Anne Rice: The Vampire Chronicles

I have loved these books ever since I first began reading them. I love her rich descriptions and the intricate characters she creates. Lestat and Louis are so wonderfully written. It is hard to not read them over and over!

Has anyone read the series?
What did you like most about it?
Who is your favorite character and why?

I read one of them - forgot the title, something like 'Lestat the Vampire' or so. Back then, I was thirteen or fourteen, I was very much in my 'vampire phase' and at that time, I still read every book until the end (a practise I eventually stopped because of books like this one). I'm truly sorry, Tonks, no offense, I guess it depends on personal preferences, but all I remember about the book is how much I hated it. It's sticking out in my memory as one of the worst disappointments I ever came across :(

Ooo I am so excited to see this thread! :clap:

I just found my Volume one book that has the first three stories. I bought it because I absolutely loved the movies. I almost finished Interview with a Vampire and I look forward to reading them and discussing them when I have finished...it may be awhile :lol:

I read one of them - forgot the title, something like 'Lestat the Vampire' or so. Back then, I was thirteen or fourteen, I was very much in my 'vampire phase' and at that time, I still read every book until the end (a practise I eventually stopped because of books like this one). I'm truly sorry, Tonks, no offense, I guess it depends on personal preferences, but all I remember about the book is how much I hated it. It's sticking out in my memory as one of the worst disappointments I ever came across :(

Hey, you definitely do not have to like the books. I am not surprised though, I think her books hit a specific person. The thing I love about them, the detail and descriptions, could be the very same thing that you dislike. The details can be too much and sometimes hearing 5 pages on the color of a leaf could be a bit draining... So I completely understand your dislike :D

Loveweasley: I can't wait until you finish! I hope you come back and discuss with me.

I think you've hit the nail there, Tonks. Now I remember - the details - they really killed me. Maybe I would have enjoyed it more had I been a little older, but now it's like Grass' 'Tin Drum' for me - read it too early, and now it's kind of toxic to me.

In fairness though, another thing I remember was that I liked one of her characters very much (and riled that he didn't get more space in the book), that Armand (???) fellow. Less interior design, more Armand - I think that was my motto then :)

I so agree with you there, I love Armand's character. It is a shame about the details because I think that tends to throw some people off especially when she hits New Orleans. I feel like I have been there! Although, I don't think I realized this until I tried to read her latest book about Jesus. Oh was that ever tedious! How many ways can one describe sand? But in this book there was no Lestat to get me through and I had to stop before 100 pages.

Tonks,

Many years ago I read several of the Vampire Chronicles by Anne Rice - Interview With The Vampire, The Vampire Lestat, The Queen of the Damned, The Tale of the Body Thief, Memnoch the Devil, and Merrick. I also read the Mayfair Witches series (The Witching Hour, Lasher, and Taltos) and her single story lines, Pandora and also The Mummy.

I thoroughly enjoyed the Vampire Chronicles that I did read but got bored when Vittorio came out so I quit reading them. Her characters are all very well developed and I must say that Louis was the one that made me continue to read the series. I liked him because he was a vampire with a conscience (and having Brad Pitt play him in the movie Interview With The Vampire does help! LOL!). As for her descriptive style of writing, I found that it made it very easy to visualize the scenes and characters, but then again, I have an affinity for non-fiction historical writing which is always rich in details. I particularly liked her descriptions of New Orleans because I live only 55 miles away and am fascinated with the history and atmosphere of the City That Care Forgot.

Rice's vampires also seem almost genderless - most of the male and female characters are both effeminate and masculine in their ways at times. If you want a background on the beginnings of Rice's vampires, read Pandora. I found that book to be helpful in piecing together the bits I felt were missing about Marius, Lestat's maker.

I think my least favorite book was Memnoch the Devil. It just seemed to get way off course and a little too weird for me.

If you like reading about vampires and New Orleans and enjoy a little bit of a Janet Evanovich comic style of writing, I recommend reading Fat White Vampire Blues by Andrew Fox. What a hoot!

I just got the triligy in one huge book. I'm going to read it during school hopefully.

I have and loved all of the Vampire Chronicles along with the Mayfair Witches series, although I felt the combined ending of both series felt kinda rushed and forced. However, I've been rather disillusioned with Rice's writing since she basically said that to go back to writing vampire books would be turning her back on God. Don't get me wrong I respect an author's wish to end a series when they want, but when I saw the article that was in, it just made me sad. As a long time fan of hers I felt pushed aside. Still, I read Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt when it came out, but I just couldn't enjoy it. I reread the vampire books occasionally but I'll never purchase a new work by her again. :no:

OOH I loved the Witch series too! It is sad what has happened to her writing. Her descriptions are so rich, succbus, that is exactly why I just fall into her works. Everything becomes so tactile and sensory that I can actually smell the Queen Anne's Lace.

Thank you for the suggestion!

I read a lot of the Vampire Chronicles as well, and Memnoch the Devil was the hardest one for me to get through. :lol: I struggled on that one and lost interest in the series soon after.
However, I loved the Mayfair witches books and my favorite character will always be Louis. I could never get enough of him.

I actually liked Memnoch. I don't know I thought it was interesting and I liked the different stuff in it. I thought it was well researched too. I can see where it went WAY off on a tangent but all in all it was interesting.

Hmm -- well I never really got into her books that much myself. The plots themselves were ok, but at points the books were rather weird. Just not really my cup of tea, Anne Rice vampire novels.

Started with the first couple but the series -- as her writing tends to (or tended to, I giveher a wide berth these days) -- degenerated into soap-opera.

I read the first 3 when I was about 15 and really enjoyed them, but a few months ago when I tried to get into them again I just couldn't.

I'm in the middle of reading Lestat the Vampire and I'm finding her writting to be of a very rare kind, and in a good way. I love how she works with the details, making you feel the book and not just read it. I get this impression that if I were to analyze what she's writting I wouldn't really understand it, but somehow I end up feeling myself what the characters do in a very abstract and undescribable way... but it's there.

The way she constructs the characters is very interesting too. How their personalities change after their transformations and how, like succubus said, they're almost genderless and yet keep very "sexual" features. I wish I had the ability to do a thorough analysis of them because it seems to me that there's a lot hidden messages let there for me to discover yet I can't quite nail them.

In that sense the movie turned out to be a disappointment. I liked it a lot the first time I watched it, before reading the books, but after the books it was just missing a lot of depth, something only her careful, detailed descriptions could offer and could not be transmited through just images.

So yes, I like them very much so far. However I might stop after Queen of the Damned. Several people have told me that after that the series begun to decline and I rather leave them at a point I like than end up disappointed. What do you suggest?

I'm in the middle of reading Lestat the Vampire and I'm finding her writting to be of a very rare kind, and in a good way. I love how she works with the details, making you feel the book and not just read it. I get this impression that if I were to analyze what she's writting I wouldn't really understand it, but somehow I end up feeling myself what the characters do in a very abstract and undescribable way... but it's there.

That's exactly what I like about the Vampire Chronicles. When I went to the States in 2003, I stayed near New Orleans and seized the opportunity to visit the Garden District. It didn't feel unfamiliar because Rice had created such a vivid imagery that it felt as if I had been there before. Even the smell and feel of the humid, scented air was exactly as described in the books. And the old cemeteries! It was a great experience.

I've acutally been reading Interview with a Vampire for awhile right now. I hate to say that I can't really get into it. I liked it at first, but its getting boring. I only have less than one hundred pages left, but I'm going to have to force myself to finish it. I don't think I will move on to the other two, even though I have all three in one big book.

That's exactly what I like about the Vampire Chronicles. When I went to the States in 2003, I stayed near New Orleans and seized the opportunity to visit the Garden District. It didn't feel unfamiliar because Rice had created such a vivid imagery that it felt as if I had been there before. Even the smell and feel of the humid, scented air was exactly as described in the books. And the old cemeteries! It was a great experience.
*Is jealous*

It's good to know it's really that effective and it's not just me losing my mind though. :lol:

*Is jealous*

It's good to know it's really that effective and it's not just me losing my mind though. :lol:

Nope, it's not just you.

The thing I admire about Rice's vampires is that they are not all Mary Sues and Gary Stues, despite their powers and beauty. The ancient ones like Kayman and Maharet have serious issues, even though they lost most of their human traits. Lestat is awesome in many respects but he can't deal with Louis' and Armand's problems. He isn't a saviour, he is and remains a rebel.

I like that too, and I think it's because even though they are vampires they are rarely trated as such. The lead roles tend to be quite attached to their humanity and even with that aside, they are analized mostly in their human qualities rather than in their vampiric ones. It doesn't matter how beautiful, or powerful they are, it matters how they feel, how the take life... and those are very human, faulty, characteristics.

I think she does a very good job in that sense. The only thing I'd have to say against her is how much her characters changed from the first book to the second, making Lestat's story feel a bit forced at times. But I can forgive that quite easily considering everything else.

I love Anne Rice's vampires. And she really throws the reader right into the world they live in.
My favorite character is Claudia. I love her so much. I think she's probably the reason Interview With a Vampire is my favorite of the chronicles.

I really like Lestat too, but I didn't care for him in the second book. It just didn't feel like the same character.

I think she does a very good job in that sense. The only thing I'd have to say against her is how much her characters changed from the first book to the second, making Lestat's story feel a bit forced at times. But I can forgive that quite easily considering everything else.

Well, yeah, one could see it this way. But I always found this to be a good example of an unreliable narrator. Both Lestat and Louis have very different recollections of their time together. Rice follows through with the ideological differences between the characters, as can be seen in The Body Thief and Louis' refusal to help Lestat.

Well, yeah, one could see it this way. But I always found this to be a good example of an unreliable narrator. Both Lestat and Louis have very different recollections of their time together. Rice follows through with the ideological differences between the characters, as can be seen in The Body Thief and Louis' refusal to help Lestat.
I haven't got that far as I got suck in into Dresden land, but I agree that it's a plausible explanation, Lestat himself makes it sound logical enough in the first chapters of his first book. Yet I still can't help but think that it wasn't really that Louis was gullible but that she changed her mind somewhere in between. What can I say, I tend to be quite cynical when it comes to these things.

I haven't got that far as I got suck in into Dresden land, but I agree that it's a plausible explanation, Lestat himself makes it sound logical enough in the first chapters of his first book. Yet I still can't help but think that it wasn't really that Louis was gullible but that she changed her mind somewhere in between. What can I say, I tend to be quite cynical when it comes to these things.

It's entirely possible that she changed how she saw Lestat. Interview with the Vampire was published nine years before The Vampire Lestat after all. However, if this was the case, she managed to cover it up very well because the different perspectives and the resulting changes in character worked for me. It's a good example of how it can be done. Breaking Dawn by S. Meyer would be a good example of how it cannot be done.

You just couldn't refrain yourself, could you? :lol:

Like I said, I do think she "covered her tracks" nice enough for it to appear as plausible. Most of the plot makes sense and Lestat was careful to tie any lose ends there could be left at the very end of The Vampire Lestat (like explaining why he had killed those two women in such a horrid way, and give details about his victims in general).

Still, I can't help to notice how similar Lestat and Louise end up being once they've both taken on the lead role. Why does Louis never notice any of his similarities with Lestat? When you see Lestat's point of view it's quite clear that they have a lot in common. That strong bond with humanity and that rebellious side, neither of the fit with the rest of the vampires. They just channel it in different ways... Lestat being more active and explosive, and Louis being more passive and prone to brooding.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that even if the plot makes sense, I can't help but feel that I'm reading two different stories rather than the same. They are located in the same universe, with the same background and characteristics. They're just slightly different.

This doesn't make the books any less enjoyable. Like you said there was a decade in between and I doubt she had intended to go on when she finished Interview With The Vampire so it's understandable. It just makes me like the books better individualy rather than as a whole.

You just couldn't refrain yourself, could you?

Like I said, I do think she "covered her tracks" nice enough for it to appear as plausible. Most of the plot makes sense and Lestat was careful to tie any lose ends there could be left at the very end of The Vampire Lestat (like explaining why he had killed those two women in such a horrid way, and give details about his victims in general).

Still, I can't help to notice how similar Lestat and Louise end up being once they've both taken on the lead role. Why does Louis never notice any of his similarities with Lestat? When you see Lestat's point of view it's quite clear that they have a lot in common. That strong bond with humanity and that rebellious side, neither of the fit with the rest of the vampires. They just channel it in different ways... Lestat being more active and explosive, and Louis being more passive and prone to brooding.

I can never help myself. :yuhup:

I think that Louis was so determined to blame Lestat for everything that went wrong in his life that he couldn't see the things that had initially drawn him to him. Louis repeatedly emphasises his cultural superiority and education to distance himself from Lestat. This works really well when he is the narrator but there is an ironic twist to it in Lestat's book. I think their reunion in The Vampire Lestat is very touching because both have grown up a bit and Louis can understand Lestat better then.

I liked the reunion too, I don't think the lose ends would have tied in as well without it.

I just wonder which one was the real Lestat... The uneducated farmer son, bitter and manipulative? Or the high class lord son who had a far better understanding of life than most full grown vampires? Which one was the real Armand even, you can already see how manipulative he is in Interview With The Vampire but he goes far beyond that in The Vampire Lestat, he's rabidly vicious.

Just makes me curious you know?

I've only just started and read Interview with the Vampire. i'm really annoyed right now, because apparently my library had two copies, had being the operative word and apparently both are lost :grumble:. I don't know when my mom will let me buy The Vampire Lestat or if she will. I put up an order for other libraries too....but not sure when i'll get it :(.

Anyways, Interview with the Vampire was amazing!!! I just loved it! The emo depressed vampire thing was kind of annoying to me after reading the Twilight series :lol: but I loved how deep the characters were. There was such a rich variety, especially with Louis being the oddball in there. I loved her descriptions, especially the blood sucking scenes. I know that sounds kind of sadistic but the way she wrote it made you see why the vampires needed and loved it.

Has anyone read the series?

Yes. My favorites from ones I've read are The Interview with the Vampire, The Vampire Lestat and Queen of the Damned.

What did you like most about it?

The vampires are incredibly powerful, amazing looks, intelligent (depending on each individual), but they have their own flaws. Whether the flaws developed as a vampire or carried over emotionally from when they were human. It makes them more rounded, believable and provides a depth, rather then just being infallible in every way.

Who is your favorite character and why?

Louis: despite being a vampire, he still has very human feelings, he held on to his human side. Marius: very intelligent, caring, but still has his flaws. Armand: at times very human needs and feelings.



Rice's vampires also seem almost genderless - most of the male and female characters are both effeminate and masculine in their ways at times. If you want a background on the beginnings of Rice's vampires, read Pandora. I found that book to be helpful in piecing together the bits I felt were missing about Marius, Lestat's maker.


Blood and Gold is Marius' story, it helps to further piece things together. How he became a vampire, how he came across the King and Queen, why he made Armand a vampire, etc.

yay, my mom bought me interview with the vampire and the library got me the vampire lestat :clap:

yay, my mom bought me interview with the vampire and the library got me the vampire lestat :clap:

Hope you enjoy the stories! Let us know what you think of them! :)

Has anyone read the series?
I've read the first four books, and thoroughly enjoyed them, but I didn't go on after that. I got bored halfway through Memnoch and just didn't go back.
What did you like most about it?
Lestat. Plain and simple. He's such a fun narrator.
Who is your favorite character and why?
See above, haha. But I really do like him because he's so impulsive and unpredictable. He finds a rule, he breaks it, just to see what would happen. He's both scary and really funny all at once. He's THE rock star of the fictional vampire world.

Has anyone read the series?
I've read the first four books, and thoroughly enjoyed them, but I didn't go on after that. I got bored halfway through Memnoch and just didn't go back.
What did you like most about it?
Lestat. Plain and simple. He's such a fun narrator.
Who is your favorite character and why?
See above, haha. But I really do like him because he's so impulsive and unpredictable. He finds a rule, he breaks it, just to see what would happen. He's both scary and really funny all at once. He's THE rock star of the fictional vampire world.

I read almost all of them, but it's been years see I touched it. I read the original first 4 books and tried to read the other stories, but by then her writing was tedious and she had gotten rid of her editor, which is NEVER a good idea.

I loved all of the original stories, Queen of the Damned still my favorite because I loved the way she wove the history of the vampires. Very interesting and very original.

Caliope, I love Lestat for the same reasons. In the first book, I didn't like him, but I think it's because I also like Louis and felt bad for him. What is it about me and brooding men and vampires? :lol:

But then Lestat told his story and, well, I loved him from then on because if I were a vampire, I'd probably do the same things he did: break the rules just to see what would happen. I'm quite the Mary Contrary girl. I love that he's the Brat Prince and just does what he wants. :evil:

But I also liked Louis as well. He'll always have a special place in my heart.

I didn't mind Memnoch that much because it was an interesting take on everything from the Devil's point of view.

After that, things were too weird and I stopped.


ASIDE: I read the Mayfair Witches as well (the original 3). I LOVED the The Witching Hour - I love that kind of detail and I always get lost in that book when I do a re-read (but it's been a while; I've been trying to read NEW things for a change! :lol: ). But I wasn't happy with where she took it after the first book (I don't want to spoil it for anybody).

I didn't mind Memnoch that much because it was an interesting take on everything from the Devil's point of view.


Yes, I found Memnoch interesting, reading things from the Devil's point of view, what he felt about those wandering souls, etc. The book was a bit odd, but it was intriguing reading a different take on the Fallen Angel.

!I decided that I wouldn't have too much time at home to read so all today I was reading at school :D. It's surprising how far I got, I'm currently on page 129 of The Vampire Lestat :D. It's amazing. I'm pretty surprised at what kind of person he is underneath all that "evil" vampirism. It's like he started out kind of like Louis but he kind of indulges more. I kind of like him more than Louis.

!I decided that I wouldn't have too much time at home to read so all today I was reading at school :D. It's surprising how far I got, I'm currently on page 129 of The Vampire Lestat :D. It's amazing. I'm pretty surprised at what kind of person he is underneath all that "evil" vampirism. It's like he started out kind of like Louis but he kind of indulges more. I kind of like him more than Louis.

Louis seems to want to keep in touch with his human feelings. Lestat had a rather different beginning as a vampire than Louis, as Magnus just left him. I get the feeling Louis wanted to understand the things around him. Lestat likes to discover the rules and push them to the limits, just to see what happens. It was very interesting reading their seperate thoughts on each other. Hope you enjoy the rest of the book!

I just saw how they both had the whole good and evil struggle going on. I haven't read much of it, he only just found out about being a vampire ;)

I just saw how they both had the whole good and evil struggle going on. I haven't read much of it, he only just found out about being a vampire ;)

I have a feeling you might wind up liking Lestat a lot. He's the quisessential bad boy really. He's not the brooding, emo type like Louis (and Edward).

Have fun with it!

:D

Happy reading! :D

What was your impression of Claudia from Interview with the Vampire?

Yes, I found Memnoch interesting, reading things from the Devil's point of view, what he felt about those wandering souls, etc. The book was a bit odd, but it was intriguing reading a different take on the Fallen Angel.

I thought the same. The theological world she comes up with is quite colourful and intriguing. It's not an easy read but I really liked it.

Yes, I found Memnoch interesting, reading things from the Devil's point of view, what he felt about those wandering souls, etc. The book was a bit odd, but it was intriguing reading a different take on the Fallen Angel.

It very much reminded me of a story I heard in college. I don't remember what class I was in or anything or who came up with the story idea, but it was that the reason Lucifer was banished was not because he refused to bow to God, but that he refused to serve Man. He believed he should only serve God.

So it was that slightly different take that I liked about it.

I like that kind of imagination and she certainly had a lot of it.

Happy reading! :D

What was your impression of Claudia from Interview with the Vampire?
My feelings about her are kind of twisted. I think I liked her and she really intrigued me.The whole feeling nothing thing is something that always makes me interested in books. she was so young and you would expect her to be repulsed by the idea of killing and drinking blood, and yet, she grows up to be colder than Louis and Lestat

It very much reminded me of a story I heard in college. I don't remember what class I was in or anything or who came up with the story idea, but it was that the reason Lucifer was banished was not because he refused to bow to God, but that he refused to serve Man. He believed he should only serve God.

So it was that slightly different take that I liked about it.

I like that kind of imagination and she certainly had a lot of it.

that's very very interesting. By the way, what was the book you guys were talking about? from the point of view of a fallen angel?

I'm kind of confused. I'm at pg 168 and he's talking about how his mother is as a vampire. It's really odd how Anne Rice talks about love. I had the same difficulties with Interview with the Vampire. Kind of confusing because it seems like Louis and Lestat are in love although I know it's just plain love. Kind of confusing sometimes.

that's very very interesting. By the way, what was the book you guys were talking about? from the point of view of a fallen angel?

Well, getting old is a terrible thing. I simply can't remember what class I was in or if it was in reference to a book or not. It may have even just been another "version" of the story from ancient times. I have absolutely NO IDEA.

Sorry!

Claudia was kind of odd in that way. But maybe because she was a child. I mean, when my older daugther is hungry, boy oh boy, keep your fingers to yourself. Maybe it's that voraciousness of hunger, that strong life force that the young seem to have that makes her that way.

I'm kind of confused. I'm at pg 168 and he's talking about how his mother is as a vampire. It's really odd how Anne Rice talks about love. I had the same difficulties with Interview with the Vampire. Kind of confusing because it seems like Louis and Lestat are in love although I know it's just plain love. Kind of confusing sometimes.

I would call it "vampire love" - they love lots of things, and not just because they are good to eat! :lol: :evil: I think she's just writing them to be very passionate in the way they view life, although each vampire may be passionate about different things. It's like they take how they were when they were human and amplify it. You take the good and the bad. Louis was a good human and a moody human so that's how he is as a vampire, but just amplify it. Lestat was kind of a brat as a human and he stayed that way as a vampire only mucho amplified! :lol:

I haven't read them in a while so that's about all I can remember about my impressions on that issue.

I read almost all of them, but it's been years see I touched it. I read the original first 4 books and tried to read the other stories, but by then her writing was tedious and she had gotten rid of her editor, which is NEVER a good idea.
Oh did she? Oh dear... I guess I can see that, now that I'm thinking about it. Memnoch was an interesting read, sort of, but I just kept thinking, "When do we get back to the vampires? C'mon, get back to the vampires! That's why I'm reading this stuff!" And then my cousin told me how it ended, and I was like, "Aw, jeez - that's where is going? Nevermind!" And I put it away. I was hoping for a better payoff than that. (Assuming what she told me is true. I didn't care enough at that point to find out.)
Caliope, I love Lestat for the same reasons. In the first book, I didn't like him, but I think it's because I also like Louis and felt bad for him. What is it about me and brooding men and vampires? :lol:

But then Lestat told his story and, well, I loved him from then on because if I were a vampire, I'd probably do the same things he did: break the rules just to see what would happen. I'm quite the Mary Contrary girl. I love that he's the Brat Prince and just does what he wants. :evil:
haha - yeah, exactly! He's so obstinate and impulsive. Marius tells him not to create a child vampire - he finds Claudia. Marius tells him not to, under ANY circumstances, disturb Akasha (and whats-his-name, the guy - he doesn' really do much, from what I remember) - Lestat dusts off his violin and gives them a little private concert and wakes them up. He's told to keep a low profile and not tell anyone the truth about vampires - Louis beat him to that one (which is one of the things, I suspect, that drew the two of them together in the first place - they're both rather blase about rules) but Lestat also wrote an autobiography and turned all the vamp secrets into rock songs and took them on tour. Everyone who meets Lestat either falls in love with him or wants to kill him. For most of the same reasons. It's great!

I know this question wasn't directed at me, but I was truly frightened of Claudia by the time I got to the end of Interview With the Vampire. Just because she's so brutal and self-possessed. It's true that, as a little child, one might expect her to be revolted by the killing and blood-drinking, but think about it: That's pretty much how she was raised. She was only, what, seven when she was turned? Six? Those are the learning years. And her life before that was dealing with the plague, so she was familiar with death already.

and whats-his-name, the guy - he doesn' really do much, from what I remember

He's called Enkil. Poor guy was sucked dry by Akasha in Queen of the Damned.

By the way, I really loved Rice's ancient vampires. The twins and Khayman were two of my favourite minor characters.

My feelings about her are kind of twisted. I think I liked her and she really intrigued me.The whole feeling nothing thing is something that always makes me interested in books. she was so young and you would expect her to be repulsed by the idea of killing and drinking blood, and yet, she grows up to be colder than Louis and Lestat




I know this question wasn't directed at me, but I was truly frightened of Claudia by the time I got to the end of Interview With the Vampire. Just because she's so brutal and self-possessed. It's true that, as a little child, one might expect her to be revolted by the killing and blood-drinking, but think about it: That's pretty much how she was raised. She was only, what, seven when she was turned? Six? Those are the learning years. And her life before that was dealing with the plague, so she was familiar with death already.

No problem, Caliope, I'm interested in what everyone thought of Claudia! :)

I could see Claudia's frustration in forever remaining in child form, never physically being able to grow up. It is scary how cold and ruthless she became, even when mentally, in theroy she could have grown up and matured. Unless, if they get turned as a young child their emotions stay very child-like. I got the impression she used her appearance to rap Louis round her finger, sometimes.



I'm kind of confused. I'm at pg 168 and he's talking about how his mother is as a vampire. It's really odd how Anne Rice talks about love. I had the same difficulties with Interview with the Vampire. Kind of confusing because it seems like Louis and Lestat are in love although I know it's just plain love. Kind of confusing sometimes.

The vampires have a variety of relationships together: friends, male and female, male and male, parent and child, etc. I think it's like how ladykrystyna described it as being "vampire love". Their feelings are very passionate and/or intense.


He's called Enkil. Poor guy was sucked dry by Akasha in Queen of the Damned.

By the way, I really loved Rice's ancient vampires. The twins and Khayman were two of my favourite minor characters.

Yes, they are good. I really like how Rice created the situation for when the first vampire came about, by using the demon spirit that got mixed into Enkil's blood. Very inventive idea.

I could see Claudia's frustration in forever remaining in child form, never physically being able to grow up. It is scary how cold and ruthless she became, even when mentally, in theroy she could have grown up and matured. Unless, if they get turned as a young child their emotions stay very child-like. I got the impression she used her appearance to rap Louis round her finger, sometimes.

I was thinking, too. You know the old saying that "kids can be cruel". Well maybe that's part of it as well. Leave children to their own devices and you get . . . Lord of the Flies! Plus, she was a vampire and I think that made her more aware of herself and others in ways that are different from a regular human child. So you throw that all together and it kind of makes sense that she would be so ruthless. Of course, Louis and Lestat weren't going to correct her much in the "food" department, where they. They taught her to keep the secret that she was a vampire and not be obvious about it, but other than that, what were the rules for her? She wasn't really a "child" in that way. And, against humans, she could certaily protect herself.

So, left to her own devices (for the most part), she is what she is.

By the way, I really loved Rice's ancient vampires. The twins and Khayman were two of my favourite minor characters.

Yes, they are good. I really like how Rice created the situation for when the first vampire came about, by using the demon spirit that got mixed into Enkil's blood. Very inventive idea.

Those are the two reasons why Queen of the Damned is kind of my favorite. I loved the story of the twins and how the first vampire became created. Very inventive indeed.

I kind of wish Stephanie Meyers had offered that kind of a story as well. Just to add depth.

That's what I liked about "early Anne Rice" - the depth of detail that actually meant something (as opposed to the flowery details about drinking blood that went on and on for pages and pages).

Oh did she? Oh dear... I guess I can see that, now that I'm thinking about it. Memnoch was an interesting read, sort of, but I just kept thinking, "When do we get back to the vampires? C'mon, get back to the vampires! That's why I'm reading this stuff!" And then my cousin told me how it ended, and I was like, "Aw, jeez - that's where is going? Nevermind!" And I put it away. I was hoping for a better payoff than that. (Assuming what she told me is true. I didn't care enough at that point to find out.)


Yeah, she did. I can't quite remember when. I don't think it was for Memnoch. It might have been after that when she started doing the individual vampire stories (Armand, Blood and Gold, Pandora, etc.). Because I remember trying to read Armand and just being so bored. So tired of the descriptions and I really didn't like the way she portrayed Marius in that. I had a certain vision of him and she changed it and I didn't like it. It didn't seem like him.

I was thinking, too. You know the old saying that "kids can be cruel". Well maybe that's part of it as well. Leave children to their own devices and you get . . . Lord of the Flies! Plus, she was a vampire and I think that made her more aware of herself and others in ways that are different from a regular human child. So you throw that all together and it kind of makes sense that she would be so ruthless. Of course, Louis and Lestat weren't going to correct her much in the "food" department, where they. They taught her to keep the secret that she was a vampire and not be obvious about it, but other than that, what were the rules for her? She wasn't really a "child" in that way. And, against humans, she could certaily protect herself.

So, left to her own devices (for the most part), she is what she is.



:agree: Very good point!



It might have been after that when she started doing the individual vampire stories (Armand, Blood and Gold, Pandora, etc.). Because I remember trying to read Armand and just being so bored. So tired of the descriptions and I really didn't like the way she portrayed Marius in that. I had a certain vision of him and she changed it and I didn't like it. It didn't seem like him.

I don't think I even want to know what Rice did to Marius. :lol: A while ago, I thought about returning to the books but I read a lot of long-time fan's reviews of the most recent books and they completely put me off. The common complaint seems to be that the characters have lost their individual characteristics and just merged into one; they just became a mouth piece for Rice to preach to the reader. So, I've decided to leave my favorite characters at a certain point, and not risk seeing them go down hill. At least as a reader, we can choose to do this.

I'm still reading Lestat. on page 289 :D. Armand is such an interesting character...I never thouht that Lestat was such an important character in the vampire world

^Oh yeah - he gets around. Like I said, everyone who meets him either falls in love with him or wants to kill him. ;)

^Oh yeah - he gets around. Like I said, everyone who meets him either falls in love with him or wants to kill him. ;)

Sometimes it's both. :lol: I don't think anyone ever loved Lestat without wanting to kill him, too.

^Oh yeah - he gets around. Like I said, everyone who meets him either falls in love with him or wants to kill him. ;)

Sometimes it's both. :lol: I don't think anyone ever loved Lestat without wanting to kill him, too.

:lol: very interesting guy.

He is such an awesome vampire compared to Edward :love:

I just finished!!! :clap:

(At about 12:30 at night)

I liked the Vampire Lestat way better than Interview with the Vampire. It was so much more interesting. It was so creepy with Akasha and Enkil. It was pretty hard to decipher with my brain turned to jello but just amazing.

I just finished!!! :clap:

(At about 12:30 at night)

I liked the Vampire Lestat way better than Interview with the Vampire. It was so much more interesting. It was so creepy with Akasha and Enkil. It was pretty hard to decipher with my brain turned to jello but just amazing.

Glad you liked it! Will you be wanting to read Queen of the Damned next?

i'm going to be starting later today :). I have to finish them soon since they're library books. I still need to decide how much I like them. I'm definitely buying The Vampire Lestat ;)

^Good for you, Voldy! I'm glad you enjoyed it. Lestat is my favorite book, but I really enjoyed Queen of the Damned as well. FYI, it's a lot gorier than the other two, from what I remember. I wasn't quite prepared for that going in.

I just finished!!! :clap:

(At about 12:30 at night)

I liked the Vampire Lestat way better than Interview with the Vampire. It was so much more interesting. It was so creepy with Akasha and Enkil. It was pretty hard to decipher with my brain turned to jello but just amazing.

Voldie, if you liked The Vampire Lestate, I think you'll like Queen of the Damned. Lots of depth, interesting and imaginative background, more and better characterizations, etc.

After that, you can read Tale of the Body Thief, or not. I don't recall that it added much to the series overall or to any of the characters, but it was kind of interesting and fun.

And after that, well, you read the rest of our posts - it's probably not worth the time.

I don't think I even want to know what Rice did to Marius.

Well, if you ever get curious and don't want to spoil, owl me and I'll tell you. ;)

Is it only the first three that really add much to the plot of the book then? I'll probably end up reading the rest of the series anyways, but I want to know how obsessed with finishing I should be :p.

The only annoying thing about Lestat for me was how he was so worried about hurting innocent mortals....but I guess I won't be able to escape that in vampire books :p

^It's probably just a bad after-taste leftover from the Twilight books. ;)

Is it only the first three that really add much to the plot of the book then? I'll probably end up reading the rest of the series anyways, but I want to know how obsessed with finishing I should be :p.

The only annoying thing about Lestat for me was how he was so worried about hurting innocent mortals....but I guess I won't be able to escape that in vampire books :p

As far as my opinion goes - the first three are the bomb. Number 4 is fun, but not necessary and I tried to read ARMAND, which was the first in the series of books about individual vampires and I couldn't even get halfway through and it wasn't a long book. I remember it being probably as long as Sorcerer's Stone! I just couldn't stomach it. After that I lost interest.

So the amount of obsession is up to you - you may actually like them.

As to "innocent mortals" - all I can say is that Rice appeared to be breaking from the standard "evil vampire" character and plot for her main characters, her protagonists. Because, as you can see, the protagonists were the vampires, rather than the humans. I think it's fine that Lestat isn't killing innocent mortals because then he's no longer the Brat Prince; then he's just evil. Lestat is a lot of things - exasperating, annoying, brat, etc. - but he's not evil. Not to me, anyway. I couldn't love him the way I do if he were.

:p

^It's probably just a bad after-taste leftover from the Twilight books. ;)
Maybe. I can handle it, Lestat is awesome in everything else anyways :p

As far as my opinion goes - the first three are the bomb. Number 4 is fun, but not necessary and I tried to read ARMAND, which was the first in the series of books about individual vampires and I couldn't even get halfway through and it wasn't a long book. I remember it being probably as long as Sorcerer's Stone! I just couldn't stomach it. After that I lost interest.

So the amount of obsession is up to you - you may actually like them.

As to "innocent mortals" - all I can say is that Rice appeared to be breaking from the standard "evil vampire" character and plot for her main characters, her protagonists. Because, as you can see, the protagonists were the vampires, rather than the humans. I think it's fine that Lestat isn't killing innocent mortals because then he's no longer the Brat Prince; then he's just evil. Lestat is a lot of things - exasperating, annoying, brat, etc. - but he's not evil. Not to me, anyway. I couldn't love him the way I do if he were.

:p
The fact that he isn't evil is the one thing that makes me like him slightly less :p. Voldemort is still my love, Lestat is just another fictional crush :D. I will keep up my dream of reading about a truly evil protagonist ;)

The fact that he isn't evil is the one thing that makes me like him slightly less . Voldemort is still my love, Lestat is just another fictional crush . I will keep up my dream of reading about a truly evil protagonist

Well, to each their own! :p No wonder you don't like Edward! :lol:

I see Eddyboy as a very weak character ;). Even Louis is much stronger. the problem I saw with Twilight vamps was how overly moral they were. Same with Harry Potter. I like people like Harry Dresden who kill when necessary or Lestat who don't try to just starve themselves. Nah...I'm not too sure how much I like Louis either, but still, more interesting than Edward.

I see Eddyboy as a very weak character ;). Even Louis is much stronger. the problem I saw with Twilight vamps was how overly moral they were. Same with Harry Potter. I like people like Harry Dresden who kill when necessary or Lestat who don't try to just starve themselves. Nah...I'm not too sure how much I like Louis either, but still, more interesting than Edward.

Yeah, I like Carlisle and think he's a sweet guy and all, but the whole Vegetarian thing was a little much for me. I have no problem with vamps feeding on the evil doers at the very least. I mean, it did add a little tension in the beginning between Edward and Bella - he of the "I don't eat humans, but, dang Bella you smell real good". I liked that idea a lot. It would be like me trying to give up meat for even a week and during that time dragging me to In and Out Burger or something. :lol:

Which is why I liked reading Midnight Sun better than Twilight because you get stuff more from Edward's POV and it is more interesting, kind of like The Vampire Lestat made Lestat more interesting.

Yeah, I still like Louis because he is sweet, but he actually got MORE annoying from Lestat's POV. :lol: He's kind of like Hermione - he'll eventually break the rules, but you have to drag him kicking and screaming. Lestat is way more fun, like Harry and Ron. I'd much rather hang with Lestat!

:evil:

Lestat is like young Tom Rddle in a sense. Well, the rule breaking sense. I don't see Harry marching off to kill Malfoy on a whim :p

Lestat is like young Tom Rddle in a sense. Well, the rule breaking sense. I don't see Harry marching off to kill Malfoy on a whim :p

Well, true. About Harry, I mean. But I wouldn't call Lestat a young Tom Riddle either, even in the rule breaking sense. Lestat isn't, well, disturbed. He's the youngest son of the Manor Lord and not worth much back then. Lestat has his issues, but I think even he would take a bite out of Tom as an "evil doer".

Lestat breaks rules for less evil reasons. He's a brat; it's that simple, IMHO. Harry breaks them because in doing so he can do something good - sometimes you have to break the rules to do good. Lestat and Harry are a little closer on the spectrum (but not that close obviously). Tom's off on his own! :lol: :p

Well either way I like Lestat way more than Harry. I have a thing for bad boys :p. Well, I hated Malfoy, too much of a rich kid attitude to make me really like him. Anyways, the fact is that i don't like goody goody characters that refuse to do anything bad. Sometimes, it's for the greater good. Anyways, it's really not the evil thing that makes me like Lestat so much. It's really what he stands for. He's a free thinker and he's willing to take chances. He just ignores the consequences and is willing to deal with them later so he's living in the present, not as much the past or the future. We don't see Louis out to become a rock star.

Well either way I like Lestat way more than Harry. I have a thing for bad boys :p. Well, I hated Malfoy, too much of a rich kid attitude to make me really like him. Anyways, the fact is that i don't like goody goody characters that refuse to do anything bad. Sometimes, it's for the greater good. Anyways, it's really not the evil thing that makes me like Lestat so much. It's really what he stands for. He's a free thinker and he's willing to take chances. He just ignores the consequences and is willing to deal with them later so he's living in the present, not as much the past or the future. We don't see Louis out to become a rock star.

No, I totally understand. I kind of like the "bad boy" thing, too. And, yeah, not Malfoy. More like Spike from Buffy. :lol:

But just to compare a bit and not get too off-topic - I liked Harry because he wasn't necessarily a complete "goody goody" either. He wasn't like the good little orphan boy. I always liked that he mouthed off to the Dursleys and to Snape and pretty much anybody else that he thought deserved it. He spoke up for himself. If he were this little meely-mouthed boy, then, no, I could have never liked him.

He stood up for himself and he was a "rebel" in his own way (See the D.A., for example). Yeah, he wasn't quite the "bad boy", but he had sarcasm and some love of rule breaking to make him somewhat fun.

Not as much fun as Lestat, no. Definitely not. Lestat's in a class by himself, just the way he likes it. :evil:

Louis . . . a rock star! :rotfl: I'm just picturing "complaint rock" a la "Clueless"! :rotfl: Poor Louis. So serious. Such a killjoy!

Nah, Harry still bothered me. Maybe I would like him a bit better in real life, but really, i wouldn't even bother trying to be befriend him. whatever happens happens. I would with Lestat though :D. And DEFINITELY with Voldy :p.

Harry was too mediocre for me. Draco too. i'm pretty picky about the whole bad boy thing :p. Lestat takes it to a whole new level, just the way i like it :D

Well, if you ever get curious and don't want to spoil, owl me and I'll tell you. ;)

Thank you, I'll keep your offer in mind. :)



The only annoying thing about Lestat for me was how he was so worried about hurting innocent mortals....but I guess I won't be able to escape that in vampire books :p


As to "innocent mortals" - all I can say is that Rice appeared to be breaking from the standard "evil vampire" character and plot for her main characters, her protagonists. Because, as you can see, the protagonists were the vampires, rather than the humans. I think it's fine that Lestat isn't killing innocent mortals because then he's no longer the Brat Prince; then he's just evil. Lestat is a lot of things - exasperating, annoying, brat, etc. - but he's not evil. Not to me, anyway. I couldn't love him the way I do if he were.



I think Marius lived by this rule: only drink the blood of murderers, etc, leave the innocent alone, it's a way of protecting the innocent too. It certainly provides an insight into any vampire's conscience and thought process, when they set themselves rules like this one.


Yeah, I still like Louis because he is sweet, but he actually got MORE annoying from Lestat's POV. :lol: He's kind of like Hermione - he'll eventually break the rules, but you have to drag him kicking and screaming. Lestat is way more fun, like Harry and Ron. I'd much rather hang with Lestat!

:evil:

:lol: Poor Louis. Although, I sometimes think he's a necesssary personality because he highlights the opposite to Lestat. Whether it be thinking things through before acting, be calmer, following rules, feeling guilty if he thinks he has done something wrong, etc.

But I happen to be a younger fan with teachers and parents doing the same to me so it kind of ruins the awesomeness of Louis ;)

I just finished Queen of the Damned and Tale of the Body Thief :D. I have to say, Tale of the Body Thief was the one that really sucked me in. For the rest of the books, i was reading slow and i had the ability to tear myself away, but seriously, I could almost see Lestat being human forever. Well, most of me thought that he would find a way to become a vamp again anyways, i mean, he's Lestat :p, but all the same. By the way, should I read Memnoch the Devil? Well, I just want to know how much it'll suck me in, because i'll probably read it anyways, I just want to be forewarned about whether it would be smart to read it before bed :p

Memnoch is unlike all the other Vampire Chronicles. It's Rice's take on Christian mythology in the universe she created. It's more complex and difficult to read but I liked it very much. It's better than her later attempts at religiously coloured fiction.

how much is it plot based? because in Interview with the Vampire and the Vampire Lestat, they were more of like a biography with many small stories, unlike Tale of the Body Thief and Queen of the Damned, which have a very specific point to the book, which makes it harder for me to stop once i get started, and seeing that i have a nasty habit of starting books right before i go to bed, and reading it all through the night or during my classes at school, well, you get my point :lol:

^For me, Memnoch read like historical fiction, with biographic flavors mixed in. I got bored with it for that reason.

Memnoch is unlike all the other Vampire Chronicles. It's Rice's take on Christian mythology in the universe she created. It's more complex and difficult to read but I liked it very much. It's better than her later attempts at religiously coloured fiction.

Agreed! Was it written when Anne Rice was still an atheist? That might have had some influence and why the author's message or thoughts changed in the more recent books.

how much is it plot based? because in Interview with the Vampire and the Vampire Lestat, they were more of like a biography with many small stories, unlike Tale of the Body Thief and Queen of the Damned, which have a very specific point to the book, which makes it harder for me to stop once i get started, and seeing that i have a nasty habit of starting books right before i go to bed, and reading it all through the night or during my classes at school, well, you get my point :lol:

It does have a lot of Lestat in it; bending the rules as usual and drawing attention to himself. :lol: Lestat's views on what the Fallen Angel shows him, which allows Rice's take on the Christian mythology. It was also a very interesting take on the whole Fallen Angel idea. I seem to remember Armand being in the novel too.

^For me, Memnoch read like historical fiction, with biographic flavors mixed in. I got bored with it for that reason.

I got that with Interview with the Vampire and The Vampire Lestat, which is why i read them so slowly. It took me like a week each. That is like RECORD time for me. I read OoTP in one day.

I'll probably be reading Memnoch then. It sounds interesting and slow enough for me not to get obsessed with finishing again.

I got that with Interview with the Vampire and The Vampire Lestat, which is why i read them so slowly. It took me like a week each. That is like RECORD time for me. I read OoTP in one day.

I'll probably be reading Memnoch then. It sounds interesting and slow enough for me not to get obsessed with finishing again.

Definitely read it, if only to get to experience one last decent book by Anne Rice before she went off the reservation.

Well, let me say that better - I have no problem with her getting back to her Catholic roots, especially after losing her husband and becoming ill. We know that JKR has kept to some of her religious roots because of the death of her mother.

I have a problem with how radical Rice got, to the point of denouncing her Vampire novels and making them out to be evil.

But, yeah, read Memnoch. The different take on Christian "mythology" is very interesting and inventive.

Glad to see you enjoyed The Tale of the Body Thief. I found it to be entertaining and almost wished that Rice stuck with more of the Adventures of Lestat instead of delving into the history of her other vampires, especially without benefit of an editor. :rolleyes:

what's wrong with her books without her editor? :lol:

and seriously!??! she started denouncing her own amazing novels?!?! :wow:

and seriously!??! she started denouncing her own amazing novels?!?! :wow:

That's what I recall. Here it is from wikipedia's piece on Anne Rice:

In 1998, after dabbling in Mormonism and spending most of her adult life as a self-described atheist, Rice returned to her Roman Catholic faith, which she had not practiced since she was 15. In October 2004, as she reaffirmed her Catholic faith, Rice announced in a Newsweek article that she would "write only for the Lord." She called Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt, her first novel in this genre, the beginning of a trilogy that will chronicle the life of Jesus.

In an interview with Christianity Today, headlined "Interview with a Penitent", Rice declared that she will never again write another vampire novel, saying; "I would never go back, not even if they say, 'You will be financially ruined; you've got to write another vampire book.' I would say no. I have no choice. I would be a fool for all eternity to turn my back on God like that." Some of her fans reacted with shock to the news of her religious and literary conversion, admonishing her in magazine articles, internet weblogs and reader reviews found on the web. Rice responded in a post on Amazon.com (see below) that stated: "And yes, the Chronicles are no more! Thank God!"

However in an interview with TIME Rice made a comment that she may write one more novel in the series which she confirmed on her website that she may or may not make the book, but if she did it would be a Christian novel with a redemption theme involving Lestat and the Talamasca.[6] She later changed her mind yet again and issued a statement on her website denying she would write such a book.[7]

In October 2008, she released the autobiography Called Out of Darkness: A Spiritual Confession, detailing her Catholic upbringing and her eventual return to Catholicism. In it the 67-year-old Rice describes the two decades she spent writing books on vampires, demons and witches as a prelude: "To be able to take the tools, the apprenticeship, whatever I learned from being a vampire writer, or whatever I was — to be able to take those tools now and put them in the service of God is a wonderful, wonderful, wonderful opportunity. And I hope I can redeem myself in that way. I hope that the Lord will accept the books I am writing now."[8] [9][10]




I guess "denounce" is too strong a term. But it sounds to me like she felt that writing vampire and witch novels was not in "service of God" and was somehow wrong of evil. That's what I take from it anyway. And that's what I find so sad. Especially because Interview with a Vampire was kind of like what HP was to JKR:

From wikipedia:

Rice reported in her biography that the themes of vampirism and the tone of the book echoed the loss of her daughter Michele from leukemia in 1972. Interview is distinct from its sequels in its sombre tone, and subsequently the perspective shifts to that of the vivacious Lestat. Nevertheless, it remains the best-selling and best-received of Rice's books.

oh, that's kind of sad to me :(. I guess she's not a Lestat inside. I can understand her choice, but it still disappoints me a lot, to say that about her own genius. :(

Definitely read it, if only to get to experience one last decent book by Anne Rice before she went off the reservation.

Well, let me say that better - I have no problem with her getting back to her Catholic roots, especially after losing her husband and becoming ill. We know that JKR has kept to some of her religious roots because of the death of her mother.

I have a problem with how radical Rice got, to the point of denouncing her Vampire novels and making them out to be evil.



I didn't know that is what happened. I thought she was an athiest at one point, but lost faith in that and found the Catholic faith. I didn't know that Catholic was her original roots.

I guess that answers my earlier question about why some readers felt the storylines and characters possibly seemed to shift direction.

It's good that Rice was able to find something that gave her support during her grieving.

I really disliked when she mixed Mayfair witches and vampires. Her writing became almost self-indulgent in these novels. And everyone loved everyone because they were rich, extremely smart and oh so beautiful. I was so bored.

i finally got time to order Memnoch the Devil from my library, but not sure when i'll get it

Ah yes, The Vampire Chronicles. :)

I read these back in High School and re-reads in college. My friends and I were so into them at the time that after we graduated we all went to New Orleans and stayed in the French Quarter. We visited Anne Rice's house, I bought a shirt that had her New York Times quote protesting Tom Cruise as Lestat...

Visiting that area really was like stepping into that world, which I guess is what is really captivating about her writing. She has the ability to draw you in and believe the world and her characters. Unfortunately, she also kind of got long winded and maybe lost sight of her world... I don't know. Whatever it was it made me lose interest after Body Thief. I bought some of the books that followed and was only able to finish and enjoy one of them, which was Pandora. I also enjoyed the Witching Hour, but got annoyed when too much mixing and matching started happening between, the witches, the vampires and the Talamasca...

My favorite book in the series is Queen of the Damned. I love the ensemble cast, for lack of a better term and how things come together at the end. I also loved the background of with story of the twins, and Akasha and Enkil...

My favorite characters are Marius, Kayman, Maharet, Armand and Pandora for whatever reason. It's been a while since I read them last. I guess I enjoyed their stories the most at that time, and their flaws. I guess I'm sort of weird in that Louis or Lestat are not favorites, even though they are good characters.

To anyone who has read Blood and Gold... Is it worth picking up again? I have it, but I was never able to finish it...

Even though they are part of a larger series I still tend to look at the first three books as a trilogy and almost wish they'd ended there, because things started to go downhill at that point for me, and the greatness of the first three wasn't ever quite recaptured in the other books from the series that I tried to get into...

The Vampire Chronicles are the rare books where the main character happens to be my fav character, well, Lestat. usually I get obsessed with the antagonist instead since the protagonist bores me to tears :p

To anyone who has read Blood and Gold... Is it worth picking up again? I have it, but I was never able to finish it...


Oh, I loved it. She was back to old form, in my opinion.

To anyone who has read Blood and Gold... Is it worth picking up again? I have it, but I was never able to finish it...



Loved this book, especially as it was about one of my favorite characters, Marius. Another favorite is in there too: Armand. I think it's worth reading, the background story is interesting, imo.

just thought of something. From what i've read in this thread, most of the books afterwards are background stories. Do they correlate a lot or could I read them out of order?

Thanks Moriath and Annie. :) I may try picking it up again after I finish the Twilight series... It should be interesting to go from one to the other. :lol: Though, I did want to re-read HP again... Decisions, decisions... ;) Marius and Armand were two of my favorites, too, but I was losing faith in the series at that point, I guess. I'll check it out and hopefully I'll get sucked back in... :)

just thought of something. From what i've read in this thread, most of the books afterwards are background stories. Do they correlate a lot or could I read them out of order?

Blood and Gold, Pandora and Armand can be read out of order.

I really disliked when she mixed Mayfair witches and vampires. Her writing became almost self-indulgent in these novels.

I came to that conclusion and gave her up after Taltos. Then I found Poppy Z. Brite's work and commentary on Rice's writing more amusing.

She has the ability to draw you in and believe the world and her characters.

That's the basic duty of any writer of fiction.

That's the basic duty of any writer of fiction.

However, not everyone does it well, whether they are published or not. I thought she did an exceptional job in detailing her world of vampires in the first books of this series. That's all I was saying.

Some people do it better than others

Well, I read the three Vampire books
Absolutely loved the books.
Lestat the Vampire is the best, probably my favorite vampire becoz of that book.
¡I love Lestat!

But I started to read "Blood and Gold" but I guess I stopped it read it find it too boring and too, but too monotone.
It happens anything there.

I know Anne can be very monotone from time to time but some of her books are way too much.

I really don´t know which Vampire Chronicle book is the best to read after The Queen of the Damned...

I am very bored, can´t find good book serie to read.

I just had to share this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1q-c3jKCaQ

I really don't care whether or not you guys watch the video (that's me by the way) but look at the comments :D. there's still hope in the world :D

Sorry about the double post but seeing that it's been nearly 10 days, I just finished Memnoch the Devil :D.

Most of it was pretty good and interesting but except for the fact that Memnoch was just a bit too similar to Lestat for me, but the plot itself was pretty cool, but confusing. Spoilers for the ending ahead:

so did Armand die and if he did, how? And what happened to Dora? did she just sort of desert Lestat or something?

And i think i'll spend tonight trying to figure exactly what either Memnoch or God wanted Lestat to do...since that confused me a lot....

On the whole, if I wasn't trapped at home with nothing to do but solitaire and minesweeper (my internet just shut off on me...), I would not have bothered reading the entire book all at once, but given the circumstances, it was moderately entertaining, just not something i could properly comprehend since halfway through i got so tired that i could barely read the text (I really really hate double vision and fuzzy vision.....). I see what you guys mean by it could get boring after a while. And while I could expect nothing else from Lestat, the ending was just way too fast for me.

Armand did not die, though we're supposed to think that at this point. His novel is set after Memnoch took place. He's very badly burnt though.

Wait, he was burnt? *reads ending again* I must've missed something :hmm:

I have loved these books ever since I first began reading them. I love her rich descriptions and the intricate characters she creates. Lestat and Louis are so wonderfully written. It is hard to not read them over and over!

Has anyone read the series?
What did you like most about it?
Who is your favorite character and why?

I've recently begun reading Interview. I really like it! It's very interesting because the characters (Louis and Lestat) are so different and interesting, and the descriptions are good. They sort of draw you into their world. It might be a little while before I finish it, though, because I have limited time for "fun reading" thanks to college.:grumble: But speaking of which, I have some free time now, so I might go read some pages.:rockon:

I thought Interview with a Vampire was awesome, but she kind of lost me in the 2nd, and I couldn't finish the third. I felt like they were a bit cryptic, like I couldnt understand the kind of relationship going on between many of the characters, like Lestat and Armand, and Louis and the little girl(I have forgotten her name..). I mean , how far did their relationships go..

I can't believe I have not seen this thread before! Either way, I say that because I have very much enjoyed reading the Vampire Chronicles. The deep insights into the historical world these characters originate from is devestatingly interesting. I liked Marius' story a lot, because of the time frame and the way it told Armand's story from a different angle. Furthermore, Pandora's history was also interesting. To be honest, it would be amazing if ever Khayman's story was written out. But due to the circumstances that won't be happening.

Though I found Memnoch's story intrigueing, it was certainly not my favourite. The religious side and then Lestat's change in personality came as a shock and from that moment on I turned to the Mayfair Chronicles.

Note: my favourite Anne Rice novel remains "The Witching Hour" :)

The deep insights into the historical world these characters originate from is devestatingly interesting. I liked Marius' story a lot, because of the time frame and the way it told Armand's story from a different angle.

:agree: I loved the history aspect within the books, especially with older vampires like Marius.

To be honest, it would be amazing if ever Khayman's story was written out. But due to the circumstances that won't be happening.

I think that would be a very interesting point of view, too. Yes, it is a pity we are unlikely to get anymore Vampire Chronicles books. I haven't read the last one, but apparently the reviews weren't too good. Sometimes it's best to leave a series when they're on a high.

:agree: I loved the history aspect within the books, especially with older vampires like Marius.



I think that would be a very interesting point of view, too. Yes, it is a pity we are unlikely to get anymore Vampire Chronicles book. I haven't read the last one, but apparently the reviews weren't to good. Sometimes it's best to leave a series when they're on a high.

Yeah, she kind of lost touch with her characters and especially Lestat. And she tried - unsuccessfully, in my view - to combine the Vampire Chronicles with the Mayfair witches.

Yeah, she kind of lost touch with her characters and especially Lestat. And she tried - unsuccessfully, in my view - to combine the Vampire Chronicles with the Mayfair witches.

I think it was the Amazon reviews for Blood Canticle, that made me wonder about the direction of the series. A lot of the reviewers felt they were being preached at as though Lestat was being used as a mouthpiece for the author. The technique isn't unusual in itself, but I gather they felt the character's personality and story itself became lost and silted because of it. :sigh:

The other books like Interview with the Vampire, The Vampire Lestat, Queen of the Damned, Blood and Gold, etc, I loved, the depth of the character personalities, the history combined within the story, the storylines themselves, the creativity are all brilliant.

I LOVE the original 3 novels in The Vampire Chronicles, my favorite being The Vampire Lestat, but I had a hard time getting into the novels beyond that...I think I'm just such a Lestat lover that I couldn't get past the fact that my favorite character was only being mentioned in passing or his story was being skipped over where it could have been filled-in....I mean, he IS rather vain...he'd definitely want to have the spotlight even in accounts that aren't necessarily about him. ;)

Has anyone read the series?
I've actually just started the series. I'm on part three of Interview with the Vampire.
What did you like most about it?
I'm actually surprised that I do. I tend to stay away from books like these. I'm not really into vampires myself. I thought I'd try it to see what real vampires are like not that sparkling wannabees of that wretched series that I won't mention in here. And also because my sister has always told me about them, so I went on with her recommendation.
Who is your favorite character and why?
So far I've taken a liking to Claudia.

I haven't finished the first yet, so after I finished there's a few things I'd like to mention if that's okay. I only read the first few posts, I don't really want any spoilers. :eeep:

I'm actually surprised that I do. I tend to stay away from books like these. I'm not really into vampires myself. I thought I'd try it to see what real vampires are like not that sparkling wannabees of that wretched series that I won't mention in here. And also because my sister has always told me about them, so I went on with her recommendation.

:) Glad to hear you're enjoying the stories so far. Anne Rice's vampires are written with a range of personailties, strengths and flaws both emotionally and physically (even though they're immortal).

I haven't finished the first yet, so after I finished there's a few things I'd like to mention if that's okay. I only read the first few posts, I don't really want any spoilers. :eeep:

It would be great to read what you felt about Interview with the Vampire. :tu:

I read all the other books several times but I made it through Interview only once. I like Louis as a character and I love the way Lestat describes him in The Vampire Lestat but he's too emo for me as the protagonist and narrator.

So I finished Interview with the Vampire. I really enjoyed it; I thought it rather weird when Louis and Claudia made their way to Europe and found the vamires that were just 'mindless corpses." Like why didn't they evolve into what Louis and Claudia were? :hmm: And what happened to Lesat? Was he disfigured because of them setting him on fire or was it the posion? :huh: Also, if it was a rule not to kill the others of their kind, why did the vampires of Theatre des Vampires kill others? Were they the rule makers? :hmm: It was a little weird, but entertaining as well. I was very sad when I learned of what happened to Claudia and Madeleine. :(

So I finished Interview with the Vampire. I really enjoyed it; I thought it rather weird when Louis and Claudia made their way to Europe and found the vamires that were just 'mindless corpses." Like why didn't they evolve into what Louis and Claudia were? :hmm: And what happened to Lesat? Was he disfigured because of them setting him on fire or was it the posion? :huh: Also, if it was a rule not to kill the others of their kind, why did the vampires of Theatre des Vampires kill others? Were they the rule makers? :hmm: It was a little weird, but entertaining as well. I was very sad when I learned of what happened to Claudia and Madeleine. :(

The Vampire Lestat explains things a bit more about why everything's the way it is. Louis doesn't really have that much of a good idea of what's going on.

The Vampire Lestat explains things a bit more about why everything's the way it is. Louis doesn't really have that much of a good idea of what's going on.

Exactly. Louis is basically a clueless, ignorant child and after The Vampire Lestat one understands why Lestat preferred to keep him in the dark.

Okay so I finally finished The Vampire Lestat today. I must admit I thought interest for awhile there. I was wondering why Rice wouldn't have released this one before Interview with the Vampire, wouldn't it have made more sense? :huh: Anyhow, I was a bit saddened when Gabrielle left him a quarter of the way through the book. I was a bit worried we won't see her again. :shrug: I found the tale of Those Who Must Be Kept quite interesting. So they were the very first of their kind, and the elders were burnt because they were left in the sun? Who were the ones who had gone after Lestat after his performance? It wasn't Marius who had burned after all? :hmm: Oh and in Interview with the Vampire, I disliked Lestat a lot, but found him somewhat different and likable in his story.

Moving on to Queen of the Damned. ;)

Okay so I finally finished The Vampire Lestat today. I must admit I thought interest for awhile there. I was wondering why Rice wouldn't have released this one before Interview with the Vampire, wouldn't it have made more sense?


Rice wrote Interview with a Vampire mainly in order to process her daughter's death, as far as I know. The Vampire Lestat, which is more positive in many respects, was the creative product of Interview. In any way, would Interview work so well if one read The Vampire Lestat first? Because in that case one would know that Louis's version of the truth is coloured by his own ignorance and morals and one wouldn't sympathise with him as one does now.

I found the tale of Those Who Must Be Kept quite interesting. So they were the very first of their kind, and the elders were burnt because they were left in the sun?

Yes. Akasha and Enkil are the first of their kind. Whatever happens to them, happens to their children. Only they are thousands of years old, so the sun may give them a sunburn but destroys all the younger vampires. Rice's vampires grow stronger with age. Spoiler for Queen of the DamnedKhayman, for example, moves around during the day. He's languid and slow but he can endure the sun.

Who were the ones who had gone after Lestat after his performance? It wasn't Marius who had burned after all? :hmm:

Random younger vampires who wanted to kill Lestat for breaking their law of secrecy. And why would Marius have burnt?

Rice wrote Interview with a Vampire mainly in order to process her daughter's death, as far as I know. The Vampire Lestat, which is more positive in many respects, was the creative product of Interview. In any way, would Interview work so well if one read The Vampire Lestat first? Because in that case one would know that Louis's version of the truth is coloured by his own ignorance and morals and one wouldn't sympathise with him as one does now.
Ahh yes perhaps you're right.



Random younger vampires who wanted to kill Lestat for breaking their law of secrecy. And why would Marius have burnt?
Oh okay, I thought so. I didn't mean he himself would burn, I meant whether he had done the burning after all like Lestat had thought.

Oh okay, I thought so. I didn't mean he himself would burn, I meant whether he had done the burning after all like Lestat had thought.

:huh: It's explained on the last pages who did it.

I read the first three when I was around fourteen and absolutely loved them. Even though they're both outsiders in their own way, I much prefer Lestat's rebellious defiance and sense of fun to Louis' whining.

I'm going to re-read them and decide if I want to go on from there.

I'm going to re-read them and decide if I want to go on from there.

Not very far. :rotfl: The last couple of novels are just really self-indulgent. They are meandering along. Basically, the Chronicles stopped being good when Rice combined witches and vampires and everyone became smart, rich, and uber-talented. I really liked Blood and Gold and Armand's story though.

Not very far. :rotfl: The last couple of novels are just really self-indulgent. They are meandering along. Basically, the Chronicles stopped being good when Rice combined witches and vampires and everyone became smart, rich, and uber-talented. I really liked Blood and Gold and Armand's story though.

Is it possible for one to read and understand these two without having to wade through the others?

Is it possible for one to read and understand these two without having to wade through the others?

Yup, to an extent. I think reading Memnoch would be advisable before reading Armand's story. But then, I always liked Memnoch. If you want to do it chronologically...

* Interview with the Vampire (1976)
* The Vampire Lestat (1985)
* The Queen of the Damned (1988)
* The Tale of the Body Thief (1992)
* Memnoch the Devil (1995)
* The Vampire Armand (1998)
* Merrick (2000)
* Blood and Gold (2001)
* Blackwood Farm (2002)
* Blood Canticle (2003)


Stop after Blood and Gold. Merrick was so-so but still readable.

I was so depressed by the ending to Interview With the Vampire that I never read any of the others.

I read Interview and it was very good, and I tried to read Lestat, but about halfway through, it just got too wierd.

I personally am very sad that she has asked us to not write fanfiction. I think that some of her characters have a lot of ... charactor, and I would really love to see what some people could do with it.

I read Interview and it was very good, and I tried to read Lestat, but about halfway through, it just got too wierd.

I personally am very sad that she has asked us to not write fanfiction. I think that some of her characters have a lot of ... charactor, and I would really love to see what some people could do with it.
:huh: Authors can request to not write fanfic? Does that mean people still couldn't get away with it? :hmm:

I've fallen out of Queen of the Damned. I'm not even half way through it. I read a few pages today, but we'll see how things go. :shrug:

There is no catagory for any Anne Rice fanfiction on any website. This was Anne's decision, and though I agree she has the total right to do that, it seems a bit harsh to me.

:huh: Authors can request to not write fanfic? Does that mean people still couldn't get away with it? :hmm:

I've fallen out of Queen of the Damned. I'm not even half way through it. I read a few pages today, but we'll see how things go. :shrug:

Yes, she can do that. Her lawyers sue fanfic writers or sites that host fanfic about her universe for copyright issues, as far as I know.

And keep on reading. Queen of the Damned is a good book. It has its lengths but I always liked her ancient vampires best. The different ways of coping with an unnaturally long lifespan fascinates me.

I've jumped back into Queen of the Damned. I lost interest in it and was just reading a page here and there, but it's caught my interest again, so hopefully I'll have it finished sometime this week. :)

I've jumped back into Queen of the Damned. I lost interest in it and was just reading a page here and there, but it's caught my interest again, so hopefully I'll have it finished sometime this week. :)

Did you ever finish? :D