Prince Lestat: The Vampire Chronicles

This is not going to be a review. I don't do reviews. These are my thoughts, or reflections if you like, on Prince Lestat. Read at your own risk. There may be possible SPOILERS here and there, so all of you sensitive lovelies, consider yourselves warned!Anyway, I am not going to play a vivisection on this book, dissecting every chapter either to ease my own frustration with this literary production or marvel at its genius, which by the way there is none. But.... it was not a bad book - comparing to Blood Canticle, for instance -, it was not a good one either, when you juxtapose it with such gems like e.g. Interview with the Vampire, Vampire Lestat or Tale of the Body Thief.So, my rating for Prince Lestat is the good solid 2.5.As I observed every "reviewer", positively or negatively inclined towards this book, felt a need to include "whys" before he or she proceeded with the "review" as if to make themselves even more qualified to "review" Prince Lestat. So be it, but I am doing this for a different reason... Yes, I read all the books in the Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles series, as well as her the Witching Hour series, and a few stand alone novels from which Cry to Heaven is my favourite of them. And yes, in my younger days I was a huge fan especially of the Rice's Vampire Chronicles. So out of the sheer sentiment for the older days and my true love for the characters I continue reading the Vampire Chronicles. At this point though, I think it's important to stress on the fact that I am a fan of a few of her books, and NOT Anne Rice herself, a subtle yet important difference here! I don't make idols of anyone or anything. And I am one of those people who believe that books once published become immanent beings, dear writers! So, if anything, I'll remain loyal to the book (story, character, etc.), never to its author, another subtle yet meaningful difference. The history of literature proves that the former is always the better, both for the book AND for its author.PART ONE OR WHO IS THIS BOOK FOR REALLY?This is a crucial question and important one. And the answer might help some profoundly disappointed and frustrated with the book readers to let go of this said frustration. Or maybe not. Heh.The answer is: it's strictly for the most devoted and loyal fans of Anne Rice, her absolutely diehard fanbase. And judging by her facebook page, it's a huge one! Her fans will absolutely love the book. And they will call it a masterpiece, simple as that. But let it not upset you! Also, what can you expect from such a book? Lots of fillers, and well, just anything and everything! Let it not upset you either! I am not saying it to taunt anyone. Anne Rice herself said it's the book about the Immortals and what they have been doing now. And well, this is pretty much what you get, literally, chapters after chapters about new and old vampires (with some new random mortal character - or two - thrown in, because why not?) and their background stories with some new information thrown here and there. And before you start on "the Voice". Forget all about it! The Voice is just a prop here, a convenient writer's excuse, which becomes less and less important to the story as Lestat becomes more and more powerful and beautiful, as if this "more" was still even possible on all accounts. And who said these chapters about vampires need to have something do with the plot? No one.. except that guy in your Creative Writing class! The fans wanted to hear about their darlings, they had waited for it since Blood Canticle (in which not even Louis was mentioned!) and they "literally" got it! Also, there was absolutely nothing about the Church and that Catholic preaching in the book (which HEAVILY filled, directly or indirectly, pretty much all Rice's vampire installments since Memnoch the Devil), so it's a double win! Again, who cares that these chapters had barely - or none - impact on the (main?) plot? No one, so far as the diehard fans are concerned.Besides, maybe, just maybe, this book is not founded on the plot structure? It's more like Anne Rice came up with the crisis in the vampire world just to visit new and old vampires, poke around, and ask them questions about their lives and all that, you know, the usual Anne Rice's "Interview with the vampires" style. And the sad truth is that had there been no Voice, nothing that much interesting would have been going on in their lives at all, except for the usual stuff: writing poetry and buying scented candles, playing with their mobiles phones (which brand I deliberately refuse to name here lol) and fetishizing the said mobile phones, buying expensive clothes obligatory from internationally known designers, visiting some exotic places and marvelling at the beauty and goodness of the world and themselves. And the way these vampires speak about the world! It's odd and awkward and not convincing. As if they were looking at the world from a far, from the windows of their expensive mansions. They speak of the world as if it was the bizarre yet absorbing painting by Hieronymus Bosch - detached from reality, divorced from it! Now how's that for a true impotent and idle decadence!And those readers who counted on some proper action and bloodshed and "evilz" vampires, well, they got disappointed of course. Then again, had there really been some true action in the Vampire Chronicles? Fighting Akasha? Maybe... Lestat chasing his Body Thief? Perhaps... You want action and vampires? Read the Strain series by del Toro. This is Anne Rice and her (auto)biographical approach to vampire mythos. I mean you must have known what you get yourself into, no?PART TWO OR WHY IS EVIL GONE?Now, my other favourite subject which the reviewers of the said book like to sink their teeth into: "Ricean vampires and how "evil" they are, and how Prince Lestat ruined it". I don't think Prince Lestat ruined anything in this department. But perhaps it is me and my non-catholic, non-religious perspective. I've never looked at these vampires from this "tainted" Christian angle. Perhaps I missed something? And I don't think Anne Rice had ever intended her vampires to be evil evil, no matter how much of that catholic moral angst and dilemma were thrown into the books, ultimately all of those were just for the colour and spice. Her vampires are dangerous alright, perhaps now even less than in the past but dangerous nonetheless, not evil though. Truly, the moment Anne Rice's Interview with the Vampire hit the bookstores, it was the end of the 19th century literary vampire and the beginning of the over-romanticization had begun. I am sure I need not to remind you again that this is Anne Rice and not Bram Stoker? We are talking about her "darlings" here after all. "Yes, yes, but her Interview with the Vampire, Vampire Lestat, Lestat and Louis or Armand, were they not vampire bad boys there? Those books had dark depth, anguish, questions, and more!" I hear you saying. Yes, these books have "depth, height and width" alright. But truly, how "evil" Lestat is in those? Are her vampires evil? Is Lestat a "monster"? I mean, really? Is he? And what kind of "evil" do we deal with here? Of course, it's not the time for discussing this all in depth here but...vampire in folklore is evil, in literature he's a dark and deadly lover - frightening yet much desired fantasy. Or, as Anne Rice likes to interpret vampire - a metaphor for the outsider in all of us. Dracula (in the book, not in movies!) is a monster, Hannibal Lecter is a monster... Lestat - if anything - is a ROMANTIC and over-romanticised "monster", a Ricean variation of Bronte's Rochester and other Bronte's Heathcliff, with fangs and peculiar diet, and of such physical beauty that it's now virtually hard to even imagine him, and with such massive wealth that could sponsor Estonia's annual national budget. But is he evil? No. You wouldn't like "evil", you would not root for evil. You would not fall in love with....evil. Besides, there's a difference between evil and evil in Literature. Literature filtered it, synthesised it, polished it, romanticised it (where needed), or ultimately, rejected it altogether. And this is what Anne Rice has done officially in Prince Lestat, rejected the notion of Evil or evil, whatever it was to her. Fair enough, it's her Licentia Poetica.Anyway, the point of this paragraph is, in case you missed it or I failed to deliver it, that there had never been a place for "evil" in Anne Rice's world of vampires, only for the moral ambiguity. So, it's nothing I already wouldn't have seen coming, and that is.. Lestat and vampires now calling themselves "People of Moon and Stars" or whatever. Do I like it? Of course not. Why? Because we've been the witnesses of not the development of the vampire characters (mind you, some of them are ancient vampires, they should know better!) and their spiritual and ethical struggles, but those of Anne Rice's herself! And Anne Rice is a mortal lady in her 70', and now Lestat is a mortal lady in her 70'. I cannot shake off this image now. Lestat is an American petite lady in her 70' - this is what I see when I think of Lestat now. How sad is it? And I know there's always a bit of writer in character he or she brings to life, but when the author's persona obscures the character, it is the death of the character, ladies and gentlemen.PART THREE OR PHYSICAL BEAUTY AS THE VISUAL INDICATOR OF MORAL GOODNESSI'd prefer if Anne Rice stayed with this moral ambiguity theme rather proceeded with the total and ultimate beatification (through even more physical "beautification") of her vampires which some reviewer had the nerve to, imagine that, compare to Vergil's Aeneid! And another reviewer concluded it's like "supernatural Hollywood, where everyone looks good and is so old that sin isn't interesting any more, so now all they're bothered about is being nice to everyone so they'll get a good obituary." Well, I am not sure I subscribe to this "sin" thing, but generally it is quite a fitting analogy of the state of affairs (and vampires) in Anne Rice's Vampire world. The world which - to continue with this analogy (and as we read in the review) - she "turned into something resembling a Beverly Hills retirement home where absolutely everyone's had tons of plastic surgery." And this is one one of my "nah" to Prince Lestat. In the first three (or four, if you include the Tale of the Body Thief) this moral ambiguity was the source of inner conflicts for many of Anne Rice's characters. The author used to be able to skillfully build a story around those inner conflicts and thus make her vampires...believable and story interesting. All this magic is gone in Prince Lestat. There's no inner conflict here, there's no inner struggle. Vampires are too busy with admiring each other's physical beauty, rehashing old stories (for new readers?) and talking how much they love each other...and Lestat, of course. Anne Rice decided that all the moral struggle, this ambiguity, is unnecessary and waste of time. And, you know, I could even agree with it because I never viewed them as "the evil" in the first place, but then again, as a child I was not fed with that christian dichotomy of good and evil. But Mrs Rice didn't offer anything interesting and equally engaging in exchange! Instead she decided that only humans are capable of "evil". Now, it's terribly convenient for vampires since mortals make to the top of the list of the vampire menu, so producing an excuse to kill them is in order here, no? As many other reviewers pointed out, once you're deemed an "evildoer" (aka "food") there's no chance for redemption for you and you're served as a dinner after which our dearly beloved vampires get back to talking about their great love for each other, new clothes, the Voice, and our buddy Benji and his annoying radio station (I have no doubt, Rice's son's radio station's the inspiration for this funny idea) and how deep and profound the previous Vampire Chronicles are... So, vampires are the Good People of Darkness now while it's the humans who are capable of being "evil"-doers at worst, at best "nincompoops". Judging the logic of the story, this is so weak, needless to say, a total shift in the Rice's vampire world paradigm. Judging the Ricean vampires, they're damn big hypocrites and so far as I am concerned they can kiss my mortal arse!More, all vampires are beautiful, and not just beautiful like Miss Universe, they're spectacularly beautiful! They are good, naturally, understanding, and dozen other flattering adjectives. Vampires, who died, and who were less fortunate in this physical department, now come back to us as outstandingly beautiful ghosts! Yes, death does not exist in Anne Rice's world, unless of course, you're an evildoer. Ahh, and of course, all mortal evildoers are ugly by proxy.PART 3 AND ¾ OR RICE'S VAMPIRES AS RUSSIAN UPSTARTS!Another thing that simply irritated me in the book was the constant product placement! Anne Rice's vampires seem to pay much attention to the brands! It is absolutely mandatory for them to wear Armani or own an iPhone! They pay attention to material goods and what brands they wear like celebrities do, and not even those interesting celebrities who happen to be also talented actors like, I don't know, Johnny Depp.. but more like the Kardashians or Russians nouveau riches!!! I get they can afford best stuff, and there are dozen ways to describe those damn clothes so that the reader wouldn't have doubts they're luxurious! But, honestly, I really do not care for the label tags on their clothes! And I dare to say it's quite lame, tacky and not in the good style to show it all off constantly on the pages of the book! Unless, Anne Rice herself is a label tag fetishist.PART FOUR AND FINAL...OR PARADISE REGAINED, MONARCHY ESTABLISHED, AND AMEL TO RULE THEM ALL!SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!And now kids we're going to talk about my greatest issue with the book - the twisted ideology Mrs Rice served her readers.Once the Evil and any moral struggle are banished from the Paradise, so far as the vampires are concerned, and the Villain is defeated which simply was not a big deal really because the Voice turned out to be a good guy...just lonely, miserable and quite conscious all this time spirit Amel seeking a better host..namely...Lestat.Lestat, to my surprise or maybe not really, decides that he's the King now, well Prince (whatever) who then established, nothing more and nothing less, a monarchy. And everybody else (and I mean EVERYBODY AND EVERYONE), to my great surprise, agrees to both monarchy and Lestat as the King of - pay attention now - "Tribe" as he calls the "vampire species" now. My question is... why monarchy? I suppose that to a mortal fantasy reader (or writer) the idea may seem appealing... but to a few millennia old vampire? Really?Anyway, this `Tribe" of "People of Moon and Stars" decides to have the Kingdom of Love now (considering they've been loving each other the entire book, it's not that surprising)...and its monarch "Prince Lestat" is - pay attention for a bit more - essentially controlled by Amel the Spirit. What a beautiful utopia! And this is one of my biggest issues with the book. In "Queen of the Damned" we learn that once Amel got into Queen's and King's blood "he was no more". He lost his consciousness and became one with the first vampires. In Prince Lestat we not only learn that he had been conscious all the time but also that he can control the minds of all vampires and that all vampires are in fact "his strain", therefore....no free will! Anne Rice uses some really tortuous scientific argumentation to explain that Amel is some physical and not a supernatural being. And now I can only think of some alien species. I don't know about other readers but for me it ruined completely the Ricean concept of Vampires - they are vampires no more! They're not even individuals to me any more! They're the collective consciousness of the Alien Amel!And Lestat? Is it even still Lestat? Or is he just Amel's host now? Oh, yes, he reassures Louis that despite all the things that happened he's still the good old Lestat. Can we believe him? We may find out in Rice's next installment "Blood Paradise", or we may not. Rice made Lestat her ultimate hero, he's the King now, he came to save all the vampires and they all now worship him like a.....god But Frank Herbert says, "beware of heroes. Much better rely on your own judgment, and your own mistakes". He also warns us to "not give over every decision-making capacity to a charismatic leader". Well, especially a charismatic leader who's a vampire and who's got the alien attached to the back of his brain. The alien who can kill any time and anywhere any vampire he wants...As for the future? Well, like one of my friends wrote: "I don't see Lestat when I read now, I only hear Anne. Lestat is a content, rich old woman." So yeah, we're going to be getting more of this...

In 1976 Ms Rice published Interview with the Vampire (IWTV). While on the surface a Gothic horror tale, Rice opened for us the world of the "undead" which would yield ten novels, collectively known as "The Vampire Chronicles."What distinguishes Ms Rice's writing is her meticulous attention to detail, historical research, imagination and character development. There is also a relentless existentialism that leaps from the first pages of IWTV and continues through the present work.The world and characters of Rice's creation are more than stock figures used in superficial plots and to satisfy the reader's taste for violence. The violence is in many ways incidental and part of their existence (as well as ours). Each character is a complex persona with virtues and tragic flaws. They manage to possess a unique literary equivalent of leitmotif wherein their very presence brings forward a unique representative account forged in the time and culture in which they were "made." Spanning six thousand years of history, they struggle to come to terms with their strange powers and the evil acts that must sustain them. They must live in a world dominated by humans. And despite their accumulated, power, wealth and knowledge they cannot escape themselves and the times in which they were created immortal. Each is a creature of his/her aeon.When reading IWTV I was reminded of Jean-Paul Sartre's (1905-80) "No Exit" (1944). This existential play concerns three dammed souls locked inside the same room in hell for all eternity. They have been placed in this room to make each other miserable. This nihilistic existence negates hope.The same maddening tension is found throughout Rice's work yet she refuses to give in to Sartre's nihilism. There must be some purpose, some trajectory and above all, some hope. In Prince Lestat, we revisit the outlandish actions of an unwilling hero. Lestat recklessly serves his own will which is driven by mid-enlightenment and pre-revolutionary French aristocratic ideals. His actions awaken Rice's cast of characters to deal with Sartre's trap. Their room may be the world, their surroundings tailored to their comfort yet try as they may they cannot escape each other or the common source of life that at once mystifies, terrorizes and binds them.A crisis has occurred that threatens to destroy them. Their estate is a mirror of enigmatic life force, Amel, trapped in a mindless body and trying to break out and forge a destiny and identity for itself. This Amel's life has been characterized by disorientation and confusion as it interacts and enters into a world that for him is meaningless and absurd. And now Amel is trapped in Sartre's eternal hell, alone, unable to become by acting. His only connection to the outside is tangential to the lives of the beings that depend upon its existence.The true horror here is not the blood, burnings and destruction but the abject hopelessness and sense of uncertain meaning that pervades the existence of Amel and Rice's vampires. In shuffling off their mortal coil, they too have lost much of the human experience which, in turn is tangential and elusive. Out of this mire Rice raises a hero whose capacity to overcome lay not merely in his substantial power but in the force of his mind and will which is driven by the dreams and ideals of the dawn of modernity. Yet there is a problem. Lestat is a rugged individualist who, unable to break out, has turned inwards. Can a modern man rise above circumstances far greater than he knows? Will he achieve victory as a Nietzsche übermensch or find a better way?Underlying the existential trap is the problem of immortality itself. While many of the modern vampires in Rice's world have chosen this Faustian bargain, those like Lestat and many of the elders did not. Lestat describes his "making" as a rape. In addition to the root crisis involving Amel and the most ancient of these creatures, Rice has created a new type of vampire. This new vampire seeks immortality for either virtue or vice. There is a generational conflict paralleling the hyperbolic changes in human society, philosophy and science. It brings both promise and chaos and raises another important theme in Rice's work: the ethics of a finite immortal creature.The Czech playwright Karel Čapek (1890-1938) explored the tragedy of immortality in his 1922 Věc Makropulos (The Makropulos Affair) which was later made into an opera by Leos Janáček. This is a tragedy of a teenage girl whose father was a Greek physician commissioned to create an elixir that would give immortality to whoever drinks it. The problem was that it was dangerous and the dose had to be repeated in 300 years. Makropulos' daughter was healthy enough to survive the treatment and was left as a lone immortal, banished and forced to make her way from the 16th Century world of her birth into the turn of the 20th century.While a summary of Čapek's play is beyond the scope of this review, the heroine faces the same dilemma as Rice's immortals. They range from the practical challenge constantly having to move on, change identity, preserve wealth and live undetected as the world is becoming more sophisticated and hiding becomes harder. She is of unprecedented beauty and drives men mad. Three hundred years of singing opera has allowed her to become the greatest singer of all time - a giant with almost superhuman capacity. She loved once and offered her father's potion her mate but it killed him.Ms Marty, as she known in the play, is discovered and reports that although she lives on her soul died long ago. She has had offspring, many lovers and fantastic lives. Loss, through death and estrangement is inescapable for her. She is cold, cynical and dead inside. She is now physically dying and needs the formula which is unknowingly tied up in a 100 year old estate legal case. As she rapidly approaches death, desperate to regain her father's formula for eternal life, the sheer ugliness and horror of her living death unfolds. She embraces death and offers the formula to her adoring understudy who promptly burns it.Immortality has the same attractions and problems for Rice's characters. We are introduced to a host of brilliant and virtuous people who wish to use their immortality to gain knowledge and improve the lot of the undead. Yet they must live with continual loss of the humans in their lives and the madness that often accompanies their association. There seems to be a basic incompatibility between vampires and human that transcends the former having to hunt and prey on the latter. What is their place in the order of creation? What is the role of the immortal among the mortal? While immortality offers much whatever joys it brings are highly dependent upon mortal activity in art, music, science, technology and luxury. Mortality dives growth, change and creativity while immortality stagnation. At the same time human development threatens the very existence of the vampiric world as technology makes potential their discovery and undoing.Thus with the opening of Price Lestat we have all these forces and issues coming to the fore. Rice crafts a tapestry with each chapter focusing on the experience and reflections of her different characters from the past and some new. This trajectory is no less than the sweep of 6000 years of human history, meticulously researched and woven together. As many a fine novelist before her, Rice patiently interlaces these individual trajectories in the setting of how the crisis is affecting creatures whose age varies from a few years to the dawn of civilization.In Price Lestat vampiric history is being driven towards a common τελιος (telios - end result). It is relentless and inescapable. The characters and our hero do not create the events but are swept up in them. In order to bring the full force and import forward Rice must painstakingly draw each line. Some have found this tedious but such is the art that brings a meaning to the work above that of a simple horror novel. Nothing less than the meaning of existence and life itself is in play.To those who have been critical of Rice's efforts in this regard I will remind them that the great novelists of the 19th century and early 20th century commonly used this technique. Dostoevsky's Brothers Karamazov comes to mind. It is the lengthy character, plot and philosophical development that make this a masterpiece and not a simple family murder mystery. "If there is no God then all things are permissible."Some have critiqued Rice for retelling the stories from her previous novels. Again, these are the trajectories that create the tension and finally the climax. In Wagner's finale of Der Ring des Nibelungen, Götterdämmerung, much of the opera is spent singing the tales of what has happened before. The weavers of fate, the Norns, sing the story for us and we know the tragic end. The hero Siegfried spends much time recounting his life before he is murdered by Alberich's son Hagen. We hear Alberich's voice echo in Hagen's head ("Hagen mein sohn") liken to Amel's voice haunting the vampires and convinces them to murder.The telling and retelling of stories and common history is one means by which people groups have formed and maintained their identity. So it is with the efforts of the "new Vampires" to forge an identity around these events and tales. This is the basis of the third great theme of the book: the formation of distinct and unified people out of a heretofore heterogeneous individuals.The tensions in such works under-gird seemingly simple plots and transform them into works of great depth. Otherwise you are left with empty violence and death.Many modern authors have chosen the nihilistic path. Martin Amis comes to mind. Common in recent lauded novels are the senselessness and meaningless of life. Violence and tragedy become void of context and there is no resolution, no redemption for the human characters. Their experience leaves them empty and the stories often lack moral virtue and a sense of direction and purpose. Such works are a sad commentary on the lack of hope in the human experience. Indeed, they are more dehumanizing than Rice's vampires.Ms Rice will have none of this. She is a secular humanist who has tremendous faith in mankind to overcome his failures and morbid estate. She is uncompromisingly optimistic and places her hope for her creatures in the vestiges of their humanity and will to transcend the muck and mire. Will the hero, Lestat, wild, reckless and unpredictable, rise to the occasion? The vampiric Valhalla is doomed to burn and fall along with its old gods. Is this the end or a new beginning?The redemption of the vampiric world is in its discovery of its place in creation. It is not a true-redemption, impossible in the Christian sense, but redemption through the rejection of nihilism and Sartre's "No Exit." It is a redemption based in the hope of a better humanity. The vampiric world will have to learn to live in harmony with itself and with the world around it. This includes humanity which it must be symbiotic as well as strange new creatures, who are themselves emerging and finding their way and place. In this way, Rice's vampires serve as a muse for mankind. As the Rheingold is returned to the Rhein maidens the leitmotif from the opening of Wagner's cycle signals a new beginning and restoration of order, Prince Lestat ends where the chronicles begin - the leitmotif of Louis de Pointe du Lac. Where the future leads is right now left to the reader's imagination. Perhaps there will be a new set of Chronicles where the challenges, victories and failures will be played out. Will there ever be a final exit for these creatures other than self-destruction? We shall see.

Attempted to read Blood Canticle recently, after years of not reading any Anne Rice (read the first five of the Vampire Chronicles years ago, plus Pandora and Vittorio the Vampire) but could not finish it. I lost interest in the whole thing pretty quickly.Yet, somehow, I decided to give this one (Prince Lestat) a try, as it seemed more promising, what with all the other characters from previous books popping up.It started off well; I was intrigued.. Some interesting back-stories, relationships... but then, 3/4 through, I started to realize the whole thing was not really going anywhere.Where is the tension, really?So I got to the point of asking myself:What the heck was going on?Do I care?I dropped the book then, because sometimes the penny takes a long time to drop, for me.Book was just disappointing: a waste of time.Giving it two stars because for brief moments I was happy to read about the fate of other, secondary characters.

The title says it all, really. I feel like Ms. Rice is so in love with her rambling prose, and her editors so terrified of saying anything against her, that her books become bloated with endless pages of introspection, countless points of repetition of the concepts she's obviously quite proud of, like the 'Savage Garden' philosophy. Much moping and whining from Lestat himself, inevitably, but interesting for the POVs of so many other supremely powerful vampires. This whole world Ms. Rice has created is incredible - I just wish her characters would get up and DO something from time to time!

Without even turning the page I am writing a review of this book.I was under the impression Anne Rice had 'hung up' her Vampire Chronicles hat in favour of her returning to the Catholic faith after years of being an Atheist.. so hadn't been following her for quite a few years..Yesterday I decided to google her and review her book list... thankfully!! Ordered the 3 Prince Lestat books and saved 5 others I know I've not read - I had read ALL her books - Vampire Chronicles, Mayfair Witches and the Beauty trilogy - and then stopped... when I thought she had!I now look forward to a feast of enjoyable reading!

Oh my! What a sublime experience. After a hiatus of over 10 years during which her writing has varied between the awful and the excellent (the latter being the wolves duet) the queen of the damned is back on top form and bringing together the disparate strands of her vampire mythos. We see here many of the characters about whom she has written previously, including Pandora, Armand etc, but there are also new and exciting additions including Benji and Faheed. She has also used this volume to develop the history of the Talamasca in a way few could have determined.This is not a book for the casual reader who is not steeped in the vampire mythos, Rice assumes a considerable fore-knowledge of the characters and their history, but for an afficianado of her vampire books this is simply a beautifully cut gem of a book. The structure of the book makes the denseness (a word?) of the text and complexity of the inter-relationships easy to manage and extremely rewarding.This feels very much like her finale to the world of vampires, with the tribe being shaped and Lestat assuming a role at the head of it, but even if this is the case the book has drawn threads together from the last 12 books, with a nod to the witches trilogy, with great skill and apparent ease.In closing- if you have read the majority of Anne Rice's vampire works you simply cannot miss this.

Where is the writing flare of Interview of the Vampire, Pandora, Blood and Gold and Armand ?This is my first Vampire Chronicle read since 2010.NB: Listening to the audiobook (must finish for a Book Challenge but thinking of bailing)The narrator is excellent however the book needs more editting down to be a more coherent read. Too many minor characters*Can't comment under the audiobook on the American site due to not purchasing enough there 🙄 yet have spent 100s €€s on the UK site (still Amazon) on phyical books and on audible purchases since the Lockdown.