on June 14, 2004
I loved this book, it was just as good as Interview with the Vampire but I did read them in the wrong order.
So when I read interview with the vampire I was very defensive over Lestat because in this book he explains why he couldn't teach Louis everything because his own maker (Magnus)died before he taught Lestat anything about being a vampire so he went looking for answers and finally found a vampire called Marius (the oldest vampire in the world and Armands maker who Armand fought to be dead.) who answered some of Lestats un-answered questions. (just like when Louis and Claudia went looking for anwsers and found Armand.)
Also we find out why he hated his father so much and what his father meant in interview with the vampire when he said 'sorry, please forgive me' before he died.
The book is writen from Lestats point of view and is kind of like his biography.
My favourate part must be the ending when Louis comes back to Lestat after reading Lestats book and understanding Lestat was like he was.
on February 11, 2004
The Vampire Lestat book by Anne Rice was the first book i ever read that was more then 200 pages. After the mesmerizing tale, i could not help but love Lestat. After that book, i collected all the chronicles that was ever written by anne rice!! i loved each and everyone of them, from blood and gold to blackwood farm and tale of the body thief.
These books gave me a world to escape into. A world that i envy very much because i want it. The book was written in such a way, that no one can distinguish whether it is real or not. that is how i feel. The books gave me a new way of thinking. i am certainly one of Lestat's biggest fans! i have his pictures every where in my room and i drive my friends crazy about how i want a guy like him. The character Lestat is someone whom every one will grow to love no matter what because he is someone a person can look upto, to be inspired by, to love without getting hurt. that is what is so special about him and the books. they are so real that after a few days you will be thinking in such a way as if they do exist. well, i wish they did!! i could read this book over and over again without getting tired or bored of it. These books are truely the work of a talent and great personality. A big thumbs up to anne rice and lestat along with Marius,Quinn, and Armand.
on September 26, 2003
Interview with a Vampire was one of my fave reads of all time despite the obsessive amorality of the characters and despite a lot of mumbo-jumbo psychobabble endeavoring to spruce up what is essentially a long series of sociopathic murders. But the idea and execution was accomplished so well that I was willing to give it a pass. For some reason, Louis was very appealing in all his sensuous evil and self-doubt.
Rice has obviously fallen for Lestat as witness the apparently endless tomes to him that bestow an almost supernatural quality. She has chosen to make the self-doubting Lestat her eternal wandering and wondering hero. He is much too effete for my taste but Rice specializes in that genre, adding a touch of lushness. She has done something else very cleverly by introducing material for future books. The stories of Marius, Armand and all the hints and unsolved puzzles strewn throughout the story are good for at least three more novels.
The historical presentation was absolutely terrifying in its authenticity and mood. France, New Orleans, Catholicism, fine wine - these are the things familiary to the author. She is an expert at deep dialogue and thoughts though she has a tendency to blather on too long. Then there is the matter or all that self-justification for murder of which she implies all vampires are entitled. So read it for the story and give some literary license.
on May 24, 2003
Lestat is one of the vampires you first meet in Interview With The Vampire. He made Louis a vampire. Since Louis told his story, and Lestat is not one to be out done, Lestat decides to write down his story. The beginning is a bit slow. You're shocked Lestat is a rocker now. You'd think Anne Rice would be out of touch with the world of music, but as you read on you find out it's not a bad choice for the attention craving Lestat.
You start off in the present. As anyone who read Interview knows, at the end of that book Lestat could was barely alive and couldn't take care of himself. So, he goes underground. Here's where the tricky part comes. Lestat went to sleep for like 50 years. Meaning Louis couldn't have seen him. You don't think about it at first. You think about it after you've read the book. It really bothers you afterwards. That in my opinion, is the only problem with the book. By the way, even Rice herself admits she made a mistake with that.
All throughout the book, you learn of Lestat's past. You learn that he was born into a poor noble family and was taken out of school at an early age. You learn about his early struggles with wanting to be good. I liked his relationship with Nicholas. Nicholas and Louis seem in my opinion very similar. Nicholas' story is sad. It's fascinating how he always wanted attention. That's why he became an actor. Lestat is very close to his mom. He even makes her a vampire.
One of the things I really enjoyed about this book is when Lestat talks about what happened in Interview. He sets the record straight. Giving his side on what happened. Once you read his side, you'll never look at him or at Interview the same. Louis was upset and wrote him as a monster. Lestat tells what really happened and his reasoning. Siding that Louis never know his reasons for doing things. Lestat also feels bad for keeping secrets from Louis. Also, Lestat didn't like the way Louis protrated him in Interview...
This was a great squel to Interw With The Vampire. You learn about the misunderstood character of Lestat. This is my all time favorite book. I doubt any book will ever take it's place as my favorite book. Why did I give it four stars instead of five? Well, when I first read it I thought it was the best book ever and still do, but that whole time mistake Anne made really upset. I couldn't stop thinking about it. Thinking about who lied? Was Louis about it, or was Lestat denying it? This was the only flaw with the book. Besides for the book being so damn addictive.
on October 20, 2002
This book begins with Lestat waking up from along time asleep in the ground to the sound of the band called devil's night out and new noises that characterize the mtv era. He decides to take control of the band and become a rock star. He also decides to write an autobiography. Then the book seems to become that autobiography that he wrote.
It tells us if his mortal childhood and vampire transformation. His dreams about becoming an actor and the dreams that he will never have . It tells about his erotic journey through life and how he befriended his best friend Nicolas. Magnus the vampire that bestowed the dark gift upon him and leaves him begging longing for answers that only he could tell him. It tells how he saves his mother with an immortal kiss. Lestat's encounter with a vampire coven that causes dilemmas for the vampire but through all the twists and turns of his story he realizes what a vampire truly is and what it takes to be one who thirsts for blood.
Wow I cant tell you how much I liked this book. This book made my favorite genre change to horror, vampire books. This tale does show that Anne can be kind of wordy and overly descriptive but hey, it painted a very detail picture in my head. This book made you think. It questioned every moral I can think of. It made me think about my own principles and ethics. Though I like book I can see how people might think it was boring. The book did have its up and downs. At the beginning I had to struggle to keep reading it, but once I got in it a little bit further, I couldn't get away from it. What I thought was a little ironic though was that the first book showed Lestat as a vampire that I had come to hate but in this book I become to love him. The first book made you assume he just was a cruel hearted blood thirsty vampire but when I read this it made me see that he was completely different and had a story all his own
on October 17, 2002
The follow up to Interview With The Vampire is an excellent piece of work told with Ms. Rice's signature writing style, which is sometimes too pansexual and extravagant to allow a reader to take any of her work as serious pieces of literature art. Sorry, Anne, but you've got a problem there . . . Tone it down!
The Vampire Lestat answers some of the questions the first novel posed. I think the underlying theme of the vampire series (which Ms. Rice unfortunately ruins after the third book) is the burning question we all ponder: How did we get here? These vampires question their lineage, and this book brings to light Lestat's knowledge.
I especially enjoyed the part of the novel where Lestat makes his mother a vampire. The characters, in general, are much more interesting in this novel than the first, especially Lestat's mother. The first novel, while interesting, is low brow in comparison to this dynamic follow up. Not to take anything away from Interview but this novel is hands down the best in the series. Apparently, Anne Rice must have enjoyed writing the novel as well, since Lestat, not Louis, became her primary vampire creature.
I was faithful to the Vampire Chronicles until they became ridiculous. Lestat didn't need to descend into Hell. Lestat didn't need to become human again. What's that got to do with the vampires' heritage? In my opinion, Anne Rice should have stopped the series with three novels. And, of those three, The Vampire Lestat is the one I most recommend!
on September 30, 2002
I have some mixed feelings about Anne Rice's "The Vampire Lestat", but all things considered, I truly believe it is a worthwhile read. In this follow-up to "Interview with the Vampire", we are told the life story of Lestat de Lioncourt, and I was bothered by the inconsistencies between the two books. Lestat tells us that Louis has lied about all kinds of things, and the cruel and cold-hearted villain we came to know and love in "Interview with the Vampire" becomes a moral, soft-hearted, and tortured soul, always trying to do the right thing and find the answers to life's mysteries. Hmmm. I think if I had not read "Interview with the Vampire", I would have found "The Vampire Lestat" far more enjoyable, because then I would have been blissfully unaware of the transformation of Lestat's character. With that said though, "The Vampire Lestat" is a compelling, if lengthy and somewhat verbose, tale, and in the end I was glad I read it, because it has many redeeming qualities.
The book purports to be Lestat's autobiography, and we are taken on a lush and erotic journey through Lestat's long and eventful life. From his youth as the son of a marquis in pre-Revolutionary France when Lestat befriends a troubled violinist named Nicolas, to the crowded streets of Paris where his life is changed forever by a solitary vampire named Magnus, who gives Lestat the dark gift before deserting him forever. Shocked and amazed by what has befallen him, Lestat, begins to learn what it is to be a vampire. Questions about the why and how of what he has become torment Lestat, but there is nobody for him to turn to. Lestat's story has many twists and turns; as he saves his mother from her deathbed with his immortal kiss, meets a hostile coven of Satan-worshipping vampires living under a cemetery, and ultimately goes off on a quest for a legendary ancient vampire named Marius in hopes of finding some answers to the questions that haunt him. And through it all we are treated to Rice's memorable and moving prose. However, the author's tendency to become overly descriptive is in evidence here, and there were some portions of the book that were a bit hard to get through.
As I've already stated, my feelings about "The Vampire Lestat" are a bit ambiguous. But despite my criticisms of this book, I actually did like it a lot. Lestat's story is affecting, intriguing, and entertaining, and in the end I could honestly say that I enjoyed it. Many people adore this book, and it's easy to see why, and on the other hand quite a few people hate it, and I can understand their point of view too. I can't guarantee anything to anyone picking up this book, because Anne Rice's writing is hypnotic and beautiful to some, and deadly boring to others. Personally, I would have been sorry if I'd missed "The Vampire Lestat", since I really did become quite engrossed in Lestat's tale. So give this book a try and see what you think, you may just be pleasantly surprised!
on April 10, 2002
Artistically, the greatest mistake Anne Rice ever made was flogging her best book to death by churning out sequels it didn't want or need. But Lestat is admittedly at least a good read, even if it doesn't really go anywhere but sideways.
Lestat awakens in the modern age to the new sound of rock music, and - vain creature that he is - can't resist the temptation to come out of the shadows and become a rock star, himself. Since he's up, he decides to tell us his story in some detail. And some more detail. And a whole lot more detail, after that.
This book has no reason to exist. It's pointless. It isn't a real story with a beginning or end, just a number of vignettes from the central character's life. It reads like a Goth soap opera.
But that doesn't mean it isn't entertaining. It's a wonderful read, if you just want to hear an immortal yack on (and on, and on) and give you a little perspective from the undead side of life.
Rice is a splendid writer. But if she's ever heard of a plot, she doesn't let on.
on November 8, 2001
Strange this was the first of Anne Rice's novels that I read. It's still my favorite of all, with some of her best characters and historical references.
Vampire Chronicles mixes dark sensuality with sweeping illustrations of places normally found in romantic epics. But here the old cliches are re-enlivened with a sinister, post-modern sexual sensibility, one that knows about human darkness and isn't afraid to paint its truly complex beauty with a tolerant eye.
The earliest of Rice's that I've read, The Feast of All Saints, takes a pre-Twain era New Orleans and, using the above pulp fiction tool, reveals sexual undercurrents that apply quite realistically to the times, including the subject of mullato male adolescent beauty. After illustrations lush and rich with views as sardonic as the poetic of Twain's, the reader expecting more Twain-esque philosophy in the plot is met instead with an open sexuality, racial understanding and mature feminine voice that raises the complexity and quality of the ultimately noir tale.
The Vampires.. aren't quite so rich; they are vampires, after all. But Rice's sensitive, frank sexuality, playful narcicism and sardonic illustrative gifts bring out the greater, more gallant qualities of the genre. And her attention to historical details and accuracy also increase the authenticity of a macabre tale.
In the late 1970s, when the series was started, camp & vampires were synonymous. But to the delight of fantasy & horror interests searching for a plausible new epic, Rice brought back some serious vampires. She was clever, introducing her vampire-time-line in Interview with a Vampire. Clever in that book, but in Lestat the history spreads wide open, all the way back to prehistoric villages of amazon women with ESP! And it is this ESP in conjunction with a poltergeist from an Egyptian house that forms the basis of the vampire legacy, and the trunk of a large tree of vampiric events encompassed in these chronicles.
Louis is still here of course, his apathetic cynicism delicious and beautiful as a dark Rachmaninoff passage. And the star is Lestat, a strapping young 18th century French woodsman with a yearning for philosophy and the meaning of life. His description: tall, leathers, long blonde hair, lithe and sensitive yet strong enough to kill a pack of wolves, was different from the film "Interview with a Vampire" choice of actor Tom Cruise, a rather more diminutive character. I like to remember Lestat as the tall, blonde, robust Frenchman that Rice originally described. It makes his flamboyant personality less snickering and more elegant than how Cruise's part portrayed him.
There are philosophical digressions in this novel that brilliant young minds may find fascinating, perhaps even moving. As far as the moral grounds of such books, I am reminded of this Albert Einstein epigram: "If you want your children to be geniuses, read them fairy tales."
on February 2, 2001
I read this novel after re-reading Interview with the Vampire as part of a campaign to get into the right frame of mind for my first trip to New Orleans (along with novels such as The Moviegoer and A Confederacy of Dunces). I felt that the first novel was a very compelling depiction of the existential dilemmas faced by a vampire based on the assumption that a vampire really could exist in our world. It treated philosophical themes of alienation and isolation in a similar way to Mary Shelley's Frankenstein.
The Vampire Lestat deals with many of the same issues from a distinctly different sensibility. Lestat is by no means the same kind of personality as Louis from the first novel. The impression he creates of himself in this first person narrative is also quite different from the way he was portrayed in the first novel. This novel is a very compelling account of how he became a vampire and his search for his ancestors and an explanation of who he really is as a vampire and how he can co-exist with his own kind and even with those who are no longer his kind.
This novel deals with homosexuality (as in Lestat's infatuation with vampires Louis, Armand, Marius) and incest (Lestat's relationship with his mother in her vampiric state) in oblique ways because vampires do not engage in sexual activity. Satisfying their blood thirst is the equivalent for them of sexual pleasure.
In the midst of Lestat's personal history we encounter other vampires (Armand, Magnus, Marius) and are immersed in their personal history which, for Marius, extends back to pre-Christian Celtic paganism and Egyptian mythology. I began to lose my place within all these background accounts within background accounts and, at times, it was difficult for me to really visualize or grasp conceptually what had happened to bring vampires into existence. Much of this difficulty is probably a weakness on my part rather than of Rice as a writer. I was impressed with the detail of the mythology that she creates, adding textures to a vast, complex tapestry. This kind of inventiveness extends far beyond anything Bram Stoker ever imagined.
Despite the fact that I found passages in the novel to be very turgid to wade through I acknowledge that Rice is a very talented writer, both within and beyond her genre. It may be awhile before I resume her vampire series or read anything else that she's written because I have had my fill of vampiric lore for the time being but I do highly recommend the two vampire novels that I have read so far.