The Good Vampire vs The "Good" Vampire

One of the things I've always loved most about Anne Rice's novel, Interview with the Vampire is the duality of Louis and Lestat's characters and what they represent. You look at them and right off the bat go "oh, Louis is the good vampire and Lestat is the bad vampire." Yet, Louis isn't really a good vampire. He's a "good" vampire, in that he tries very much so to repress his vampiric side and abide by the human ideas of what is right and wrong. He clings desperately to his past and tries to act human rather than accepting himself for who he is now and his newfound nature. Lestat, on the other hand, is the ideal vampire. We may look at him and point and say "bad" but he is true to himself and what a vampire is supposed to be. He isn't bogged down by human constructs and allows himself to follow his more animalistic desires that come with being a vampire. So, while Lestat may be the "bad" vampire of the story, he is objectively a good vampire. Playing off of these two characters, one which is "good" but not really good and one which is "bad" but not really bad is neat and it creates an interesting dynamic between the two of them. I would argue that this dynamic that Anne Rice has created is one of, if not the most, compelling parts of the story and can certainly be backed up by the still-strong fandom's love for these two characters and their relationship with each other.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Escapism in Coraline

Annihilation and Anxiety