desire'e

Desiree| She/Her | 26 | G A Y and Filipino which is the worst combo ever iykyk

[fatherofthebride]

whenever i click on the notes of a song i like and see a bunch of people being like "hate that this became a tiktok sound" i feel so free like genuinely free in my bones. one million aspiring influencers can never make me hate "heat waves" by glass animals. the only time i hear "too sweet" is when i pull up a hozier album and press play. your demonic app has no power over me and how often i listen to my songs #mysongs

[yusiyomogi]

there are so many people in iwtv fandom whose whole vibe is "i'm racist but i'm right" and you still interact with them in good faith.

[yusiyomogi]

i doubt that many lestat fans are following me. but if any of you are reading this, i wanna ask you to disentangle yourself and your friends from these fucked up fandom spaces. and i know, i know, most of you feel like... "my fandom space is good, no one i know is like that", but reality is... when i see fucked up anti-black posts from lestat stans, those likes are not coming from nowhere. the problem of "quiet agreement" is very very relevant, and it something that makes vocal racists braver.

if you wanna listen, again, please always listen to what black fans of the show have to say. if you noticed a pattern where black fans says that someone is doing/saying something anti-black, but your first reaction is "nah, it doesn't feel that way", you're wrong. you're being defensive. it's understandable feeling, but you need to get over it.

here's what i noticed in "quiet agreement" fan spaces and what's my advice to people who still care and wanna do better:

1) learn what anti-black microaggressions are, how they manifest, how they tend to looks like. i know that a very few people are hyperaware of social cues, dog whistles and underlying implications, that's why sometimes it needs research.

2) start paying attention to the patterns of behavior. if someone you follow always gets into fights with black fans, even if the topic "about fictional characters", it's a huge red flag. start looking into it.

3) start approaching what bipoc say in a good faith. get over your irritation that they don't like the same character you do. get over your insecurity when they talk about nebulous "white fans". racism is a real-world problem, your personal feelings is something you can work through.

4) if you feel like you're being accused unfairly, ask for elaboration. some people wouldn't wanna explain it to you, but many would.

5) stop closing your eyes during rare instances of awful behavior. if someone makes cool funny posts about your favorite character and only "sometimes" acts in racist and unhinged way, you can't simply wait out these periods of time. you need to say something to them or you need to stop interacting. there are plenty of people who post funny things without also being awful people.

6) stop giving grace to people over and over again. if it's repeated offense, no amount of excuses will fix the situation. stop supporting people like that even if they were perfectly nice to you in the past, it's not worth it. you don't want to be associated with them.

7) cut ties with bad people publicly. let your friends know why you decided to stop supporting certain people. it'll help many others to realize that they've been closing their eyes on awful things too.

[gaypeople]

terminal case of angel face

[op-la]

[op-la]

ghost girl walking

[op-la]

[op-la]

"Who are you, Louis?"

For @ldpdlweek2026 day 4 - guilt | reconciliation and forgiveness

You can get this as a print here

[yusiyomogi]

"or is it the sleep of an infant?"

a quick painting for day six of @ldpdlweek2026 (mental illness & angst)

[kinkydorah]

DELAINEY HAYLES The Vampire Lestat: After Dark Preview Special

[yusiyomogi]

a couple of sketches for day three and day four of @ldpdlweek2026 respectively!

day three - romance | parallels (yes, i think loustat is a kind of couple who dance in their pajamas before bed)

day four - guilt | reconciliation & forgiveness

[wenisometimes]

let it out and let it in

[sillystigmata]

Control it.

[ldpdlarchive]

[reticent-vampire]

Assad Zaman in The Vampire Lestat: After Dark

[ithelpstodream]

[enfranchisement]

[onethousandrbirds]

happy anniversary 

[omni-rhombus]

Oh, hey Charlie, sorry you didn’t make it to the 8 year anniversary

[wolfythewitch]

all all all

[murfpersonalblog]

Certain Lestans in AMC's IWTV fandom keep harping about "the tale that was told" as a thinly veiled way of exonerating Lestat of any wrongdoing or accountability, by accusing Claudia & Louis & Armand of lying about everything in S1 & S2. But it's interesting how they don't actually seem to be paying attention to the actual chronological order of events, and who's been telling which tales when, and for whom:

1917 - 1949: Claudia's diaries narrate HER life from HER authentic pov (via journaling), for HER private venting (folks keep confusing sincerity/authenticity for reliability)

1949: The Trial narrates LESTAT'S life from HIS compromised/ventriloquiized pov (via the coven script), for public consumption

1973: Louis narrates HIS life from HIS compromised pov (via Armand's Seismic Lie about "Banishment"), for public consumption. (These sessions are recorded on tape, pre-Armand wiping Louis' memory.)

2022: Louis narrates HIS life from HIS AND CLAUDIA'S compromised povs (via Armand's lies/memory wipes & the editorialized/missing diary pages), for public consumption

2023ish: Daniel narrates The Unholy Family's life & HIS encounters with Loumand from HIS compromised pov (via the Talamasca's edits), for public consumption

2025/2026ish: Lestat narrates HIS life from HIS compromised pov (via the documentary/music videos/TVL book/etc), for public consumption

"The tale that was told" in narrative form was FIRST told to the public BY LESTAT, as part of the Trial designed to have Louis & Claudia publicly lynched & KILLED.

Everything Louis has done since then is REACTIONARY, based on the words that came out of LESTAT'S mouth, and what LESTAT said about him & Claudia, and their life together, on that public stage in front of a bunch of hateful AF strangers who wanted Louis & Claudia dead.

The TVC fandom's always given the credit to Louis as THEE titular vampire who was the first one to publish a vampire's (auto)biography (via Daniel); but AMC's changed it to make LESTAT was the first one--because they changed the nature of the Trial itself.

In the books, Lestat doesn't talk about his tragic love life with Nicki & how he met Louis & who said "Come to Me" first & his affair with Antoine(tte) & the night Claudia was turned & Louis refusing to have sex with him & blahblahblah. In the books, the Trial's strictly about 2 things:

confirming who had a hand in having Lestat killed (was Claudia working alone, or was Louis in on it, too?)

confirming whether or not Lestat told them about the Great Laws

That's IT.

There is no tale--it's an interrogation that's quick & efficient. book!Lestat's forced to tell the truth, that Claudia was the only one involved in poisoning him & slitting his throat. Armand saved Louis's life, and Lestat went crazy with guilt & hid in his NOLA sad shack until he went to ground & slept for the next 100ish years until Satan's Night Out woke him up with their rock music in the modern day.

That's IT.

AMC is the one that made a gigantic deal about the Trial, and gods bless them for that, it was an incredible adaptive choice. 👍 But people in this fandom don't seem to realize that Louis' version of events in S1 (2022) & esp. S2 (1973) do NOT exist in a vacuum. Defensive AF Lestans are acting like the Trial is based on the things (read: lies) Louis said, when NO--what Louis' saying is based entirely around everything that went down during the Trial--especially the ramifications of "Banishment."

AMC!Lestat lied up & down that Trial (forced or willing), and Louis' been pissed ever since, cuz the Trial heavily impacted his idea of Lestat's character & vampirism as a solution to his problems; and whether or not he'd sold his soul to the white devil who never GAF about him and "paid the biblical price for his first love" by losing Claudia cuz he made the wrong choice by accepting Lestat's companionship--"snatching the piece of candy;" when he should've just "worn a different suit" or killed himself in the church like he originally planned.

So it's rather comical seeing the Lestans twist themselves into knots to point the finger at Tom Dick & Harry, everyone but LESTAT for the things LESTAT did that snowballed this entire effed up situation, including but by no means limited to just the Ep5 Fight. 🙄🤷‍♂️

[whocareshoney-deactivated202605]

I just wanted to add that despite the trial being retold ostensibly as a recollection of Louis and Armand, many of the things Lestat says and does in that trial seem accurate to what he actually believes - his side of the story. Like when he makes an audience member experience vampire loneliness as a way to make himself a more sympathetic victim. Yes, it’s scripted, but there does clearly seem to be truth to the fear of abandonment being a major influence on his leveraging of power in his relationship with Louis. I’ve noticed fans will use Lestat’s feelings (loneliness, abandonment issues) which are technically being retold by Louis, in all of his sympathy, as justification for Lestat’s actions, but in the same breath claim that Lestat has never told his side of the story. We are given, to some extent, his side of the story. The trial was his sympathy edit. As a result, I think it’s doubtful that anything Lestat says in season 3 will provide a more sympathetic edit than he was given at the trial with respect to his actions in season 1.

[murfpersonalblog]

EXCELLENT POINT, THANK YOU!!! 💯

Especially because although the Trial EPISODE is being retold by Loumand (complete with flashbacks from heaven knows whose pov), the Trial SCRIPT as a physical entity isn't retold by ANYONE. It is what it is, it speaks for itself. And as a script, it is FAR less gracious towards Louis & Claudia than Louis ever was towards Lestat in 2022.

Yes, the 1973 interview reamed Lestat to hell & back, but even Louis admitted in 2022 that that version was wildly unfair towards Lestat (a la Anne Rice's IWTV book--and unlike hers, the 1973 tapes were never published). (And even in 1973, the tapes weren't meant to have Lestat KILLED. He was just venting to Daniel about his estranged ex.) He literally said that he wanted his new interview in 2022 to give Lestat "a more nuanced portrait." Whatever Daniel & the Talamasca put in the new book is entirely out of Louis' hands or control (or consent/permission--hence: burning the laptop).

So who's the biased one spreading a tale that was told to paint someone in a bad light? 🤣

[jojam10]

[murfpersonalblog]

@jojam10 Yes, I know what she wrote, I even put excerpts from Anne Rice's books in my post. 🙄🤣 My point is that AMC overhauled her books by thoroughly changing the context of the Trial.

In AR's book, there is no "Banishment."

book!Armand doesn't lie about the coven tryna kill Louis, and Louis doesn't leave Paris with Armand thinking that Lestat WILLINGLY had a hand in his & Claudia's sham Trial. book!Louis KNOWS the Trial "made a fool of you!" and that Lestat wanted him to come back home to NOLA.

AMC!Louis knows NONE of this. He thinks Lestat HATED him & wanted him DEAD, because AMC!Armand lied about "Banishment" and no one told Louis differently for the next 77 years until Daniel showed up with Raglan's/Sam's copy of the Trial Script with Armand's marginalia in red ink. 💀

That is why the first rendition of the interview in 1973 sees Louis SO PISSED, still thinking Lestat's a p.o.s. who hated him & Claudia & wanted them both dead.

By 2022, Louis' sobered up considerably, had more time to think (& suspect Armand of foul play), and he wants to finally set the record straight.

So what Anne Rice wrote is NOT a 1:1 with what AMC is doing, because SHE never wrote "Banishment", ROLIN did. 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️

What Anne Rice wrote:

1859: Claudia writes in ONE diary, NEVER about her whole life, but about the Murder Plot, and her plans to go to Europe, for her private venting

1870: The Trial interrogates Lestat, NOT about anyone's life, but about his DEATH at Claudia's hand. Under Armand's torture, Lestat confirms that she was the one who killed him, and that he never told his fledglings about the Great Laws. This was a closed trial the coven conducted in private, NOT a public performance like the rest of TdV's plays.

1973 / 1976: Louis narrates HIS life from HIS pov to Daniel, for public consumption

1984: Lestat writes HIS life from HIS pov (via TVL & his music videos), for public consumption

See what difference that makes? 🤣 ANNE RICE never wrote Armand telling Louis a Seismic Lie about "Banishment."

In ANNE RICE's books, IWTV & TVL corroborate each other, and book!Louis actually has a MUCH better recollection of what happened at the Trial than book!Lestat did, because ANNE RICE never wrote about Armand instructing TdV to Mind Fog Louis and then going back to wipe his memories in 1973! ANNE RICE never wrote about book!Louis needing an odyssey of recollection, cuz book!Louis never has AMNESIA! It's AMC!Louis who DOES!

In ANNE RICE's book, the ONLY one walking around who didn't remember ish was LESTAT, cuz Armand tortured his arse and Lestat was out of his frikkin mind, just like I broke down here, because yes, I DO read what Anne Rice wrote--and UNLIKE the book purist superfans who I always see YOU in the comments section glazing their schlongs @jojam10, I was the one who was RIGHT about the 2x8 Reunion Scene being real, when they were telling the Lestans that it never frikkin happened just cuz ANNE RICE wrote that it didn't! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 As if ANNE RICE is the one writing this show! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣