I don't want to come off wrong with this either, or rude. As I'm about to just explain why I think his motivations aren't actually all that wishy-washy wrt the trail, and that we do have some information, just not explicitly. And I know it's not exactly the point being made here.
Matter of fact, I'd agree that the show is probably doing things too subtly, and open to too much interpretation, for an average audience. And something to find plainly "scarier" or at least more direct would've fixed this. What they've got is great for someone like me who loves picking stuff apart, but would probably fall flat as a character, especially for those who love book!Mand, for those who aren't. It's the point they're after, but it is difficult to understand Show!mand unless you're sitting with it to pick this kind of stuff apart. I think they're going to go for a slow reveal of things though, developing him exponentially next season, I'd imagine. Anyway, I hope this just reads as adding my own thoughts to this, which you've said were welcome. I do like this conversation going on here!
I just wanted to highlight something that's not necessarily been, with how Armand may not so much as been simply neutered by the coven, or giving into them for whatever whim or unpassioned and uncertain reason he has, as been said. But that there was some much greater and decisive inciting which brought on his involvements, and subsequent lies about them. That have nothing to do with either his personal desires or intentions with Louis or Claudia, but rather falling victim to the covens regards for them, yes.
Though, it appears to me that his cowardice is brought on by something much greater than just himself then. What he calls a one time thing. More over, that there's an apparent lack of self present in this act. So, he can't even attempt to be the gremlin during this period of the trial being rehearsed and ensued, by the very creation of it. I'd figure the same, that even if upset about Louis' behaviors, and disdain for Claudia, either wouldn't make Show!Armand, on his own, elect to the trial, let alone scheme it. And that he might emotionally think to do a thing of similar end, but he would always be overrided by his much greater motivations of love. (At his core Armand as a character is about love, and having to come to a better understanding of how to love.)
This all leading towards the likelihood some actual threat then - as has been implied and explicitly stated in the show - was legitimately posed onto him. Which in turn made him take on this new mask of a Coward. Someone who's choices in things aren't actual real choices. Being without his own character, 'out of character from what one would expect', becomes therefore a narrative device to intentionally mislead (the writers were loving it this season).
Even if he'd come around to seeing the threat wasn't one that was real, that this Coward mask was wholly unnecessary - and the point he had could very well've been only after the coven was caput, or in that month just before. Maybe the moment Louis is saved. - He seems to still figure the very idea of the threat itself was enough, at the time, to make him causally believe, to this day, that 'there was no preventing it'.
Through this, he protects the innocence of this Coward that's still inside him somewhere, from what he couldn't have known.
Anyway, I strongly believe there is actually no lie about there being such a threat imposed on Armand to a degree someone like him would actually have believed it, or at least strongly think to believe it. It's something I discuss here with how he parallels Madeleine's story arc: X (CW: SA mention; also take this as a CW for the rest of the reply). It's something the line 'or they'd kill me' seems to suggest without necessarily stating how they'd do it. And it's something of a stretch too, I'm aware, that Armand's own election to hide very distinct details from Daniel specifically, seems to (at least to me) imply. Imply, Claudia had written things she overheard the coven intended to do with Armand, or would like to do to him, and then do act on wrt this very thing that becomes this threat he deems real enough to become cowardice for.
(It seems apt as well to point out I'm referring to the episode that deals with all these various themes and ideas. And that motivationally Armand not simply telling Louis what really happened is equally the threat looming and the shame building. Both would likely compound on each other into keeping up this act.)
The reasons I think this is with how Daniel takes to needing to know about Claudia's SA (Armand recall knows prior to the interview this cold disregard for sexual violence is a part of him), and with how they've not hidden the fact Armand has mistreated Claudia so far. Louis would know already anything said in them so it's not about keeping him with him. Which to me can only mean those pages weren't about that. 'why did I owe you my one act of cowardice? Why did I you my shame?' therefore turns into a way of saying, 'I was traumatized, which I don't owe you the story of, and yet also I didn't stand up against it. Even though I know I am powerful enough to, and I am ashamed of that.' As opposed to simply being, 'I don't want you knowing these specific details, just cause it makes me look kind of bad.' Which he does care about that, but he only seems to care about hiding anything to the extent it would actually effect him. And what even would be in Claudia's dairy's to suggest it had something to do with the bigger coverup? She cuts off right before they go about doing it.
I think, to Armand, Daniel is a present reminder of this very threat he faced before, and a threat in how he has the potential to replicate it by being one to him for all sorts of other reasons. It makes narrative sense Armand would put back on a masked personality in the presence of a threat like this, as "Rashid". Who is much like the Coward - able to express opinions about how this is going to go, but not necessarily the role able to exert anything else over the continuing of the situation. And this narrative parallel isn't as strong to include, for me, if Armand had nothing to actually feel threatened by in Paris. Though "Rashid" exists for all reasons Daniel is threatening so it makes sense regardless.
The gremlin in him - the part that would fight back - is pretty much squandered to be any part in this 'one act', when the coven presumably puts him under the same kinds of conditions where that sort of aspect would've been severely punished - with Marius. (Who we're already meant to draw some associations to wrt Daniel.) So, he might as well not have any power, when he is seeing to the coven through the trauma-lens of: They are the abuser who did have all the power over him. (note; Santiago specifically mirrors Marius in how he's become his new 'master', and will show mercy on him if he behaves. This entire aspect falls short if he didn't actually replicate this in any earned way.)
To add some onto other topics here, with Louis, he fears letting that side Gremlin out all the times. And if it comes out, it's provoked. With no real need to mask himself, which was about all he was in Paris, he's still just as ashamed, or lost to reasoning with this dark side of himself, as he is with the cowardice. He's at least aware it's not the sort of behaviors Louis would approve of, and he might fear Louis not liking him if he were to behave in this rampaging, putting rats in blenders, or torturing the guy considered a friend for a week, kind of way. Obviously. But I also think the otherwise mellowed out personality he takes on is just as much his own personality now, as is the gremlin. He's just not lending to lean into this freak he could be, unless provoked. Which isn't even then the real gremlin either. (This is pretty much reiteration of things already said though.) But I repeat to say he's like, just almost, fully himself. In a way. Maybe even, just almost, telling the full truth about everything? And I'd say they should be building up towards both.
I feel with what the writers are doing with Armand as a character is leaning into this division of identity, and the relations trauma has on replicating, and taking on identities that are not necessarily ours. Or that actively work against us, and other people in our lives. How severe abuse happens to necessitate a level of monstrosity to be able to take on certain and uncertain other monstrosities. How it blinds us to knowing the extent of our own horrors as horrific, be that perpetrated or subjected. And the natural personal consequence of such traumatizations being this unfixed sense of self, as well as a deep shame about what that self is, does, or what it's been subjected to. Which ends up also inevitably hurting everyone else out of his life, sometimes deliberately. It makes finding and knowing how to love, others and yourself, debilitatingly difficult.
And THIS IS very compelling writing of Armand, to me. Personally. It feels well-rounded to me. It makes it narratively easier on the writers convincing an audience there's something redemptive there - there's something innocent there. If they're putting together his main book arc of acceptance/admittance, and finding the kind of love he'd always been really after, which ends up being familial not romantic. Leaning into the horrific isn't necessary and could just become confused.
Anyway, I really can't wait for them to explore him more as well! I want to see how these aspects of him progress, or are shown in regress because of flashbacks!
kianamaiart
gummygunk
andulkaphoto
titsay
discoholicmusic
germansingergirl
stormborns
