Интервью с вампиром

The Vampire Chronicles #1

by Anne Rice, Энн Райс, Марина Литвинова (Translator)

Вампирская психодрама, созданная «посланницей оккультного мира» Энн Райс, стала поистине классикой не только жанра, но и мировой литературы. История вампира, рассказанная им самим в нарушение всех заповедей, завораживает с первых страниц. Гипнотический голос повествует о жизни и нежизни и словно во сне переносит слушателя то на плантации Луизианы, то в Париж XIX века, то в крохотную прикарпатскую деревушку...
Неужели обитатели Мира Тьмы — это воплощенное зло — способны, подобно смертным, страдать и радоваться, любить и ненавидеть, вечно искать ответы на вечные вопросы?

Genres: Horror, Fantasy, Fiction, Vampires, Paranormal, Classics, Gothic

448 pages, Hardcover

First published April 12, 1976

About the author

Anne Rice (born Howard Allen Frances O'Brien) was a best-selling American author of gothic, supernatural, historical, erotica, and later religious themed books. Best known for The Vampire Chronicles, her prevailing thematic focus is on love, death, immortality, existentialism, and the human condition. She was married to poet Stan Rice for 41 years until his death in 2002. Her books have sold nearly 100 million copies, making her one of the most widely read authors in modern history.

Anne Rice passed on December 11, 2021 due to complications from a stroke. She was eighty years old at the time of her death.

She uses the pseudonym Anne Rampling for adult-themed fiction (i.e., erotica) and A.N. Roquelaure for fiction featuring sexually explicit sado-masochism.

Reviews

[C. · Rating 4 out of 5]

You begin.
It seems like it might be fun.
A little bit trashy, but fun.
Not so well written.
Disappointing.
Already, you know it won't be up to much.
You keep reading.
Why this way?
You read, wondering why.
It seems pointless.
You are bored, your mind wanders.
You keep reading.
You cannot stop.
It is dark.
So dark.
The atmosphere.
Dark. Macabre. Gothic. Haunting.
Erotic.
You are trapped.
Trapped in someone's twisted fantasy.
Kinky.
Until pain and suffering and anguish and loneliness are beautiful.
Alluring.
Seductive.
But you know that they are not, and no book will make it so.
You keep reading.
You are bored. You put the book down.
But you have to finish it.
You keep reading.
You read.
Waiting for gratification.
Waiting for something to happen.
Waiting.
You cannot look away.
You keep reading.
It is a beautiful day outside.
You keep reading.
So dark.
So sensual.
So strange.
The plot shifts.
A small climax.
You groan.
Sigh.
Still a hundred and fifty pages left.
You keep reading.
Repelled.
Attracted.
You shift positions.
You ache for more.
You keep reading.

...

Blam! Kazam! Ka-POW!
Climax!
Death! Destruction! Fire!
Alone.
Downwards spiral.
Depression.
Dark.
So dark.
Come on, suicide.
There is no suicide.
Wandering.
Searching.
Existential angst.
Oh.
That was all.
What a stupid ending.

[Geoffrey · Rating 1 out of 5]

Gay, but not gay enough.

[Kat Kennedy · Rating 3 out of 5]

If you would kindly look at my shelves, you might notice that I've read a good chunk of vampire novels written in the past two decades. It seemed strange to me, though, that I still hadn't read one of the more important ones.

Now, I don't think it's because this book is particularly brilliant or a masterpiece. Yet it does represent an important paradigm shift in the representation of vampires in modern literature. Whilst Vampires are still unaccountably evil in this novel, they are also relatable, capable of sparking our empathy and intimate to us on a level not really seen previously to this novel.

Published in 1976, it is the story of the world's most boring vampire, Louis. Okay, I take that back, ALMOST the world's most boring vampire...

[image error]
Excellent, now that our obligatory Twilight reference is out of the way, we can get on with the review!

We've come a long way from the original publication of Interview With a Vampire. Previous to this novel, a story about Vampires was generally a horror novel and nobody expected Vampires to turn out to be the good guys. Now they are almost guaranteed to be, at the most, misunderstood.

Like our current generation of teenagers...



As far as I can see in my research, this seems to be the place where Vampire Empathizing began or at least was made popular. I wanted to know if The Lost Boys, Blade, Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Anita Blake, Vampire Diaries, Twilight et al owe their existence to Interview With A Vampire and if they've done it justice.

Well, I've been searching for a Vampire novel or movie that is as much of a pop culture icon, that displays tenets of Vampire Empathizing and which predates Interview With a Vampire but so far my search hasn't revealed much.

As for how this novels stands up to the wealth of vampire media that followed it? Well, in some aspects I think it is a vast improvement. The idea of Vampires being the dark seducer isn't new and using them to represent repressed sexuality has become stock standard.

However this book deals with those two themes in a very different way. The dark seducer, Lestat, and the repressed sexual being, Claudia, both destroy Louis in vastly different ways and it's a nice, depressing change from the usual state of affairs.

But still, on its own, it's not a fantastic book. It may have popularized Vampire Empathizing, but it's probably also responsible for a lot of terrible gothic poetry.

And in case you're wondering if the movie is better than the book? In this instance, yes. Though I can't say why...



I'm not sure what the movie has that the book doesn't...



Or what makes the movie more intriguing...



But it sure is SOMETHING!

[Virginia Ronan ♥ Herondale ♥ · Rating 4 out of 5]

”People who cease to believe in God or goodness altogether still believe in the devil. I don’t know why. No, I do indeed know why. Evil is always possible. And goodness is eternally difficult.”

It’s been ages I first saw the movie but I still remember how much I enjoyed it. How sorry I felt for Louis when he told his story and how much I loved Lestat for being the evil manipulator that he is. *lol* By now I even have “Interview with the Vampire” on DVD and every once in a while I re-watch it and glory in the amazingness of this film! They did a great job with the film adaption, that’s for sure, but to be entirely honest Anne Rice did an even greater job writing the book. XD

”I’d like to meet the devil some night,” he said once with a malignant smile. “I’d chase him from here to the wilds of the Pacific. I am the devil.”

I don’t know why it took me so many years to read this, especially because I already read “Queen of the Damned” and “The Vampire Armand” and loved them both, but sometimes it just takes a little longer until the inevitable happens and as it seems to read “Interview with the Vampire” was one of those special cases. ;-) So what can I say about this book that hasn’t been said already?
I loved Louis! He’ll always have a special place in my heart because he’s the embodiment of the fight of good against evil. No matter which vampire you encounter throughout the course of this book, they all lost their humanity, their compassion for their victims and their sense of justice.

”I saw you in the theatre, your suffering, your sympathy with that girl. I saw your sympathy for Denis when I offered him to you; you die when you kill, as if you feel that you deserve to die, and you stint on nothing. But why, with this passion and this sense of justice, do you wish to call yourself the child of Satan!”

Louis? Nope, never! He’d been turned into a vampire decades and centuries ago, but he still managed to preserve his humanity and to some degree even his innocence. He has to drink blood in order to stay alive but he certainly doesn’t enjoy it. In fact he condemns himself for being too weak to go without it, he despises the weakness of his nature and he most definitely loathes the creature that lives within him. In short: I’m pretty certain he’s the worst vampire ever. *lol*

”He loves you. He loves you. He would have you, and he would not have me stand in the way.”

And because of this he attacks Claudia and makes her a vampire in the end (Well, actually Lestat turns her but those are just semantics. ;-P) Maybe it was her innocence that drew him, maybe it was her young blood, her strong will to survive but whatever it was, it caused him to drink from a child and Lestat in his endless cruelty and cunning persuaded him to kill her only to take it from there and to make her a vampire instead.

”Monsters! To give me immortality in this hopeless guise, this helpless form!”

Oh, how I felt with Claudia! Just imagine being imprisoned in a body that is so young and frail! I mean in the book she’s only five(!!!) when she’s turned and her mind grows but her body never changes. A 65 year old woman, living an eternal life in the body of a five year old!? How cruel, how horrible this existence must have been. Alone to feel sexual desire but never to act on it, to be trapped in a body that isn’t made for anything of it. Poor Claudia! >_< It’s no surprise she despised them both for it. Lestat she hated with a passion, but Louis? How could she hate him? She was torn because she loved him but also detested him for what he had done. For how he treated her: As a child even though she was already a grown up woman.

”For you see,” I said to her in that same calm voice, “what died tonight in this room was not that woman. It will take her many nights to die, perhaps years. What has died in this room tonight is the last vestige in me of what was human.”

And so the story unfolds and the repercussions their actions entail eventually catch up on them. *sighs* By the end of the book I actually felt sorry for all of them. Not only Louis and Claudia but also Lestat and Armand. It made me sad to see what happened to them and I’m really sorry that Armand and Louis never got a chance to work out.

”I want you. I want you more than anything in the world.”

They had such a great chemistry, but the price to be together was just too high. To destroy the one thing Louis loved the most sort of destroyed Louis as well. So basically everything Armand loved about him was snuffed out the moment he set things into motion. The irony isn’t lost on me. >_<

Conclusion:

I really enjoyed reading “Interview with the Vampire”! Sometimes it felt like watching the movie and at other times I appreciated the additional info that always seems to get lost in film adaptions, no matter how decent they are. *lol* Some things you can only glean when you read the book and for me this alone was enough reason to give it a try. XD

P.S: I think I’ll have another movie date with Louis, Lestat and Armand tonight. ;-P
_______________________

Did anyone say vampires are out?
Nope, they are definitely not, because this little gem existed way before “Twilight” was even a thought. ;-P

I wanted to read this ever since my young and innocent me watched “Interview with the Vampire” on TV. (That rhyme wasn’t intended I swear. *lol*)
Well, anyway! I always loved the movie! A sexy and broody Brad Pitt, a wicked and cunning Tom Cruise, what’s not to love? XD Plus they are so beautiful that it hurts. <3

*coughs* Okay, back on track:
I saw this at the library,
I snatched it from the shelf,
I giggled gleefully (and rather maliciously)
and now I’m going to read it!

End of the story! Let’s hope it’s a good one! *fingers crossed* XD

[Madeline · Rating 2 out of 5]

Damn you straight to hell, 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die, for what you made me do. You made me read a goddamn vampire book. Not only that, you made me read a vampire book with a cover made entirely of shiny ostentatious material that shouted to everyone in the library as I checked this out, "Look everyone! Madeline is reading a book about vampires! SHINY SHINY SHINY LOOK AT ME! I CONTAIN SEXY BROODING VAMPIRES AND I AM SO EFFING SHINY."

(I cannot stress how shiny-gold this cover is. Like, the ancient Egyptians would look at this cover and say, "That's a bit much." It was awful.)

Okay, so the book itself isn't bad, really - hence my rating of two stars, which Goodreads classifies as "it was ok." That's what the book is: just okay. Maybe I would have been more thrilled by the story if I hadn't seen the movie - even though there's stuff in the book that didn't make it into the movie, none of it is particularly thrilling. At least the movie made the wise decision to keep the blatant, in-your-face-but-unacknowledged homoeroticism (seriously, this book is, and I mean this in the most literal way possible, the gayest thing I've ever read) but changed the fact that a) Claudia is only five years old in the book and b) she and Louis do everything except actually have sex with each other. They're always kissing and caressing each other and Louis is calling her his lover and his paramour and it is so fucking creepy.

But, lest we forget, vampire books are supposed to be creepy. In these post-Twilight days, it's easy to forget that there was once a time where vampires fucked and killed and were a general amoral all-around good time, and if one of them chose to be all broody and sad about being a vampire he was the weird one that no one else wanted to hang out with. God, I miss those days - to the point where I considered giving this an extra star, just because I was so grateful to read a story about vampires who do actual vampire stuff and it's sexy and scary instead of boring and schmoopy.

Also good was how in-depth Rice goes into the psychology of vampires, and I loved her explanation for why they haven't overrun the planet: most vampires are miserable, and end up killing themselves. Explains Armand, who I will continue to picture as Antonio Banderas and you can't stop me:

"How many vampires do you think have the stamina for immortality? They have the most dismal notions of immortality to begin with. For in becoming immortal they want all the forms of their life to be fixed as they are and incorruptible...When, in fact, all things change except the vampire himself; everything except the vampire is subject to constant corruption and distortion. Soon, with an inflexible mind, and often even with the most flexible mind, this immortality becomes a penitential sentence in a madhouse of figures and forms that are hopelessly unintelligible and without value. One evening a vampire rises and realizes what he has feared perhaps for decades, that he simply wants no more of life at any cost."

That part was pretty cool. But as for the rest, I'll just watch the movie, thanks. Or not, because if we're going to be honest I don't even like the movie that much. It's probably time to admit to myself that I have no interest in reading about/watching any vampires not created by Joss Whedon. Sorry, Ms. Rice, but if my vampires must be broody, I at least want them to be funny and charming too. (or Alexander Skarsgard, because god damn)

[Joelle · Rating 1 out of 5]

I thought it was slow, difficult to read. I finished it only by sheer determination, not out of pleasure.

[Debbie W. · Rating 4 out of 5]

Since I've watched the movie based on this book several years ago (starring Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt), I decided to end October 2021 by reading one of the most chilling vampire tales ever written (sorry, Bram!)

I enjoyed:
1. the extremely descriptive scenes throughout the story, a few of them giving me the shivers;
2. the writing style of using an interview-format; and,
3. the intrinsic character development of Lestat, Claudia, and most importantly, Louis. Although eyebrow-raising at times, I really got the sense of Louis's struggles with his sense of evil, his immortality, and essentially, his loss of humanity, showing me that he has a conscience!

What niggled at me:
At times, Louis's philosophical musings and conversations droned on and on, to the point where I needed toothpicks to keep my eyes open!

According to Louis, being a vampire isn't all that it's cracked up to be. It was a deliciously creepy read, but, at this time, I don't think I will be reading any of the sequels of Anne Rice's The Vampire Chronicles.

[Jenna ❤ ❀ ❤ · Rating 5 out of 5]

I just saw that Anne died today. I am devastated. She was my favourite author for 20+ years. I conversed with her several times. There were periods in my life when her books were the only thing I had to live for. They kept me going. And it all started with Interview with the Vampire back in 1993.

By the time of her last novel Blood Communion in 2018, I had outgrown her writing style, which saddened me. I said I would never read any more books she published because I wanted to only remember the feeling of when I loved reading them.

Now she will not write another.

Dear Anne, thank you for all you gave to the world with your writing and your beautiful soul. Thank you for all you gave to me.

[Brett C · Rating 5 out of 5]

I thoroughly enjoyed this from beginning to end. This was pure gothic-vampire horror but presented in a way the characters all had human emotions and interpersonal problems. I really liked the descriptive imagery used throughout the entire story: from dark 1700s Louisiana to shadowy Old Country Europe. The tone contained all the elements of a good vampire/horror story: dark and gothic. These were real vampires that killed people; whether to feed or the thrill of the hunt.

I liked the idea that Louis was literally giving an interview the entire time to a reporter only named 'the boy'. Louis was a well-crafted character who was deep and reflective. He clashed with Lestat, who was the narcissistic and ruthless vampire who killed mercilessly. Then there was the child Claudia who transformed into an adult. All three had interesting dynamic that reflected real human emotions: anger, contempt, etc. Eventually the story caught up to the present and a lot happened in between (I don't want to spoil it).

Overall I really liked this. The story was horror and gothic at its finest. I like the movie and think they are both good in their own way. I would recommend this to anyone who liked gothic horror or vampire fiction. Thanks!

[Noah · Rating 4 out of 5]

I lay my head on a thousand beds / It's been a test to see how far a man can go without himself / I think I lost the only piece that held it all in place / Now my madness is the only love I let myself embrace (Adaption – The Weeknd).

Not to start this review out by speaking like a Nosferatu… but hello there, I’m here to tell you that I really enjoyed this book! Well, I guess that's more Obi-Wan Kenobi than Dracula, but whatever. Anyway, I’m in a good mood right now because I’m proud that I finished this book without giving up at any point! I mean, I almost never “DNF” a book, so this is hardly anything new, but it's still cause for celebration, no? Because I can be quite the giver-upper with literally anything else! A show’s second episode will be filled to the brim of unfunny jokes (“bird-blindness?” Okay, sure) and I’ll drop that shit in a second, a game gives me one too many walls of texts in the tutorial? I’m out. I even stopped a stream of the only streamer I like because he and some randos were playing a game where they had to guess music, so when they kept getting all the R&B songs wrong I was so angry that I had to shut it off right quick! With books though, I like to stick it out. I don’t even know why, considering literature arguably requires the most patience out of any pastime but here we are. This is starting to sound like a humble brag (#humblebrag), but maybe my newfound willpower is because I’ve been trying to go through all the gay genres like I’m collecting the Infinity Stones! I’ve got gay contemporaries and gay mysteries down pat, so it was only a matter of time before I tackled Gay Horror. Eek! And to that end, well, the book version of Interview with the Vampire is quite a bit different than what those gay gif sets I’ve seen on Tumblr would have had me believing. Still pretty gay, but not as openly so, perhaps? Of course, how explicitly gay something is definitely isn’t an indicator of quality in the plainest sense, which is a lesson I’ve learned all too quickly after reading the worst book in the world, Playing the Palace, but it was still a bit of an adjustment after realizing just how blurred the lines between reprehensible and sympathetic this novel portrayed both Louis and Lestat. I haven’t seen the show yet (just the gay gifs, like I said), but it's clear that there were some very important changes made in the show in order to make the story more easily accessible to the masses (including me, I'm with the masses on this one). Sure, that’s not always a good thing, but softening the blow in certain places in order to adjust to the change in times never really hurts. Because with this book, even Louis, the narrator and arguably the most sympathetic character in the novel outside of the dude giving him the interview, is a damn plantation owner. Like, the story tries to go on and on about how him turning into a vampire was his start of darkness or whatever, but let's be real here, by that metric the man was evil long before he started chomping on some necks! And while I don’t mind authentic depictions of history, that still doesn’t change the fact that this aspect of his character put a cap on how much sympathy I’d ever feel for him in any given scene. Oh boohoo, Mr. Antebellum South over here is crying about humanity again, like I could give a shit. Say what you will about Quentin Tarantino, but he definitely had the right idea that the only nuance slave owners deserve is giving them just enough time to show how evil and dumb they are before Django takes them out.

I don't know, maybe I just needed Lin-Manuel Miranda to write a little rap and then everything would be totally fine again, but aside from the lyrical prose, I couldn't find anything of the sort to alleviate such concerns. Oh, you know what? Since Louis lives forever, maybe he can write a little "Ryan Reynolds and Ryan Reynolds' wife apologize for getting married on a plantation" apology post on his Instagram and we'd all forgive him because he feels really, really bad about it. Though, with the severity of Louis' actions, he would need the ukulele to really drive home the apology. You know, the works. Look, I’m not saying I'm cancelling Lestat and Louis, but that's only because cancelling somebody has never worked successfully except for when the world all kindly banded together against DJ Khaled after he proudly proclaimed that he doesn’t orally reciprocate to his lovers. For all the tears cried, there's no doubt that every character is a monster and I was about ready to call Van Helsing on these dastardly devils by the time I reached paragraph four! Anyway, as far as queer allegories go, I'll just say that there's a reason why Interview with the Vampire has the reputation that it does in the community. I know Anne Rice said any queer interpretation was unintentional at first, but come on now, this book's gayness was about as clear as the light of day Louis and Lestat will never see again. I’m aware that the show made the relationships between Louis and Lestat and Louis and Armand and Louis and the interviewer explicit, but I still don’t know where I stand in regards to the source material, or how comfortable I am with labeling the book version queer considering the vampires are little more than vicious predators or mindless monsters, with even “morally good” Louis losing control and indulging in the vampire lifestyle being presented as a moral failing. Here’s the thing about representation, if things are dire enough, the drought long enough, then pretty much anything can be interpreted in a positive light. Let's travel back to the year of 2014 for a second and take a listen to “Break Your Heart Right Back” by Ariana Grande, as I’ve often seen it called an LGBT+ anthem for some reason, even though I always found it to be a rather mean-spirited. I mean, I'll nod my head along for sure, but if we were to listen to the lyrics closely, they’re actually about her boyfriend cheating on her (a common enough theme in music), but the twist here is that he cheated on her with another man! Dun dun dunnn! Man on man action, can you believe it!? Taking the lyric “what goes around, comes around,” and the cheeky sample from Diana Ross’s “I’m Coming Out” into account, this can only imply that Ari-Chan here is getting revenge on her ex by outing him. It's the whole, “I'm an ally, I love the gays! Unless it's somebody I don’t like, then it's cool to make fun of their sexuality” sentiment. So yeah, I guess it’s “good representation” when you take into account when it came out (get it “came out” heh heh), but when you look at it through a modern lens, then things don’t quite hold up. Nonetheless, positive interpretation or nah, Interview with the Vampire is queer and it is a good book, even if those two aspects exist parallel in my mind rather than actually meeting at any point.

“People who cease to believe in God or goodness altogether still believe in the devil. I don’t know why. No, I do know why. Evil is always possible. And goodness is eternally difficult.”

Besides, regardless of any personal opinion on my end, it can’t be denied that this book did have a profound effect on a lot of gay men throughout its history, and it did come out (ha ha “come out” …wait, I did that joke already) during a turbulent time in queer history (when isn't it a turbulent time in queer history?), so the fact that the novel was able to touch so many people shouldn’t be ignored. It's interesting because we live in a time where there are plenty of queer books out right now, but just like anything that gets too commercialized, they can sometimes feel like they’re written about queer folk rather than for us, if you catch my drift. You know the ones, that despite literally being LGBT+ fiction, they’re written with an overwhelmingly heteronormative gaze where instead of telling an authentic story, the prose feels like we’re being gazed at nature documentary style like the wild animals across the Serengeti. I want to be offended, but I guess it does work both ways, because whenever I want a peek into what’s going on with het culture, I just listen to the latest Sabrina Carpenter! “A little communication, yes, that's my ideal foreplay. Assemble a chair from IKEA, I'm like, oooh ahhh” …Girl. But yeah, an oversaturated market will always produce slop. It's an eventuality, really, and to me these books are more like the literature equivalent of a gentrified Chinese restaurant like Din Tai Fung, because everybody knows that any self-respecting Chinese person wouldn’t be caught dead in that overpriced, overly illuminated, overly sanitized joint! Well, I like their dumplings and I’m Chinese, but you'll never catch me calling myself self-respecting. Anyway, my point is that Interview with the Vampire still remains as impactful today as it ever was, and if nothing else, I did find my copy of the book in a closet (no joke). If that weren’t so on the nose, then I’d probably take it as some kind of message from the gay gods. So yeah, I read a lot of vampire books, and one aspect of this novel that I really enjoyed was noticing how much of a missing puzzle piece it felt like in the pantheon of vampire literature. It’s hard not to notice the difference in the “evil servants of the devil” depiction pre-Interview with the Vampire and the haunted and tortured, yet sympathetic and romantic figures seen in most vampire media after this book was put out in the world. It can't be denied that this book set a precedent for the genre, and even if people scoff at Twilight or the Simon Snow books, there’s no doubt that they owe a lot of their popularity to this book right here. Though I will say that studying the timeline also highlights just how sanitized and whittled down the creatures of the night have become in recent days, because even though Interview with the Vampire is one of the most popular examples of a sympathetic vampire, the book still chronicles how tortured a life being such a creature would entail. Weirdly enough, outside of straight up horror like Sinners, I think What We Do in the Shadows is the closest thing to this book in capturing just how callous and amoral vampires are by nature.

Anyway, not to get all “YouTube Essay” on you, but I think the reason why this book had such a different take on genre than those that preceded it was because this book isn't really about vampires, but rather uses them as a helpful shorthand and metaphor for irreparable grief and how living on after losing a loved one can feel like a hellish forever. I found this novel to be greatly affecting, and had a hard time continuing on at points due to how emotionally devastating the story often was. To that end, I don’t know if I can continue reading the sequels, seeing as this one worked as almost the perfect stand-alone, in that it gives the reader just the perfect amount of mystery to the unique mythos without getting too into the weeds. I know that the rest of the series goes on to give more in-depth world-building to the vampire society, but I honestly don’t whether or not seeing these characters in a more serialized format would endear me to them more, or just dilute their characterizations to the point where they’re more like Marvel superheroes than the romantic figures portrayed in this novel. I guess this is my way of segueing into talking about Lestat, because yeah, while he basically becomes the main character and a beloved anti-hero later on, I found his depiction here as nothing more than a pathetic monster to be more than enough for a fully realized character arc. I know we're supposed to like him later on when he gets his own point-of-view novels, and I haven’t read them yet so I don’t know how I’ll feel about him down the line, but I truly cannot imagine ever coming around on him. Even without the the fact that this was my introduction to him, I'd never forget his beautifully tragic final moments, as I really felt like it was a proper send-off to the character. I’ve seen it said that Anne Rice hadn’t fully nailed his characterization down yet while writing this book, but… how can that be? This is a full ass novel and he gets a full ass character arc with more than enough screen time to hint at an eventual path to redemption, but rather than absolution, he’s given as definitive an ending as can be where he’s forever latching on to a past relationship and so nostalgia poisoned that he sees it as “the good ole days,” unable to care for himself and mumbling incoherently to nobody. I mean, I liked it. It was a perfectly befitting ending and underlined the pervasive nature of grief quite nicely. So, imagine my shock at how upon further research, this bit is quickly explained as Louis being an unreliable narrator (cop out in my opinion) in a long line of Lestat’s more unsavory traits being sympathetically retconned away. So that begs the question, will these character remain as faithfully awful and terribly captivating the longer I read this series? I guess we’ll see. As it stands, I see Interview with the Vampire as singularly haunting novel about loneliness bringing people together and the dread of realizing that when companionship isn’t connected by warmth, but rather necessity, that horrible loneliness comes right back around and becomes as pronounced as it’s ever been. With an eternity to live the only answer left to find is that... this is all there is, and all that there will ever be.

When the sun comes up, you're searching for a love / So your heart won't lead you to anyone / When the sun goes down, I know what you become / You become awake, unlike the rest of us.

[Melissa ♥ Dog/Wolf Lover ♥ Martin · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have to say I liked the movie better. I mean eye candy!



I have wanted to read this series forever and since one of my groups is doing a challenge for a badge I thought now would be perfect. BUT, if they don't get better I'm not going to waste my time.

Too many books to waste time any more 😊

Happy Reading!

Mel ❤️

[Rebecca · Rating 5 out of 5]

“Evil is a point of view. We are immortal. And what we have before us are the rich feasts that conscience cannot appreciate and mortal men cannot know without regret. God kills, and so shall we; indiscriminately He takes the richest and the poorest, and so shall we; for no creatures under God are as we are, none so like Him as ourselves, dark angels not confined to the stinking limits of hell but wandering His earth and all its kingdoms.”

Interview with the Vampire by Anne Rice is a mesmerizing and haunting exploration of immortality, morality, and the complexities of the human condition. Set in 18th-century New Orleans, the novel follows the charismatic vampire Louis de Pointe du Lac as he recounts his extraordinary life to a curious journalist.

Rice's lush prose and richly detailed world-building immerse readers in a dark and atmospheric tale that transcends the typical conventions of the vampire genre. Through Louis' introspective narrative, Rice delves deep into themes of loneliness, desire, and the eternal struggle between good and evil.

The character of Lestat, Louis' enigmatic and unpredictable maker, adds an electrifying dynamic to the story, while the exploration of their complex relationship provides a gripping emotional core.

Interview with the Vampire is a timeless classic that continues to captivate readers with its intricate plot, vivid imagery, and profound exploration of the human psyche. My favourite of the genre.

My Highest Recommendation.

[Jay Kristoff · Rating 5 out of 5]

Disclaimer: I was pretty young when I first met this book. If I was young today (sniff) I'd probably have been called an emo, but back then they called us goths. And truth be told, I was actually a metalhead who just liked (and thus, hung around) the goth girlies, but what the fuck does that have to do with Goodreads...

Point is, this is One Of Those Books for me. The ones that comes along at a certain point in your life and kinda change the way you see the world. I must've read it half a dozen times over the course of my life, and there's maybe a handful of books that can claim that (dubious) prize.

So, this is a book about VAMPIRES. Not the sparkly perfect boyfriend kind. Not the kind who plays baseball and goes to highschool. And I know the T-series is an easy target these days, but it's (inexplicably) the benchmark by which most readers measure vampire novels, so in this case, it's fair game.

This is a book about the kind of vampires who slowly erode over the centuries, whose humanity gently withers and dies, whose good intentions gradually give way to the monster inside. It's a story about the battle with hunger, and how on a long enough timeline, the hunger always wins.

It's a book about immortality. Scouring off the glimmering sheen that lies in the ideal of living forever, and exploring the crushing reality of a life unending. Watching everything you knew, the world in which you grew up, washed away one decade at a time. Watching all the things you knew and love wither and fade, while you remain, changeless and deathless, with only the monster inside you for company. It takes the romance of vampirism, an ideal that so many people are in love with, and strips it back to the ugly, parasitic truth. Everything - love, friendship, trust, hope, beauty, aspiration, creativity, EVERYTHING dies on a timeline of forever. Except you and the hunger inside you.

This book was written by Anne Rice as a means of coping with tragedy in her own life, and the pathos bleeds from every page. Powerful stuff, my friends. It's certainly not a happy book - don't read it for the luls. But if you feel the need to cast aside your sparklevamps and read a vampire story with a little more depth, this is an awesome place to start.

[El ♡ · Rating 1 out of 5]

I am disturbed by the ever present air of pedophilia hanging over each passage where Claudia is mentioned. Like genuinely why is this book so well rated and why in any of the reviews I read did I see no mention of this? Literally even the scene where she is turned uses phrases like "I wanted her." Then as you get further into it, and she starts to grow mentally, he begins to describe how like sensual she is and it was disgusting. "Father and daughter, lover and lover." "I was estranged from her and in agony as if she were my bride." "'Kill with me tonight,' she whispered as sensually as a lover."

And while I do enjoy the TV adaptation, I am kind of shocked at the way it painted Louis in a much kinder light, even making him a black man who specifically calls Lestat out on racism while in the book he is a plantation owner who is horribly racist himself.

All in all.... Anne Rice what the fuck....🤢

[Anne · Rating 1 out of 5]

It's hard to admit that a movie with Tom Cruise in it could actually be less boring than a book.
But there you go.
I read this when I was a teen, and I had a much higher tolerance for meandering bullshit plots than I do now, so my review was originally 3 stars. However, on reflection...
Yeah. This was pretty much crap.
Sorry if this offends any Rice fanatics.
Hmmm. No, on reflection I really don't care who it offends.

[Leo . · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this book. Read it a while ago. Thought the film was very good. Not sure whether it was as good as the book or not. It is very similar to The Picture Of Dorian Grey. In both books the main character had a wealth of knowledge and experience. They rub shoulders with the more, privileged people.

Is vampirism real? I once watched a documentary video; fake news? And in the
film a lab scientist had a series of clear tanks containing mice. Some pregnant mice, some new born mice and another containing an old mouse. The hairs on its chin were grey so I guess he was getting old. I think mice only live for about two years so this one was probably at least two summers old. Anyhow I digress, this gets nasty now. The video goes into a time lapse. The lab assistant was taking baby mice from the mother and feeding them to the old mouse. The video is filmed over a couple of weeks and condensed to a few minutes on the time lapse. Now, the old mouse is getting younger! Wtf! The old mouse, eating the pure clean flesh of new born mice, gets younger. His greying chin hair is now a lovely golden brown and he is flitting about his environment like a teenager. I don't know whether this video is real or fake. Was the mouse swapped with a younger one? Who knows? If it is fake it is quite...elaborate. So I ask again, is vampirism real?

If it is real then the Race of the Vampire would be far older than humanity. That means they would Predate humanity. So explains why Vampires predate, as in hunt, feed off, suck the blood of humans. So does Predate mean what is says, before? Or, hunt, stalk, eat? Or are the two meanings the same? Was the Tiger here before the deer? Was the wolf here before the sheep? As humans, with our intellect, we as a race don't really have a predator these days. We create things to protect us. So are we the top of the food chain? Do we, as in all nature, have a predator? For every right there is a left and every up there is a down. Are we the most intelligent beings on this planet? Are there many races? Do they hide in the shadows? What is folklore compared to mainstream? Why is Romania called Rome Mania? Legend of Dracuul. Vlad the Impaler. A madman! Was ancient Romania, Visigoths? Gothic? Named so because it became a Roman outpost? Rome occupied Egypt. Romany, curses and casting spells. The mystics of Egypt did too. I am forever playing Devils Advocate, too many questions and not enough answers.

Let's take the Alfa Romeo car manufacturer. I recently learned it is owned by the Vatican. Maybe. Who knows? We all know that the Vatican is a state within a state. Like the city of London, where all the oligarchy live. Or the District Of Colombia. So, the Vatican probably owns the Alfa Romeo car company, secretly it would appear.

The esoteric world communicate via logos. Sigils, symbols, icons etc. A picture spells a thousand words...only to those who can decipher them. Words are only for the masses. They are swords.

Now let's look at the Alfa Romeo badge. I am not going to copy and paste one in for fear of copy right strike. One will have to look for themselves however, I can describe it. Here goes:

A circle within a circle. The outer circle, enveloping around, spells the words Alfa Romeo. To the left of the inner circle is the Red Cross of St. George. To the right is a dragon. On the dragon's head is a Crown. A forked tongue protruding from the dragons mouth. How absurd.

Let's break this down.

A circle within a circle. A wheel within a wheel. Hidden. Esoteric. Occultic.
The outer circle contains the word "Alfa" top, supreme, dominance. Also the word Rome. It envelopes the inner circle. So Rome is top dog.

To left of the inner circle is the St. George Flag. A red cross. England. Did St. George not slay the dragon?

To the right of the flag is a Dragon.

On top of its head is a Crown. Royalty.

What appears to be a forked tongue protruding from its maw. If one turns the logo 180 degrees one can clearly see it is not a tongue at all...it is a human! So the Dragon has a Crown on its head and a human hanging out of its mouth. How absurd. It's only a company logo right?

So according to this badge. Rome is top dog and there would be no Royalty if not for Holy Roman Empire. The Royals are actually dragons. Lol! And they eat humans, really? David Icke must be cringing. Lol! It is so absurd, it is crazy.

What is true is that some time ago Prince Charles visited Romania and whilst walking around some Gothic temples with the Romanian leader he turned and said. With a chuckle, "You do realise ofcourse that I am a direct descendant of Vlad The Impaler". Or words to that effect. I remember watching it on a mainstream news channel. Is Prince Charles the Prince Of Wales? I think he is. Does the Welsh flag have a Red Dragon on it? I believe it does. Is Prince Charles a direct descendant of Vlad The Impaler? He thinks he is. Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. Interesting to know that Windsor is not the real name of the British Royals. Romania. Rome. Egypt. Britain. Celtic. Druids. Mysticism. The Vatican. Royal Bloodlines. The elites believe it.

Incidentally the Visigoths had a distinctive red shield and a Criss Sword. I read some where that the name Rothschild means Red Shield.

Coincidence? I hope I am not hung drawn and quartered. :-)

I used to watch Penny Dreadful on TV and really thought it was a great show. Penny Dreadfuls were small comic book magazines from the Victorian era. Basically like fantasy and folklore. In the TV show the main plot was vampirism. In the show the protagonists find an Alpha Vampire, an original. The creature has an autopsy. The skin is scaly and covered in hieroglyphs. Egyptian hieroglyphs. Its fangs are akin to a serpent. Hmm! I thought it was a very interesting concept. Dorian Grey also featured heavily in the show, as did Spring-Heeled Jack. The show was subsequently scrapped. I wonder why? I wonder a lot. When an alpha bites it infects. A made vampire in folklore is actually infected, not born a vampire, so when it rises from the dead it could almost be considered a Zombie. It is rumoured that archeologists have unearthed many plague pits across Europe and UK and in those mass graves the corpses were beheaded and had punctures to the chest area. I once read an article about this very subject. The piece outlined that indeed during the middle ages and before this was quite frequently practiced. Was it merely superstition? I certainty never learned this at school, it was not in the curriculum. I will research this subject more.🐯👍


Halloween, it is near

Fun, dressing up, people are queer

Celebrating and partying, reverie in darkness, entice

Hollywood, sins, orgies and sacrifice

Moloch, possession, and black eyes, such folly

Misery, pain, pleasure, and melancholy

Perversion, casting couch, a tug of the hair

Demons, persuasive, cold crispy air

Magicians, black mirrors, visions projected

Child actors, extortion, black mail, not protected

A cabal, a circle, a ring, a brotherhood

Preying on youth, in every neighbourhood

Monsters, bogey men, moonlight, and tears

Vampirism, blood thirst, thousands of years

Druidism, skull and bones, esoteric teaching

Technology, 5G, A net, A web, ever reaching
By Leo💓👍🐯

#leo'sesotericprose
#Adrenochrome

[Ren · Rating 3 out of 5]

I first read this book in High School and my sad gothic self immediately fell in love with its beautiful, damaged characters. For years this book haunted me. The rest of the Vampires books were pulpy fun but this book really had something. She captured something here and her almost baroque prose really carries the story.

Later in life, I came to realize that Interview is a kind of Catcher In The Rye for goths. Louis is turned into a vampire and continues his search for the answers: who he is, why he is, what his place is. He wars with lovers, family and friends in his search to define his own life only to discover that nothing he does matters and that everyone is just as lost as he is, an ultimately there are no answers but the ones we make ourselves.

[Gabriel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Una novela narrada con mucha potencia e intensidad, con un tono gótico y oscuro, pero también que desborda sensualidad, atracción y crueldad.

«Los placeres de la vida de vampiro no estaban disponibles para él, porque estaba concentrado en una venganza maniática contra la vida mortal que había abandonado.»

Lo primero resaltable de la lectura es el enfrentamiento del humano con el vampiro y su belleza inmortal y la evidente atracción y tensión; luego el enfrentamiento con la muerte de su alrededor, una muerte que afecta su psiquis; más tarde está la aceptación, el paso a la eternidad luego de la muerte propia, donde hay una muerte física y del alma que no puede ser reparada. Pero curiosa y contradictoriamente hay un despertar, una nueva realidad desde la visión del vampiro recién nacido y el aumento de sus sentidos y emociones, con un aferro a la vida que se traduce en chupar sangre.

Nuestro protagonista (quien le cuenta la vida al personaje que lo entrevista) es un vampiro que al principio reniega de su condición vampírica, se niega a matar porque no se ha corrompido del todo y sigue una brújula moral todavía humana y a lo largo de la novela, con todos sus sentimientos intensos surgirán cambios en su idea del bien y el mal, también entre la humanidad y la deshumanización de vampiros que han perdido el amor por la mortalidad y la fragilidad humana o de vampiros que directamente odian y envidian esa efímera vida de las personas por las que ya no tienen respeto ni compasión.

Vampiros angustiados, intensos y aburridos de su eternidad, vampiros crueles pero no por ello supremamente emocionales y sentimentales. Hay vampiros ateos, vampiros manipuladores e imponentes, vampiros que se creen y se ponen a la par de Dios. Vampiros instintivos, vampiros salvajes, vampiros inteligentes y sobre todo existencialistas. Son criaturas que se preguntan y se cuestionan todo el tiempo, viven filosofando sobre su vida, sus acciones y sus propósitos en la tierra para bien o para mal.

«Consumido por el odio, miraba hacia atrás. Consumido por la envidia, nada le agradaba, salvo si podía arrebatárselo a los demás; y, una vez que lo poseía, se quedaba frío e insatisfecho, sin amor por esa cosa, y entonces partía a la búsqueda de algo más: la venganza, ciega, estéril y despreciable.»

Me ha gustado mucho que
hay una diversidad ética y moral para ver desde diferentes lentes el vampirismo, los hay quienes piensan en la inmortalidad como un don, otros como una cárcel y un castigo divino, algunos envidian lo efímero de la vida, otros solo quieren entender su propia eternidad y vivir en comunión con la humanidad. Hay vampiros asesinos y sanguinarios que consumen sangre por gusto y asesinan por diversión, así como los hay quienes se niegan a arropar su cualidad vampírica que es la de matar humanos para perpetuar su existencia. Vampiros enemistados entre ellos donde la única posible forma de unión es la de dominancia y sometimiento, donde gobiernan y manipulan a otros para hacerlos suyos (de su propiedad), para única y exclusivamente convertirlos en sus esclavos.

La novela hace un camino soberbio por varias partes del mundo a finales del siglo XVIII y comienzos y mediados del XIX, primero empieza en Norteamérica, Luisiana, en el año 1791, durante una era donde todavía primaba la esclavitud para mostrarnos los cambios culturales. Luego, las calles de Nueva Orleans se convierten en la sede de alimentación básica mientras la enfermedad y la epidemia azota a la gente. Más tarde un viaje a Europa, para recorrer el Viejo Mundo en búsqueda de otras criaturas nocturnas que se alimentan de sangre. Y en París, el último punto de la historia es donde se termina el principal conflicto de los personajes y aparecen nuevos enemigos y vampiros interesantes como mi querido Armand.

Él y personajes como Lestat representan un gran y rico misterio por descubrir en el futuro que sin duda traerá más chicha que la que dio un personaje como Louis que solo nos presenta la punta del iceberg en un mundo nuevo que no conoce, con seres de la noche que si bien son crueles, ambiciosos y corruptos también tienen sentimientos y pasados escondidos detrás de esa belleza mortal. A lo mejor y más respuestas sobre el origen, las debilidades y las fortalezas de ser vampiro. Y es que lo poco y nada que sabemos de Lestat es gracias a un punto de vista imparcial como el de Louis. Todo lo que dice Louis sobre él terminan pareciendo más conjeturas que afirmaciones cien por ciento seguras.

«Antes, todo el arte había tenido para mí la promesa de una comprensión más profunda del corazón humano. Ahora el corazón humano no significaba nada. No lo denigré. Simplemente, me olvidé de él.»

No hay conocimiento profundo sobre el vampirismo (o eso parece), porque Lestat no sabe nada, porque el vampirismo queda en un gran misterio sin resolver. La tríada insana que se construye entre Lestat, Louis y Claudia que más temprano que tarde verá caer sus cimientos es buenísima, porque entre desconfianzas, odio y venganza silenciosa todo se desmorona. Louis detestando al imponente y burlón de Lestat porque quiere saber todos los secretos y misterios de los vampiros; Claudia, la eterna infante que nunca superará esa imagen inocente y pequeña y quedará congelada en esa edad para siempre. El resentimiento poco y nada dura en una relación que avista fuego, veneno y ansias por matar.

Seres de la noche que navegan entre ambas vertientes, una dualidad conformada por la criatura que da miedo y aterra por su hambre y ansia sanguinaria (véase Carmilla o Drácula) y la parte humana y emocional en ellos, una que se aferra a la inmortalidad pero que tiene debates éticos y morales sobre la vida y la muerte, la soledad, el asesinato y la eternidad. El libro se centra en el tema de la inmortalidad, la pérdida, la sexualidad y el poder, el misterio mismo del origen y creación de estas criaturas que navegan por principios cuestionables. Y es una auténtica maravilla porque es una narración bella y evocadora, me resultó imposible no caer ante tanto encanto. De hecho, tengo marcados muchos pasajes y frases espectaculares. Anne Rice escribía de lujo, su prosa me fascina.

[Vessey · Rating 5 out of 5]

I admit that I couldn't get through the rest of "The Vampire Chronicles", but this one stays a favourite.

First, I really like Anne Rice's prose. It is so beautiful and enchanting. The whole story comes along with a good measure of dark sensuality, which I particularly like. What is more important to me, though, is that it presents, in a very captivating way, problems which have been haunting humanity since for ever. How many people in reality live tortured by guilt and loneliness and feel different than everybody else the way Louis does? Or how many people are tormented by the thought that their looks do not show their true self and that the others are unable to see past the surface? (Claudia). Or how many people are forced to live and suffer with someone they can never quite connect to, out of necessity, loneliness, because they love them despite all, or all three at once? I think many people can relate to the heroes (I should say anti-heroes, really) of this dark tale.

What is loneliness? What is the world? What is eternity? What does it mean to be immortal? What is the nature of existence? Is there God? What does it mean to be good? What does it mean to be evil? And which is the bigger evil - to be the actual committer of a crime or to allow it? What is life, what is death? It speaks not only of, and the value of, life and death of humans as individuals, but of the life and death of beliefs, values, possibilities.

It is told through the POV of one narrator, but it has a really big scope. Anne Rice shows an amazing skill in reflecting people's feelings and struggles. What is fiction if not a mirror to reality? Two opposite concepts which are not that opposite, after all. Every creation of art is a message born out of its creator's experience and inner world.

Read count: 4

[Kay · Rating 3 out of 5]

Almost didn't make it past part II. 😉 I thought I would love this book, but I actually enjoyed the movie more. I will see what others think about book two, I'm a little curious about the ending in the novel (different from the movie) but this book was fairly monotonous...

[Paul Bryant · Rating 4 out of 5]

Oh God, I'm going to have to do this. Oh well, here I go. Hmm – he looks a bit fierce.

"Bless me, Father, for I have sinned."

Silence… erm – now what am I supposed to say ? oh yes…

"I confess to God almighty, to blessed Mary, ever Virgin, to all the Saints, and to you Father, that I have sinned very much in thought, word, deed and omission, by my fault, my fault, my most grievous fault. Especially since my last confession which was ....... approximately 23 years and several months ago. Er. Hmm. I accuse myself of the following sins."

"Go on my son."

Okay, here goes.

"In the last 23 years I have read 64 true crime books, you know, those sleazy penny dreadfuls about serial killers and all of that, and I have read umpteen books about pop music, but I have not read any Tolstoy, Toni Morrison or Balzac, no Stendahl, no Kafka… no Thomas Pynchon... zero Proust... are you getting the drift here?"

Good Christ, thinks the priest, it's one of those. I wouldn't have thought it to look at the fellow. But he's one all right.

"No Toni Morrison, are you sure my son?"

"None at all, father. I even read Interview with the Vampire, but I didn't read Beloved or the Song of Solomon or Gilead or Middlemarch or The Magic Mountain or any of that stuff."

"Yet you know the titles."

"Oh yes, I know the titles, father. That's all I know. Just the titles."

"Go on then."

"Well… also… I think Michael Haneke movies are dull and repetitive. And 2666 is dreadful and I'd rather throw myself off a cliff than sit through anything by Eisenstein, Godard or Fellini. And I realise throwing yourself off a cliff is another sin."

"Well you're right about that. You'd better come clean about the rest of it too, I suppose."

"Right. Yes. Well."

Silence.

"This is quite difficult, father. Okay. I never listened to Radiohead."

The priest is visibly shocked.

"You never listened to Radiohead? The world's greatest band whose OK Computer is poised to wrest the title of all time best rock album from the dead hands of the shibboleths of the sixties for ever?"

"Yes Father, that Radiohead."

"You never even heard them? At all?"

"No Father. For these and all my other sins that I cannot now remember, I am truly sorry, firmly resolve not to sin again and humbly ask pardon of God, and of you, Father, counsel, penance and absolution".

"Well, I've heard some things, as you do, when you're a priest, I can tell you. But this…. Well, at the very least, you must read three Toni Morrisons, go and buy AND listen to OK Computer AND Kid A, and buy AND view the boxed set of Werner Herzog which is on Amazon for a reasonable price. And don't leave it another 23 years again."

"O my God, I am heartily sorry for having offended you, and I detest all my sins, because of Your just punishments, I firmly resolve, with the help of Your grace, to sin no more and to avoid the near occasion of sin."

"Out you go then, skedaddle."

Whew, that was awful. But it had to be done. Fancy mentioning Interview with the Vampire. I could have said something else, like Jack Kerouac, that's bad enough. Oh the shame. Well, he's probably heard worse. Oh well. Hmm, Radiohead can't be that bad, can they?

[Lady MacDeath · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read all the books a long time ago, back in my 20’s, I’m now 53 years young 😜 and I was and still am a fan of Anne Rice. The first book I ever read of Anne’s was ‘The Witching Hour’ which was given to me by a friend, and from then I was hooked onto everything that she did. The book ‘Interview with a Vampire’ was so much better than the film, which I’ve always felt was miscast, because reading the book first, long before the film was released, I would never have imagined Tom Cruise as Lestat 😱 these chronicles are by far the best vampire books I’ve EVER read. RIP Anne Rice 🖤

[Tony Z · Rating 4 out of 5]

He caminado por las calles de Nueva Orleans como el Segador Maldito y me he alimentado de vida humana para mantener mi propia existencia. No soy un mortal, padre; soy inmortal y condenado, como los ángeles puestos en el infierno por Dios. Soy un vampiro.

Hacía tiempo que no leía sobre vampiros, y quería darle una oportunidad a los famosos vampiros de Rice, conocidos por algunos (como yo) por la icónica película de “Entrevista con el vampiro” que lleva el mismo nombre del primer libro de la saga.

A diferencia de otros libros de vampiros que he leído, acá, la historia está totalmente centrada en los inmortales, se nos presentan tres vampiros que van a formar una especie de familia moderna conviviendo gran parte de la historia, cada vampiro tiene una personalidad muy marcada, tenemos a Louis el protagonista, él es quien nos narrara su vida, su muerte y su inmortalidad.

Louis representa la melancolía, la tristeza y autocondenación, él se odia a si mismo por ser vampiro, desprecia el tener que matar para sobrevivir, y tiene una búsqueda personal de lo sobrenatural y lo ético, ¿existe Dios? ¿Existe Satán? ¿Existe el bien? ¿Existe el mal? ¿Por qué soy inmortal? ¿Existe la salvación o todos estamos condenados? Son preguntas que lo atormentaran toda su existencia

¿Qué significa morir cuando puedes vivir hasta el fin del mundo? ¿Y qué es "el fin del mundo" salvo una frase?; porque ¿quién sabe siquiera lo que es el mundo? Yo ya he vivido dos siglos, he visto las ilusiones de uno hechas trizas por otro, he sido eternamente joven y eternamente viejo, carente de ilusiones, viviendo de momento a momento de una manera que me hizo imaginar un reloj de plata repiqueteando en el vacío; con la superficie pintada, las manecillas delicadamente talladas sin que nadie las mirara, iluminado por una luz que no era luz, como la luz con la que Dios creó al mundo antes de que creara la luz. Latiendo, latiendo, latiendo, con la precisión del reloj, en una habitación tan vasta como el universo.

En contraparte tenemos a Lestat, opuesto totalmente en personalidad a Louis aparentemente, para él la muerte es un placer, la disfruta, es su pasión, no se cuestiona demasiado, su ética es más simple,

—El mal es un punto de vista —me susurró ahora—. Somos inmortales. Y lo que tenemos ante nosotros son las fiestas suntuosas que la conciencia no puede apreciar y que los seres humanos no pueden conocer sin arrepentirse. Dios asesina y nosotros también; indiscriminadamente. El arrasa a ricos y pobres y nosotros hacemos lo mismo; porque ninguna criatura es igual a nosotros, ninguna tan parecida a Él como nosotros, ángeles oscuros no confiados a los límites hediondos del infierno sino paseando por Su tierra y todos Sus reinos.

Y luego tenemos a Claudia, la artimaña de Lestat, que se robó de todas las mujeres taimadas de la historia ¿qué hacer para conservar un hombre en tu vida? Respuesta: dale un hijo, en este caso una hija, una hija inmortal, eternamente niña, preciosa pero terrible, para ella la muerte no hay que razonarla o cuestionarla, es solo el simple acto de alimentarse, así como la Mona Lisa, sin risa ni llanto, debo decir que de los vampiros de la historia ella me parece la más temible.

si crees que Dios creó a Satán, debes percatarte de que todo el poder de Satán proviene de Dios, y que Satán es simplemente una criatura de Dios, por lo que nosotros también somos criaturas de Dios. En realidad, no existen las criaturas de Satán.

En general el libro me ha encantado, la pluma de Rice es envidiable para cualquier autor, debate temas profundos, como los ya mencionados el bien y el mal, lo sobrenatural, la existencia de Dios, (las conversaciones de Armand y Louis son las más importantes sobre esto), y el amor, si el amor, siendo acá bastante particular, el amor para los vampiros va más allá de lo físico, si bien es cierto que se habla mucho de la belleza, para ellos tiene que ver más con el apego y la convivencia, con la personalidad y con los sentimientos que otros vampiros (a veces humanos) despiertan en ellos, se ven amores de padres, amores fraternos, amores de parejas, amores de camaradería, amores de maestro y aprendiz, el amor es libre, sin importar género o edad, lo que me lleva a decir que si no tienes una mente abierta quizás este no sea un libro para ti.

Desde luego pienso seguir leyendo sobre estos vampiros filosóficos, e invito a todos a leer a Rice, si les gustan las obras de horror que son más que solo monstruos , así como Frankenstein de Mary Shelley o El retrato de Dorian Gray de Oscar Wilde, de seguro les gustara la Entrevista con el vampiro de Anne Rice

La gente que deja de creer en Dios, o en la bondad, sigue creyendo en el demonio. No sé por qué. No; sé muy bien por qué. El mal siempre es posible. Y la bondad es eternamente difícil.

[Jeffrey Caston · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was a "re-read" for me, but with the audiobook the second time around. Although the narrator was fine on the version I had, I don't think his voice fit the particular project.

But listening to again reminded me just how much I loved this story. Multiple layers of love, sensation, and sensuality. Everything, living, dead, and even inanimate came alive. This story delves into and portrays masterfully the emotional mixture that can happen with love and hate embodied in and/or directed against, the same person. I was also, again struck by the writing that showed the inherent connection of one creature begetting another creature, but with the unique vampiric twist to it.

And I was struck, yet again, by the theme of the inherent "wrongness," and arguably, evilness of "passivity."

Cannot, cannot, CANNOT recommend this one highly enough. Even if you don't like vamps or horror, this has GOT to be a classic in my humble opinion.

UPDATE -- THIRD READING JANUARY 2024

This is my third reading of this masterpiece. I've gotten a better appreciation of it each time. This most recent reading came courtesy of the (new at the time) Terror Tomes GR group. And for that I thank all the mods and participants for encouraging this go-around.

By typical standards, Interview With the Vampire shouldn't work. It's a story within a story. It's largely recitational, rather than immersively narrative in a MC's life as they experience it. Auntie Anne eschews normal chapter breaks and instead organizes it into four very long sections. Some of the paragraphs are ginormous; on my Kindle there were several paragraphs spanned several pages. The world building is Interview With the Vampire is very roundabout.

But it does work. Or at least it does for me.

The closest thing, as I think about it as a comparison, is how someone unfamiliar with chicken and waffles (bear with me here) might have reacted to seeing it on a menu in the 1990s (as an aside-it's amazing and if you haven't tried it, dude get on it!) and had the courage to try something new. Or a long-time skier (circa 1970, give or take) faced with one of them new-fangled snowboard thingies, who then tries to give it a whack.

[Enter said person's epiphany wherein they realize the awesomeness of either thing here].

In other words, something that seems to the uninitiated that shouldn't work, but does, AND their creator had the confidence to know somewhere deep down inside that it would work and that they were creating a delicious, now iconic dish or creating a new winter sport. I've got to think (though I obviously don't know for sure] that Auntie Anne had to have had some inkling that this wild novel she'd created had something special. (At least that is what I am telling myself. I hope that was the case.)

I don't know. I'm rambling, I know. It's just one reader's thoughts.

Anyway, Interview With the Vampire in my humble opinion, despite its structure, really works as a masterful story. It is immersive despite the "interview," reflective format told from Louis' perspective. It's immersive. I really do feel like the guy listening to his interview. A contemplative monster fighting his inherent nature and need to feed and kill.

Uncle Stevie is an awesome storyteller, but somehow Auntie Anne did the sensory/sensuality/emotive elements a lot better than he has/had. Again, just one reader's opinion.

I'm embarrased to say I haven't finished the Vampire Chronicles, but I will. I've made myself that promise. Maybe they aren't all as masterful. But one thing is for sure and that it's gonna be one helluva unique ride.

[Cecilia · Rating 5 out of 5]

4,5⭐️

Relectura; ya que lo había leído hace más de diez años atrás y si bien recordaba a que apuntaba la historia, me había olvidado de bastantes cosas, como por ejemplo: la personalidad de Lestat ❤️ descrita por Anne Rice, exponiéndolo como un personaje mediocre, movilizado por sus miedos más que por su conocimiento.

En cuanto a Louis, si recordaba su sufrimiento al tener que arrebatar una vida para poder continuar con su existencia, la culpa que emanaba de esta acción; también sus constantes reflexiones, en donde se catalogaba como un hijo del demonio y que no podía ser feliz o estar en paz producto de su nuevo estado o de lo que se había convertido. Durante todos los años en que transcurre la historia, narrada por este personaje, Louis se culpa por todo lo que va sucediendo, desde lo que le sucedió a su hermano hasta el desenlace de Claudia.

Y también tenemos como personaje principal a Claudia, en esta segunda lectura consegui empatizar con ella, con su sufrimiento, sus limitaciones, sus ansias de poder ser independiente, pero tener que depender eternamente debido a su condición. Coincidía con ella en que sus “padres” habían sido unos monstruos al crearla.

Sin duda, es todo lo que esta bien cuando quieres leer una historia de vampiros; Anne Rice logra plasmar y construir unos personajes con los que logras vincularte, para bien o para mal; odiándonos, amándolos o sufriendo con ellos.

[Becky · Rating 2 out of 5]

Oy... Can a book be disappointing if I expected not to like it? Or, rather, can I be disappointed in it?

Yep.

This was seriously boring. And repetitive. And boringly repetitive. And unexciting and also it rehashed the same things over and over. And over. Did I mention it was boring? Because it was. Even more than I expected. At about 100 pages in, I was like "OK, this isn't terrible, that's good." And then... It just stayed right there. At "Not Terrible" level. Nothing interesting happened, nothing exciting, nothing to make me want to find out what happens. I finished this simply because I was knitting stuff and running errands, and I might as well listen to something while I did that, but mostly I just zoned out, especially towards the end. Impressive endorsement, eh?

So, OK, here's the book, Cliffs Notes version:
There is a vampire giving an interview to a mortal "boy", telling his life story. (By the way, aside from the novelty of finding out that there ARE actually vampires, I have no idea why this boy sat all night listening to this vampire. He seemed interested... but by what?) Anyway, so, this vampire tells his life (or undead) story: A vampire met him, coveted his property, turned him, moved in, manipulated him and was a general, all around jerkface. Our narrator vamp, Louis, whines a lot. Gets all existential-y a lot. Whines some more about existential stuff. Questions everything: Where do I come from? What is my purpose? Why do we need to kill to feed? Who made vampires? God? Satan? Bob the Builder? Are there more of us? Why is killing PEOPLE so much awesomer than killing animals? Why is killing some people (read: pretty ones) awesomer still than killing some other (read: not pretty ones) people? Why do I ask so many questions?

OK, I threw that last one in there. He should have asked it, though. I mean holy crap on a stick, he's got The Life™: he's rich, and smart about investing so will likely remain that way, handsome, and immortal, which all amounts to him being able to do whatever the hell he wants to for as long as he wants to. Yet all he does is WHINE and ponder the meaning of life... or undeath. Because, you know, humans have it all figured out. /snark.

Anyway, plot summary continued:
Lestat continues being a jerk, and adds a 3rd to their happy family, a child. Who will remain a child forever and ever and ever... except in her mind. (Oh the bitterness and anger and existentialism and questions... They never end!!) The two turnees don't like Lestat (because he's a jerkface, remember?) and so they plot their method of getting him out of the way and going on their merry way to find their own answers. They travel around and find zombie vampires, ask some more questions about them... travel more, and then they find more vampires! Wooo! Finally, something like progress! Only... these vampires are also boring fucking paper wastes. They are all existential-y too, only their subject of choice is technically death rather than existence. So, again, a rehash of What It All Means™... You get the point by now, right? I mean MY point, because I still don't think the book has one.

Frank Muller reading the audio helped me to get through this. Anne Rice has diarrhea of the pen when it comes to detail, and her pen only writes in one color: Purple.

Her purple pen has put me off of quite a few of her other books, and would have put me off this one too, had I not been able to find something shiny and zone out for a good 20 minutes at a time while she described a door, or moon reflection on the water, or the texture of the smell of velvet or some such. Shiny thing, you saved my sanity. Thank you.

Anyway... I don't know why I continue to attempt Anne Rice. I think it's because so many people love her books, and there are so many of them, that I rationalize that the next one will probably be better. Except... no. It's not. Or maybe it's just ME, and I just don't like her. Six of one, half a dozen of the other. I think this will be my last attempt though. At some point, one just has to admit defeat and move on.

I've finished two of Rice's books, ever, out of a combined 7 or 8 or so attempts, if I remember correctly, and I didn't like either of them. Fail.

Halloween October 2011: #9

[Magrat Ajostiernos · Rating 3 out of 5]

3,5
Un poco de montaña rusa de emociones, el principio y el final me gustaron muchísimo pero la parte central se me hizo un poco bola porque... LOUIS es un cenizo máximo. Pero todos los demás personajes me resultaban tan interesantes y la trama tan bien llevada que al final no importó tanto.
Quizás lo que peor llevo de Rice es esa obsesión metafísica del bien y el mal que tiene, porque es algo que aunque tiene sentido con sus personajes, personalmente me resulta muy cansino. Aún así, como digo, me gustó muchísimo tanto el resto de personajes (Claudia y Lestat forever) como la descripción de esa Nueva Orleans y París... las partes históricas, siempre mis favoritas con esta mujer.
Me parece la lectura halloweenesca definitiva, por cierto.
¿Seguiré con la saga? Posiblemente. Me he quedado con ganas de seguir explorando el mundo que imagina Rice, aunque tampoco con la necesidad de ponerme ya.
Y habrá que volver a ver la peli ^^

[A Mac · Rating 3 out of 5]

Louis never wanted to be a vampire, nor did he even believe in their existence. But in Louisiana in the 1800s, he discovers there’s much more to his world than he ever knew. But his maker, Lestat, does not make his life easy and even goes out of his way to antagonize Louis. A third vampire eventually joins their group, which creates a nice balance at first. But when things begin to unravel, Louis is forced to choose between his companions, a decision that will affect the rest of his immortal life.

I was a little concerned with the way the story is told that it wouldn’t be that engaging or come to life. Since it’s written as Louis telling his story to someone else, it’s not set up in a way that traditionally encourages engaging descriptions or a meaningful atmosphere, but the author did a decent job incorporating both of those things (more descriptions than atmospheric, though). I did like that the vampires in this book were all awful in their own way. There was no sexy, brooding vampire that humans can’t help but love. They were all despicable to varying degrees, and the author didn’t shy away from the bloody horror of vampirism.

I enjoyed how character-driven this tale was and how it examined relationships. I think the discussion on the power of the “creator” over the newly created vampires was fascinating, especially surrounding the concept of how a newly created vampire might be in for a struggle if their creator is a toxic megalomaniac who is unwilling to share vital information. In fact, relationships were the strongest aspect of this work. I loved the incorporation of a child vampire and the many issues/struggles that entailed as well – it seems that many vampire books stay away from that topic.

There were some (many) instances where Louis waxed poetic and it got rather boring, but overall, it was an engaging vampire read.

[Shovelmonkey1 · Rating 3 out of 5]

Poor vampires. Such a bad press over the years what with all the blood sucking, neck snapping and general ravaging of virgins, maidens and anyone with a taste for Gothic-style bedroom furniture and an open window.

Still, now that Edward Cullen and his pan-faced fan base of moody teens have infiltrated popular culture, replacing the stereotypical images of pale, foppish young men in lacy cuffs and brocaded velvet jackets with a utilitarian Gap-Style wardrobe of urban wear (and a slightly sulky look), we seem to be moving further away from the more traditional imagery. That said, R-Patz (see I know the lingo, I listen to the kids) appears to be dead from the eyeballs down in many scenes and is probably as wooden as the stake which should be used to pin him back into his eternal resting place, so not all elements of the vampire legend have been entirely done away with.

Interview with the Vampire was almost solely responsible (see Lost Boys for its partner in crime) for spawning the epidemic known as the great vampire obsession of the late 20th century or at the very least a huge resurgence in the interest in vampire myth and lore. Ok, ok Bram Stoker deserves a big old nod for originally bringing us the whole idea of wing-ed blood suckers who like nothing more than a snooze in a wooden box and a brisk sea journey to the north-east coast of England. Or if you like we can go a bit further back and point the sharp end of the stake at Sheridan Le Fanu for his sapphic vampires which featured in his collection of short stories "In a Glass Darkly". Whoever you'd like to blame for it, you have to admit they were onto a good wheeze. The romance of immortality fuelled by the go-juice of another human being (it goes down easier if you just think of it as a sort of clotted Slim-Fast meal) seems to have had a weirdly kinky appeal which has garnered it a fan base of millions. Lets break it down and see what there really is to like about being a vampire.

Eternal life - obviously gets a big tick but then it does depend who you get stuck with. If you end like Louis, locked in a bitter battle of wills with the sadistic Lestat, then eternity is going to seem like, well.... an eternity.

Drinking blood - readily available, free (therefore credit crunch chic), nutritious and virtually calorie free. It's simple: Live fast, die young, drink blood and have a good looking and upwardly mobile corpse. (WARNING: don't try this at home- this review is not suggesting that a diet of blood will ever do you any favours, nor is it condoning "borrowing" the blood of people who are not you). Alternatively, forever is a long time to go without a solid meal and you know you'll eventually start complaining that dinner always tastes the same.

Flight/ surprisingly speedy turns of movement - being super fast is a handy skill to have if you need to face the pacey modern lifestyle of the 21st century. Queue jumping, being first in the door at the Harvey Nichols January Sales and avoiding having to sit in economy class during flights are all things which would improve my life.

Sleeping in a coffin - compact and bijoux if you live in a tiny inner city apartment where you're kitchen, bathroom, living room and bedroom are all practically the same room. Why not drape your coffin with an attractive throw and turn it into a table for night-time use? On the downside no one ever said eternal rest would be a comfortable one.

Interview with the Vampire takes itself pretty seriously (a lot more seriously than this review), and despite the fact Louis' hand wringing and tortured immortal soul act did start to grate on me towards the end, overall I enjoyed this and was able to stop raising my eye brows long enough to appreciate the detail and originality of the story. Fangs for the great story Anne!

[Gaijinmama · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am going to confess that I didn't read this book until 1993, after I'd seen the movie. I couldn't handle horror movies or scary books at the time, but Brad Pitt, Antonio Banderas and a surprisingly good Tom Cruise really got my attention.
Now I'm a bona fide fan. I'm working toward reading everything Rice has written, and now I enjoy many other authors who write about vampires.
It wasn't just that the vampire dudes were soooo totally hot in the movie. As is usually the case, the book turned out to be even better. Rice's characters are among the most compelling ever created in fiction. Louis with his constant moral conflicts and philosophical musings, Lestat with his naughty Bad Boy Bloodsucking Attitude and sarcasm (which Tom Cruise did really well in the film..though Lestat is definitely supposed to be taller!). Claudia with her keen intelligence and relentless anger at having been trapped for eternity in a child's body. Armand for being..at this stage of the series anyway...such a deep, dark, sexy enigma. Rice was the first author to make her vampires complex enough to keep my attention and, more importantly, make me actually **LIKE** them as they go around ripping people's throats out.

My favorite character however, has got to be the City of New Orleans, the true star of this show. I'm sure I'm nowhere near the first reader who has been inspired by Rice's books to visit this special, unique city and wander through the French Quarter and the Garden District. Rice knows and loves her city, and that feeling is infectious. I'm a sucker for well-developed characters, but in this book and the rest of Rice's work, it's the setting that draws me in most of all.

The indelible image of Antonio almost kissing Brad doesn't hurt either