Lestat Le Vampire

ISBN: 2226031332
ISBN 13: 9782226031334
By: Anne Rice

Check Price Now

Genres

Anne Rice Currently Reading Fantasy Favorites Fiction Horror Paranormal To Read Vampire Vampires

About this book

Once an aristocrat in the heady days of pre-revolutionary France, now Lestat is a rockstar in the demonic, shimmering 1980s. He rushes through the centuries in search of others like him, seeking answers to the mystery of his terrifying exsitence. His story, the second volume in Anne Rice's best-selling Vampire Chronicles, is mesmerizing, passionate, and thrilling.

Reader's Thoughts

Melissa

** spoiler alert ** Was excited about this one after I LOOOVED "Inteview..." however I was not impressed after the first half of the book. She essentially gives 3 backstories here. Lestat, of course, and then Armand, and then Marius. Lestat seemed so extreme and crazy in the first novel... but here he seemed just like Louis. The writing was beautiful in the first book, but here it just seemed very chaotic, and almost like she was trying too hard to replicate the first book. Lestat was supposed to be chaotic, not the writing. I did enjoy his history, but I almost hated him in the first book and rather expected him to stay more a villain than a "hero." Not that I'm calling him a hero, but hopefully you know what I mean. I know this review is going to make some people angry, but honest is honest. The rock star thing didn't make sense to me either, though I know somehow he has to become "current."Armand was also not what I expected. Very often I'm delighted by that, but the role reversal here was also odd for me. Armand was very seductive and "a good guy" in the first book, here the exact opposite. I was also confused by his description. The movie version of the first book may have contributed to that, but I definitely didn't picture Armand as a young red-head. There was some confusion in the graveyard scene as to who was the "leader," who was Armand, and who everyone else was of the Children of Darkness. Obviously it became clear eventually, but nevertheless, it was confusing. Once we got to Marius, though, the book changed for me. I was VERY interested by this story, the writing seemed to flow better, and the storyline about the beginning of vampirism finally fit in. Things were still a little contradictory, however, once we got to the "explanation" of the first book. Lestat idolizes Marius, yet breaks every single rule. Fans of the first novel will agree that this sounds very much like Lestat, but in this novel he's very different for most of it. I don't know, I'd love to hear what everyone else thinks but I'm just not loving this book like I did the first one.

Eddie Black

This is one of those books that defined me. I don't mean that I turned goth or vampire or whatever. No... it started me thinking.I was born and raised in the South. I didn't read anything else other than fantasy novels (like Dragonlance). I joined the Marines in 89 and while watching a movie about a teenage vampire it was mentioned that Dracula is 'good literature'. I went to the base library to check out Dracula and beside it on the shelf was this book. I took this one instead.The book was great. I loved it. The book engendered a question within me that never found any sunlight growing up a protestant in the Deep South. That queston, can something evil love? The values of the Southern protestant is one of black and white and there is no mixing, no grey, no overlap. By witnessing the drama of Lestat's journey, this manifestation of the Shadow declaring it's evil and it's good... I questioned this myself. It is a slippery slope to question everything. With no reading, history, or even exposure to any philosophy (Arkansas public school after all) I now asked questions about ethics, the nature of God, what is beauty, morality, and more. I had become a philosopher (though not a good one).Now, 17 years later I've been around the world many times, am nearing the completion of two degrees (psychology and philosophy) and am a much different, much broader, much more deepened soul. The questions I've asked, the roads I've taken, the experiences I've had, are all a result of my search for my own truth. A lot of that was set afire because of reading this book. I know that many bemoan Anne's move from the supernatural and to Christian writings. It's her life and I respect that. Yet I am reminded of something Jung said, we do not become enlighted by imagining beings of light, but by making the darkness visible (I'm paraphrasing). Lestat might not be a being of light (that's another topic) but his darkness is illuminating.This is one of my favorite books ever.

Tanabrus

** spoiler alert ** Secondo libro de Le cronache dei vampiri.Questa trilogia mi fa pensare a una matrioska.Mi spiego.Il primo libro della trilogia, il celebre Intervista col vampiro, vede il vampiro Louis narrare la propria storia. E quindi narrare le vicende del vampiro Lestat per come le conosce, per come le ha sperimentate.Questo libro allarga la visuale: spronato dall’esempio di Louis (che ha generato un libro chiamato proprio Intervista col vampiro), Lestat trova la forza di tornare a vivere la sua non vita. Ma non solo, decide di scrivere la sua storia (si, il libro si chiamerà Scelti dalle tenebre).La sua storia partendo da quando era giovane, un nobilotto di campagna appartenente a una famiglia impoveritasi nella Francia pre-rivoluzione, fino ad arrivare al suo ritorno sulla scena come rockstar in un’estrema sfida a tutto e tutti, e alle inaspettate conseguenze di questa sua scelta. Passando ovviamente per tutta la sua non-vita, Louis e Claudia compresi.Il volume successivo, La regina dei dannati, per mezzo libro ripercorre le ventiquattro ore (o giù di lì) precedenti il concerto di Lestat, ma viste da un’infinità di punti di vista diversi. Per poi passare lentamente all’azione (se così si può dire).Quindi, ogni volume riprende in un certo senso il precedente ampliandolo. Da qui la matrioska.Passiamo più nello specifico a questo libro.La premessa, come ho detto, è il risveglio di Lestat. E la sua scelta di fare un gruppo rock, di dichiararsi per quello che è realmente, di cantare ciò che sa. Tutte cose, ovviamente, contrarie alle regole dei vampiri (che in una sorta di Masquerade proibiscono di rivelarsi agli umani, o di divulgare nomi e rifugi degli altri vampir. Comprensibile come cosa, visto che di giorno sono totalmente vulnerabili).Decide anche però di scrivere un libro come quello scritto sulla base dell’intervista concessa da Louis, un libro sulla sua vita.L’intero libro Scelti dall’oscurità riguarderà questo, la sua vita.La sua gioventù irrequieta in Francia e il suo rapporto difficile con la famiglia, la sua amicizia profonda con Nicholas.La fuga a Parigi, l’ingresso nel mondo del teatro.La vampirizzazione, l’evoluzione dei suoi pensieri.E poi Gabrielle, sua madre; Armand e la sua congrega; la disperata ricerca di Marius, l’impellente necessità di comprendere; Louis, Claudia, il Teatro dei Vampiri…Fondamentalmente è quasi un romanzo di crescita.Dal ragazzo di campagna Lestat fino ad arrivare alla rockstar, con una lenta maturazione più che altro a livello di percezioni, di consapevolezza, di morale, di idee.Non di carattere, perchè il suo carattere non cambierà mai. Il suo carattere è ciò che lo rende diverso dagli altri: audace, irrispettoso, arrogante, irritante.Quando gli altri vampiri temevano i simboli religiosi, lui entrava tranquillamente nelle chiese, cacciava in Notre Dame, spaventava i fedeli.Quando gli altri vampiri si nascondevano nelle catacombe, lui portava avanti affari a Parigi, tramite un avvocato che faceva da intermediario di giorno. Faceva regali alle persone amate: il padre e i fratelli, la madre malata, Nicholas e la compagnia teatrale.Si definiva “un nuovo male per un nuovo secolo”, irridendo le superstizioni dei vampiri che si ritenevano maledetti da Dio e obbligati a fare da demoni per suo volere: viveva tra gli umani, si mescolava a loro, li ammaliava, li corteggiava, se ne inebriava.Quindi, il libro è essenzialmente una biografia. Stop. La parte del concerto, anticipata dall’inizio del libro e vissuta alla fine, è trattata brevemente e non si capisce granchè, diciamo che è un antipasto del terzo libro.Com’è questa biografia?Di sicuro non è brutta. Interessante, piacevole.Ma anche stancante, direi, per lo stile tipico della Rice. Quasi poetico, ma prolisso. Enormemente descritivo quando si tratta di mostrare i sentimenti di qualcuno, ciò che prova. Le sue idee.Alla lunga stanca questa cosa.Tanto per dire, dopo aver letto questo libro ho dato una rilettura veloce alla Regina, che avevo letto anni fa e che ora potevo comprendere meglio visto che prima non conoscevo praticamente nessun personaggio.Beh, la rilettura (tagliando buona parte dell’inizio “fine del secondo libro vista da mille angolazioni” ed evitando le lunghe parti descrittive di stupori, innamoramenti, esaltazioni e sensazioni varie) è durata tre-quattro ore (e non è che ricordassi molto, giusto cosa accadeva a grandissime linee).C’è chi apprezza questo stile (uno scrittore di Leth a caso, ad esempio) ma io di solito preferisco che ci sia un po’ più di azione. Non dico totalmente avventura, ma ad esempio anche Murakami parla di sentimenti, sensazioni e via dicendo. Solitamente però ci mescola azione, per rendere più avvincente il libro.Qui, finita la parte della Congrega di Armand, l’azione praticamente scompare del tutto… non è propriamente il mio tipo di libro.Comunque è una buona lettura ugualmente, e il tipo di vampiro di cui scrive la Rice è affascinante.Sopratutto vedendo vampiretti da due soldi brillanti e vegetariani come quelli di una certa saga ora fatta anche film di cui non dirò il nome per non farle involontariamente pubblicità… ecco, mille volte meglio questi vampiri (e questi libri) di quelli lì, senza ombra di dubbio.Solo che non penso potrei leggermi diversi libri di questo tipo di seguito, ecco.

Austin James

I just finished Anne Rice's second book in The Vampire Chronicles. "The Vampire Lestat" is part prequel and part sequel to the first book in the series "Interview with The Vampire." It tells the story of Lestat. It tells how he was created, and where he is now. Readers will learn more about characters from the first book as well.Like her first book, Rice uses first person narration to tell her tale. By doing so (and retelling parts of the first story from a different point of view) she explores the unreliability and bias of the narrator which is telling the story. Ultimately it is up to the reader to decide which version of events is true.The thing that really separates Rice's vampires from other literary vampires is the questions they often make the reader ask. Serving as symbolic "reluctant agnostics," the vampires explore questions of spirituality in hopes of reaching salvation they will never receive.I gave this book four out of five stars.Originally reviewed on my website at http://www.AustinJamesHere.blogspot.com

Laura

Grab a tampon and a hot-water bottle team; you’re in for a bloody ride, and we’re not talking about the horror-fest you anticipated.Note - I have avoided Anne Rice’s books for several reasons, not all of them truly worth repeating, but it’s safe to say that Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise were certainly contributing factors to my aversion.The Vampire Lestat swung between gripping interest and complete… boredom.I’m sorry, I really did like this book in its entirety but there was too much talk about ‘feelings’.I didn’t want to read the echoes of lost loves (you’re immortal, congratulations), I wanted more slash and gore: guts busting out, necks torn in half, you know “fun” stuff. Or maybe that’s just me?Although there were some really good points – like when a vampire is crushed slowly into the ground until there’s nothing left but bubbling goop – there were few of these events to keep me really engaged.The Good:I really liked the way Rice wrote; it captured so much detail of the period/s. Although not a captivating read it certainly had me wanting to reach the end.Characters were really well thought out, and the narrative seemed organic.The Bad:Shut up about feelings. You’re a killing machine, go and do that.The Ugly:Lestat conveniently inherits amazing wealth. He spends it haphazardly, was there any point that he became poor?I was a little disappointed with the ending – as it is a cliffhanger to the next book – but I doubt I’ll read another one.

Mochacocafan

Let me clear one thing up: I haven't read Queen of the Damned yet, but this book definitely increased my love for Lestat.In Interview With the Vampire, Lestat read to me as the aristocratic, realistic, practical vampire with a lust for blood and opinions grounded in blunt reality. I liked him as a villain, and I love him as a hero. Louis felt to me like a melodramatic teenager with a flair for angsty sololiquies. I don't hate him, but I don't have a passion for his character.Lestat's history is mildly disturbing, especially his flip-flopping love for his mother, but he does have flaws and personality, and that makes him interesting. He's the charming, gorgeous young man who will drink your blood, slay evildoers, play the piano, argue intelligently with a sophisticated French accent, and love his fellow vampires and mortals in a darkly honest way I love.Lestat is the neo-European vampire, graceful and deadly. Yes, his O.O Claudia incident was a mistake, but hey, no-one is perfect. And this golden-haired vampire does come close.

Lou

This story was told by the same guy who had read the audiobook for The Gunslinger by Stephen King. It was a really good narration he really puts you into the mind of Lestat. A tale of the coming of age/vampire of Lestat, you are taken through different timelines of his life through centuries. It was a very deep memoir of his, Anne rice really knows how to use words elegantly in this story. There were times that the life story became a bore and felt like he was self loathing. It brings me back to the Dexter books and his insight as a killer and all his dark passenger rambles. I enjoyed the first book Interview with a vampire more.

Ellie Red

So much more than what the title promises! 'The Vampire Lestat' is not just a tale of our beloved vampire, it's the origins of the vampire world, everything is being said, written and explained about vampires. Anne Rice has magnificently succeeded in re-creating the phenomenon 'vampire'.In this novel you get to know Lestat's point of view and you discover how much differently Louis perceived him in 'interview with the vampire'. All in all a must read for anyone who is in love with the vampire culture.

Христо Блажев

“Вампирът Лестат” – страховито и страстно, магично ново начало…http://knigolandia.info/book-review/v...Не бях подготвен за тази книга. Нито “Интервю с вампир”, нито трилогията “Напаст” на Торо и Хоган, нито продължението на Стокър – “Дракула: Немъртвият” или купищата други жанрови книги, за които съм писал тук. Просто не очаквах такова чудо, което на някои страници да ме пленява неудържимо, на други да ме отвращава и обърква, на трети да ме кара да препрочитам разни мистични изстъпления в почуда… а в края да кипва кръвта в диви ритми. Еротичността на текста на някои места е хипнотична, а сексуалността пропива всяка страница, без да отдава дан на морал и някакви си норми – гръцките кръвосмесителни митове са скрити под тази вампирска вакханлия, а и не само те – келтските, египетските – Ан Райс смело е бръкнала в кацата с митовете и легендите и е черпила доволно.

Jepoi Genaldo

Certainly Anne Rice is a genius!In the Book “The Vampire Lestat” tackles the origins of Lestat from Human to VampireThe depth of the Story was pretty intense which made the whole story enticing.The Vampire Lestat is the second edition of Anne Rice’s Vampire Chronicles which tells the story of Lestat De Lioncourt; a 200 year old Vampire originating from Auvergne France, An impoverished Aristocrat due to his brother. After running off to Paris to be an actor together with his close friend Nicholas De Lenfent, Lestat was bitten by an old Vampire name Magnus which started this story.What amazes me is that she created an entire world which was vividly described which makes you believe you where inside it. Honestly I even forgot to eat because I soaked in the story.Lastly “The Vampire Lestat” is a prelude to the book “Queen of the Damn” and let me tell will make you gasping in the end!

Christine (AR)

Dear Anne Rice:NOT WORTHY.Signed, All Fictional Vampires Who Are Not LestatThis was a re-read for me, but in all honesty, I don't think I was ready for this book the first time I read it. Or at least, I didn't appreciate it for the sheer masterpiece of storytelling that it is, and it's not just the mood and the world and the mythology and the fast-moving plot -- more than anything, it's the characters. Lestat, of course, Rice's 'brat prince', arrogant and compassionate and impossible, all at the same time -- he'd be enough to carry any book, imo, but the secondary characters are just as layered and bewitching, probably because we see them through Lestat's eyes. Nicki and his endless internal darkness; Armand, who manages to be both tragic and terrifying; Gabrielle, who seems like a force of nature; and even Louis, the whiny, unreliable narrator from Interview comes off as beautiful and mysterious, the star-crossed love of Lestat's afterlife. I swooned through the last chapter.I didn't care for the places Rice took this series after Queen of the Damned, but for me, Lestat continues to define the vampire-as-anti-hero genre. No other blood-sucker comes close.

Natalia Belardy

I really liked it. The way Lestat tells his story is very catchy and hilarious. I literally couldn't keep the book apart from me for more than a day (and those days were because I had things to do at uni... If i hadn't, I would've finished earlier)

Kelly

It is my suggestion that, if you want to sample Anne Rice, and have never read any of her other works, this may be the book you want to read instead of her most famous novel, "Interview with a Vampire." let me explain."The Vampire Lestat" is quite a different novel from the first in the series, because we are dealing with an entirely different vampire than the depressed and vulnerable Louis from Rice's first book. Don't get me wrong, Lestat was the antagonist in Interview but towards the end of the novel you start to think maybe that's not the case. That single thought pushed me to read his story to find out why Lestat was the way he was.I LOVED learning about where Lestat came from and also finding out about ALL of the ancient vampires, all the way back to the very FIRST vampire. In Lestat's story, the reader goes throughout the centuries, as he meets other vampire's who tell their tales. This book feels like a world tour that goes back to Ancient Egyptian times, to classical Rome, to pagan Europe, to the times of the French Revolution, to an old, decaying (slightly creepy I might add) Parisian cemetery and back up to the present time. It was FUN to follow Lestats journey to find the truth..the same truth that Louis was always searching for, but never found. The entire story is fascinating and spans centuries as Lestat grows from a fledgling vampire into the emotional, lonely, angry, and finally carefree vampire he is upon setting foot on a San Francisco stage to perform his first rock concert in front of 15,000 screaming fans. (Yes, Lestat is a Rock star in the 1980's in this book! My first thought to that was, "Whatever!" But then it made sense.)Lestat now gets a chance to tell his OWN story, and it makes us (the reader) realize that he has suffered even more than Louis and shows that he is not a villain; he is the tragic hero of sorts. He is actually far more aware than Louis, something else that Louis doesn't see either. He is a gentle, innocent, thoughtful young man who has suffered so much in his life, and then he is forced into becoming one of the living dead, who now must kill to survive. It is explained to us why Lestat is the way he is and why he does the things he does which is truly interesting.When you read "Interview with a Vampire" you don't know then that Lestat is misunderstood by Louis, and therefore misunderstood by the reader, whom is seeing the story through Louis' eyes. The glimpses of Lestat we have in Interview with the Vampire, of his relationship with his father, of the way he acts, of his charm that Louis finds both attractive and repulsive, of his love of bright artificial light and his desire to live luxuriously, of his friendship with a young musician, of his doting upon Claudia and showering her with gifts, of his fear to lose Louis, of him emotionally distraught and pleading with Louis to come back to him in Paris (which I didn't understand at the time), and finally of the frail, broken, and pitiful shadow of a man he has become by the end of Louis's story, where Louis finds him again in New Orleans. All of these things are hints at the depth and complexity of the character of Lestat. In The Vampire Lestat, you will finally see the entire picture, and see the masterpiece of a character that Lestat is. The depth and the multi-dimensionality, and the humanity of Lestat. If you liked Louis before, you will still like him. But you will like Lestat even more because you will see how completely misunderstood he is and learn the story of the pain and sorrow he kept hidden in his heart, hidden underneath that charming facade that Louis encountered on his plantation in 1791. You will start to understand HOW Lestat could act the way he did towards Louis and Claudia which was the answer to the questions I was seeking in this book so I closed the covers of this book satisfied.

Jao Romero

I've read Anne Rice's "Interview..." and "Lestat" long before I realized I actually liked these romantic blood-suckers. My better-half drew out my interest in them. Like a lot of things I disliked before and now like, vampires for me has become something which I count as how much my wife has changed me.I still remember how I felt after reading Lestat's story, how that brief glimpse in an immortal's life and psyche made me felt somehow -- connected.I read "Lestat" long ago, yet it's only now that I truly understand what Lestat was griping about when he said that: the world is a savage garden. If I meet Lestat right now, I'd say to him: I feel you man. I understand why you hate God.I mean for godssakes, he was given a gift/curse (depending on how you view it) which he did not want, and in which he was able to experience what many mortals were unable to experience. To view man's suffering in the flow of time, to be their predator and share their grief, to have lived a millenia and reached a point where he actually longed for death...Truly who wouldn't cry out to heaven and say: you made the world a savage garden, for what purpose, you unfathomable prick?Anne Rice's discourse on heaven and earth, the angels, and God's reason for creating man, in her other book "Memnoch," made me feel Lestat's pain more. And yet, when given that choice to either side with God or with Satan, Lestat chose God.And this is how Lestat's savage garden truly comes full circle.To have lived his life and know eternity and despair, seen in the eyes of an immortal, the view of the world can certainly one that can be called: a savage garden. A garden where you can see the most beautiful roses, pick one up, and be pricked by its thorns.It's the paradox of life. Pain makes life bloom unlike any other emotion we can experience.---To see the world in a grain of sand, and heaven in a wild flower,Fuck fate which isn't in your hand, and curse God and his damn power.

Michelle

TL;DR - it's worth reading if you enjoy the franchise, the characters, and are willing to self-edit (that is, skip the repetitive expositions).Although I read this book when it was first published, and reread it a time or two in the intervening decades, most recently I "read" this book as an audio book, which is an interesting test for a book. The book is in the first person, so listening to it heightens the effect of Lestat telling you his story; however, I hadn't realized how much of the pontificating I usually skipped over when rereading the book in print. At times during the narration I wanted to stop Lestat and tell him, "I get it--you've made your point. Move along, please." I had forgotten the endless exposition about the nature of good and evil and spirituality, and I had forgotten how much Lestat verges on being a "Mary Sue" (an overly idealized character). His flaws are extensive, some of which even acknowledged in faux-self-deprecation, but somehow everyone loves him despite these flaws, and forgives him the most outrageous transgressions, which always end up benefitting him.The character of Gabrielle has always been more interesting to me than Lestat. Where his extreme extraversion annoys me, her uncompromising introversion attracts. Where Lestat's transformation to vampire leads him to endless ruminations about the need to love humans and humanity, his dependence on and need of them, the utter lack of meaning in a life without the love of humans, Gabrielle uses her transformation to free her at last from the demands and needs of others. She sticks around for a few transitional decades to try to wean her son into adult independence, but ultimately puts her own selfhood first. Detaching to look at the structure of the book, the tale within a tale is carried too far, and by the time Lestat meets up with Marius, I was snorting as I counted the layers, as we have Lestat, who tells us the tale of himself listening to Marius, as Marius relates the tale of Marius listening to the tale of the Egyptian priest, who relates the story of Those Who Must Be Kept. There may have been another layer in there, but who can keep track? While the individual embedded stories were interesting, they also felt like a massive info dump, to give us the necessary background to appreciate the amazing specialness of Lestat, when he is the one to whom the Queen (silent and unmoving for centuries) responds.If you're going to read this book for the first time, make sure you have the next book "Queen of the Damned" ready, as "The Vampire Lestat" ends in a cliffhanger.

Share your thoughts

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *