestat. Does he fear losing himself? Does he truly? Lestat's sense of self is not exactly fragile, or rather not the way you’d think. He is, at every point in Anne Rice's novels and in AMC's adaptation, extraordinarily certain of who he is, or rather of who he wants to appear to be. He walks into every room as the most important person in it and does not entertain the possibility that it is incorrect.
Sam Reid describes Lestat as someone who is "always willing to be seen". Lestat genuinely believes he occupies a higher plane than other vampires, and certainly higher than humans. He frames Louis' moral anguish not as valid, or painful transition from human to vampire, but as weakness.
He views his transformation into a vampire as one that sheds the pain of his human life, he genuinely sees the Dark Gift as a gift. He doesn't mourn his mortality or grieve what he lost. He reframes every horror of his existence as proof of his superiority. So, Louis’ refusal to accept the dark gift threatens his own idealisation of his vampiric life. The self-mythology must stay intact.
He doesn't just want Louis to stay, he wants Louis to stay and agree with Lestat’s version of why the relationship is good. He wants Louis grateful, elevated and reflected back at him as proof that Lestat is worth loving.
This is why the entire interview structure of the show, with Louis telling his story to a journalist, and reclaiming the narrative, is such a perfect recipe for chaos. Lestat’s reaction to Louis' version of events is essentially the reaction of someone who has just had their self-myth dismantled for the public eye.
Might I add, Actor Sam Reid himself has acknowledged that Lestat is a narcissist who carries a lot of suppressed self-hatred, which people use to argue in favor of BPD, but if you knew anything about NPD, self hatred and profound shame is quite literally the pathology…
What NPD actually is, and why it doesn't make you a monster
This is where the conversation tends to go wrong, because most people have only encountered NPD as a pejorative, often misunderstood as a simple vanity or cruelty. "Narcissist" in pop psychology has come to mean a manipulative abuser with no inner life, no pain, no humanity. That is both clinically inaccurate and deeply harmful to people who carry the diagnosis, and to anyone trying to understand the humans around it.
NPD is a personality disorder built around a fragile core-self that is defended by an edifice of grandiosity. The grandiosity is not the self but the armour, and underneath it is profound shame, a sense of fundamental defectiveness, and a near-constant need for the outside world to reflect back the self-image that holds the internal structure together.
People with NPD do not lack emotion, if anything, they often feel things with extraordinary intensity. But the emotions most accessible to them are those tied to their self-image: pride, humiliation, contempt, admiration. What is harder for a narcissist is to access their sustained empathy, and not because they are incapable of it, but because their psychological energy is so consumed by maintaining the grandiose self-structure that there is little left for consistent attunement to others, making it fundamentally difficult to recognise the inner lives of others as equally real and valid as one’s own. It is not a diagnosis that renders someone a monster, no matter what popular media make it seem.
Lestat’s “fear of abandonment”
Lestat’s desperate pursuit of Louis, his devastation over Nicki, his hunger for Armand's acknowledgment/power... .etc… do read as abandonment terror on the surface. But a distinction matters here, BPD abandonment fear is rooted in a fragmented, unstable sense of self, but Lestat's relational desperation reads differently: if you leave, you are denying what I am owed.
The self is never really in question, but the recognition around it is. He needs Louis to witness him, to reflect back his own importance. Lestat needs Louis to reflect something back to him that Louis, in his grief and guilt, simply cannot provide. Louis looks at Lestat and sees appetite, carelessness, cruelty. Lestat looks at Louis looking at him and experiences something close to “narcissistic injury “. Not because Louis has abandoned him but because Louis refuses to confirm the image. And it’s the very reason he turns his attention to Antoinette, when Louis’ attention and love isn’t turned his way, a relationship he states himself is purely to feed that recognition he desperately need.
Lestat's violence toward Louis escalates from the slow burn of feeling unseen, of Louis pulling away, Louis building an interiority that excludes him, Louis becoming, in some sense, a separate person.
The cruelty is retaliatory, clearly the cruelty of someone whose supply is being withdrawn.
Lestat’s inconsistent (but not absent!) empathy
This is where the "he's a monster" reading fails. Lestat is not without empathy but rather has flashes of it that we witness all throughout. Like the complicated tenderness he has toward Louis even when he is at his most destructive. His grief when things he loves are taken from him are real. But they come and go in ways that follow his self-narrative rather than the other person's needs.
He loves Louis intensely, but struggles to accept that Louis is a person who exists independently of Lestat's narrative about their relationship. Louis calls this out, arguing that Lestat made him a vampire because he couldn't live by himself, and it lands so hard because it strips away Lestat’s framing of himself as the magnificent benefactor who gave Louis the dark gift, and reframes the whole relationship as Lestat’s need, not his generosity. And that’s the key NPD paradox, the grandiosity is actually downstream of a terror of abandonment and emptiness.
It’s much more complicated than people make it to be. He is tender when tenderness reflects well on him as a lover, a maker, a companion. He is cruel when the other person’s reality threatens to collapse the story he NEEDS to be true.
That inconsistency, present and withdrawn, is not quite based on the other person's behaviour but on his own internal state.
NPD does not preclude empathy, but rather describes it as inconsistent and contingent empathy, one that functions when one’s needs are met and falters when they aren’t. This is textbook Lestat, he can be extraordinarily attuned and loving, when he feels secure and admired. But when this equilibrium breaks, the attunement switches off and the entitlement takes over. A great example would be Lestat crashing Paul’s funeral, he feels rejected, ignored, and seemingly does not care about Louis’ grief, outside of how it inconvenience his growing relationship with Louis.
That oscillation is not the same as the BPD splitting between idealisation and devaluation, which is driven by the other person changing in the borderline individual’s perception. Lestat’s oscillation is driven by what he is receiving.
One thing I would consider the clearest diagnostic distinctions is what triggers the character’s worst behaviour
For BPD, the core wound is abandonment, the terror of being left. NPD rage isn't really about anger the way most people experience it. It can be read as system alarm.
The grandiose self-image is load-bearing, holding the fragile structure up. So when something threatens it, would it be criticism, rejection, someone choosing another person over you, someone refusing to see you the way you need to be seen… The psyche reads it as a real existential threat. The response is wildly out of the proportion because the stakes are internally total.
We see it with Lestat constantly. It’s not Louis disagreeing with him that sets him off, but that Louis persists in disagreeing. Louis keeps having an inner life that won’t bend to Lestat’s version of things, and he experiences that as a kind of annihilation.
His anger almost never looks like simple cruelty, it arrives fast, it's disproportionate, and it almost always traces back to the same wound, the feeling that he is being made small, or that someone he loves is slipping out of his control.
Sam Reid plays it with this quality of barely contained alarm even in the quieter scenes. The charm and the volatility exist on the same frequency. You always feel like Lestat is one wrong word away from tipping not because he's evil, but because his internal regulation is genuinely fragile. The performance is brilliant for that reason.
In both the novel and the show, Lestat’s decision to turn Claudia is not about her. It is about what she could do, and does, for his relationship with Louis. She becomes a mechanism for keeping Louis close. She is, in a way, an extension of the self, instrumentalised in the service of Lestat’s needs. It does not mean he did not love her, it is the NPD tendency to experience others as objects that exist in relation to oneself, rather than as fully separate subjects with independent interiority.
Why the BPD reading persists (and why its not without merit)
Lestat is emotionally intense, he clings, rages, he loves with totality. Fans who some have BPD or love someone who does, see themselves in him, and that identification stays valid and meaningful. BPD and NPD frequently co-occur (in real life and literature), and Lestat may well carry traits of both.
The show’s portrayal in particular softens his edges in ways that could invite more borderline-coded readings, but traits are not a diagnosis, and when looking at his particularities, such as the grandiose self-narrative, the entitlement, the empathy that is contingent on supply, the rage at being insufficiently mirrored…… The NPD framework is doing far more explanatory and accurate work.
At the end of the day, Lestat de Lioncourt is not a villain because he has NPD. I’d argue he is a tragedy because he has everything, beauty, power, eternity, and remains incapable of the very intimacy he can’t stop demanding.
theartofmadeline
romaincrisis
