Status
Available
Call number
Collection
Publication
Ballantine Books (1991), Edition: 15th printing, Mass Market Paperback, 352 pages
Description
Fantasy. Fiction. Horror. Thriller. HTML:40th ANNIVERSARY EDITION ā?¢ From the #1 New York Times bestselling author, "a magnificent, compulsively readable thriller...Rice begins where Bram Stoker and the Hollywood versions leave off and penetrates directly to the true fascination of the mythā??the education of the vampireā? (Chicago Tribune). ā?¢ The inspiration for the hit television series The time is now. We are in a small room with the vampire, face to face, as he speaksā??as he pours out the hypnotic, shocking, moving, and erotically charged confessions of his first two hundred years as one of the living dead. . . He speaks quietly, plainly, even gently . . . carrying us back to the night when he departed human existence as heirā??young, romantic, cultivatedā??to a great Louisiana plantation, and was inducted by the radiant and sinister Lestat into the other, the "endless," life . . . learning first to sustain himself on the blood of cocks and rats caught in the raffish streets of New Orleans, then on the blood of human beings . . . to the years when, moving away from his final human ties under the tutelage of the hated yet necessary Lestat, he gradually embraces the habits, hungers, feelings of vampirism: the detachment, the hardened will, the "superior" sensual pleasures. He carries us back to the crucial moment in a dark New Orleans street when he finds the exquisite lost young child Claudia, wanting not to hurt but to comfort her, struggling against the last residue of human feeling within him . . . We see how Claudia in turn is made a vampireā??all her passion and intelligence trapped forever in the body of a small childā??and how they arrive at their passionate and dangerous alliance, their French Quarter life of opulence: delicate Grecian statues, Chinese vases, crystal chandeliers, a butler, a maid, a stone nymph in the hidden garden court . . . night curving into night with their vampire senses heightened to the beauty of the world, thirsting for the beauty of deathā??a constant stream of vulnerable strangers awaiting them below . . . We see them joined against the envious, dangerous Lestat, embarking on a perilous search across Europe for others like themselves, desperate to discover the world they belong to, the ways of survival, to know what they are and why, where they came from, what their future can be . . . We follow them across Austria and Transylvania, encountering their kind in forms beyond their wildest imagining . . . to Paris, where footsteps behind them, in exact rhythm with their own, steer them to the doors of the ThĆ©Ć¢tre des Vampiresā??the beautiful, lewd, and febrile mime theatre whose posters of penny-dreadful vampires at once mask and reveal the horror within . . . to their meeting with the eerily magnetic Armand, who brings them, at last, into intimacy with a whole brilliant and decadent society of vampires, an intimacy that becomes sudden terror when they are compelled to confront what they have feared and fled . . . In its unceasing flow of spellbinding storytelling, of danger and flight, of loyalty and treachery, Interview with the Vampire bears witness of a lit… (more)
Media reviews
The author's seriousness is honest, I think, but misplaced; perhaps a bit more Grand Guignol elegance was called for father than incessant philosophizing. Immersed in the book's fetid, morbid atmosphere - like being in a hothouse full of decaying funeral lilies - one longs to get out in the garden.
User reviews
LibraryThing member Murphy-Jacobs
It was 1978 and I was visiting my aunt and cousins in the mountains of North Carolina. My older cousin, Karen, was away being a teenager (Bible camp, I think) and I slept in her room while she was gone. I had a new color-in blacklight poster, the black flocking untouched, and a precious Peter
I finished it some time early in the morning, slept through most of the day, and that afternoon, opened it up and read it again. Later that week, when she got back from camp and was brushing her teeth (30 minutes with baking soda) I negotiated a trade with Karen -- my Peter Frampton poster for the book. I had to have it. I almost had to throw in the blacklight poster, but Karen was a bigger Frampton fan than I was.
For a 13 year old in the late 70s, Interview was heady, heady stuff. I could barely remember Dark Shadows, had seen perhaps half of some cheesy Dracula movie, and tended to think of vampires in terms of Count Chocula and Grampa from The Munsters. Yarbro hadn't crossed my radar and possibly wasn't in my local library. This book? This was dark and passionate, sensual and sexual, intoxicating and mysterious, unbearably sad, deeply angry. Yeah, a lot for a 13 year old to drink in.
How exactly do I convey my memory of Rice's New Orleans velvet heat? How do I describe my mental vision of Louis (who looked nothing like Brad Pitt) and Lestat (who looked like anyone but Tom Cruise!)? I can't recount the speeding heartbeats that echoed in my ears as I read. I don't remember pages or words or text at all. I floated ghostly over the streets of Paris, witnessing depravity and cruelty and obsession, love and sacrifice, touching the satins, feeling the breath. The novel caressed my skin and whispered to me.
Nothing else I've read by Rice -- and I did try -- achieved the power of this outpouring of madness and grief. I've read the book several times since that particular summer of hair rock and Hardy Boys and, while I'm aware it has flaws (the angst! Oh, the angst!) none of them affect that smokey music and incense infused darkness the book still has. It opened the door to the now tired and wrung-out sexy-vamp trend, set the tone for a genre, took vampires out of their Victorian euphemism and innuendo, and produced them anew in the imagination, more violent, more real, and certainly more deeply wired into the psyche and body. While it harkens to those earlier versions in penny-dreadfuls and B movies, it doesn't lean on them or owe them much for its existence (certainly not the way much of the modern genre lean on it).
For me, it will be always locked into place in a certain summer on a narrow bed under the poster of a long haired guitarist.
Show More
Frampton poster I'd bought with my allowance. My other cousin, Lynn, and I spent hours roaming the wilds around the trailer and giggling over Shaun Cassidy and her passion for KISS. Karen had this book sitting on the floor next to her bed. One rainy afternoon while Lynn was doing something else and I was bored, I picked it up and started reading.I finished it some time early in the morning, slept through most of the day, and that afternoon, opened it up and read it again. Later that week, when she got back from camp and was brushing her teeth (30 minutes with baking soda) I negotiated a trade with Karen -- my Peter Frampton poster for the book. I had to have it. I almost had to throw in the blacklight poster, but Karen was a bigger Frampton fan than I was.
For a 13 year old in the late 70s, Interview was heady, heady stuff. I could barely remember Dark Shadows, had seen perhaps half of some cheesy Dracula movie, and tended to think of vampires in terms of Count Chocula and Grampa from The Munsters. Yarbro hadn't crossed my radar and possibly wasn't in my local library. This book? This was dark and passionate, sensual and sexual, intoxicating and mysterious, unbearably sad, deeply angry. Yeah, a lot for a 13 year old to drink in.
How exactly do I convey my memory of Rice's New Orleans velvet heat? How do I describe my mental vision of Louis (who looked nothing like Brad Pitt) and Lestat (who looked like anyone but Tom Cruise!)? I can't recount the speeding heartbeats that echoed in my ears as I read. I don't remember pages or words or text at all. I floated ghostly over the streets of Paris, witnessing depravity and cruelty and obsession, love and sacrifice, touching the satins, feeling the breath. The novel caressed my skin and whispered to me.
Nothing else I've read by Rice -- and I did try -- achieved the power of this outpouring of madness and grief. I've read the book several times since that particular summer of hair rock and Hardy Boys and, while I'm aware it has flaws (the angst! Oh, the angst!) none of them affect that smokey music and incense infused darkness the book still has. It opened the door to the now tired and wrung-out sexy-vamp trend, set the tone for a genre, took vampires out of their Victorian euphemism and innuendo, and produced them anew in the imagination, more violent, more real, and certainly more deeply wired into the psyche and body. While it harkens to those earlier versions in penny-dreadfuls and B movies, it doesn't lean on them or owe them much for its existence (certainly not the way much of the modern genre lean on it).
For me, it will be always locked into place in a certain summer on a narrow bed under the poster of a long haired guitarist.
Show Less
LibraryThing member clackermuffin
Starts very slowly, picks up a bit, and then heads straight to a predictable conclusion. Horror has to be written exceptionally well to get past its basic silliness (a vampire telling its story to a journo!) but Rice never really manages it. She possesses talent but it's wasted on this sort of
Show More
nonsense. Lestat is nowhere interesting as she thinks. Show Less
LibraryThing member LisaMaria_C
I was drawn in from the first page. The conceit is that Louis, made a vampire by the sinister Lestat in 1791 New Orleans, is telling his life--or rather after-life story to an interviewer known only as "the boy."
One of the reasons I found this a riveting read is that Rice writes in a clean,
Another part of what makes this vampire story unusual is that it is about the education of a vampire in what he is and how to survive. Few vampire stories I've read are from the vampire's point of view. They're either books of those trying to flee or fight them or those in love or lust with the glamorized, eroticized version Rice did so much to promote. Louis is interesting in that he never fully gives up his humanity. This makes him an apt narrator into the vampire world he shares with Lestat--and later his companion Claudia, a vampire they made forever trapped into the body of a five year old girl.
That last is one of the creepiest aspects of the novel--the adult, sensuous and sexual person within a child's body. And goodness, Louis can be tediously emo at times. But it's mostly a good read and seminal in the genre and still strikingly original in several respects--I'm glad I read it. I'm not however motivated to read more in this series.
One of the reasons I found this a riveting read is that Rice writes in a clean,
Show More
transparent style, yet one lush with sensory detail--very atmospheric in ways that brought alive 18th century New Orleans and 19th Century France. Another part of what makes this vampire story unusual is that it is about the education of a vampire in what he is and how to survive. Few vampire stories I've read are from the vampire's point of view. They're either books of those trying to flee or fight them or those in love or lust with the glamorized, eroticized version Rice did so much to promote. Louis is interesting in that he never fully gives up his humanity. This makes him an apt narrator into the vampire world he shares with Lestat--and later his companion Claudia, a vampire they made forever trapped into the body of a five year old girl.
That last is one of the creepiest aspects of the novel--the adult, sensuous and sexual person within a child's body. And goodness, Louis can be tediously emo at times. But it's mostly a good read and seminal in the genre and still strikingly original in several respects--I'm glad I read it. I'm not however motivated to read more in this series.
Show Less
LibraryThing member DeborahJ2016
Read this my Freshman year of high school- just when the world is nearly at its most dramatic *EVER* and you empathize so much with Louis and Lestat that you want to *BE* just like them and Anne Rice is a genius for being so soulful and truthful and no one else could possibly underSTAND your pain
And then you watch Buffy for several years and realize that Spike AND Angel would have laughed themselves *sick* over Louis' navel-gazing ("Dude, if you're so depressed over being a vampire, just go knock on Faith's door and flash some fang- she'll dust you in a New York minute!") and rolled their eyes over Lestat's psycho-babble.
But, still, it captures that "Beautiful/Lonely/Deadly" kind of feeling- and many of today's ParaRom books owe their very existence to this book and its sequels.
Show More
and anguish except these glorious, beautiful creatures of the night.And then you watch Buffy for several years and realize that Spike AND Angel would have laughed themselves *sick* over Louis' navel-gazing ("Dude, if you're so depressed over being a vampire, just go knock on Faith's door and flash some fang- she'll dust you in a New York minute!") and rolled their eyes over Lestat's psycho-babble.
But, still, it captures that "Beautiful/Lonely/Deadly" kind of feeling- and many of today's ParaRom books owe their very existence to this book and its sequels.
Show Less
LibraryThing member hrissliss
While the book did get better - worlds better - by the end (probably because Louis stopped whining) it was still just bad writing. Self indulgent, is the term I'd prefer. No one writes in that style unless they want to look like they're being "dated" when in fact they are anything but. It's
My most definable objection to the work as a whole, and probably the most nitpicky, was her constant, abrupt jumps to 'present day' and the interviewer. The audience only has to be told once that there is a framing story. They do not need to be jerked out of the narrative repeatedly to make the point. Much like Big Fish. He did the same thing there. She stopped later in the story, which also might be a reason why I enjoyed the latter half more than the first.
This is another one of the few books which I enjoyed better as a movie. They did a lot of editing and interpretation to shrink it down to the time they did, and I think it helped. Much of the book was lost in purple prose descriptions of objects and events which would have been better if summarized briefly. More of an impact.
I'm happy I read it, still, since I like knowing the type of writing which is currently 'best selling', and trying to understand why popular things are popular. My tastes just missed with this one. Severely. I don't think I was even looking at the same target. 1/10
Show More
pretentious in a(n amusingly) low class way.My most definable objection to the work as a whole, and probably the most nitpicky, was her constant, abrupt jumps to 'present day' and the interviewer. The audience only has to be told once that there is a framing story. They do not need to be jerked out of the narrative repeatedly to make the point. Much like Big Fish. He did the same thing there. She stopped later in the story, which also might be a reason why I enjoyed the latter half more than the first.
This is another one of the few books which I enjoyed better as a movie. They did a lot of editing and interpretation to shrink it down to the time they did, and I think it helped. Much of the book was lost in purple prose descriptions of objects and events which would have been better if summarized briefly. More of an impact.
I'm happy I read it, still, since I like knowing the type of writing which is currently 'best selling', and trying to understand why popular things are popular. My tastes just missed with this one. Severely. I don't think I was even looking at the same target. 1/10
Show Less
LibraryThing member mercyrain
Anne Rice is probably one of _the_ classics to read among vampire fiction so I probably sound very blasphemous to say I enjoy the Hollywood film versions of her books much more than the books themselves. Stylistically, I find her so caught up in the minutia that the flow becomes cumbersome to read.
Show More
There are evidently plenty who enjoy this, and when I first started reading this, I bought up a large number of her books, but they've all since been given away, many of them unread. This title only remains in the library because it was a gift. Show Less
LibraryThing member Citizenjoyce
Probably good for the time it was written, full of different views on vampires, ennui and debauchery. Read in the 21st century it's rather boring and pointless, though Rice seems to think she's saying a good deal about good and evil.
LibraryThing member synesthesia
This may have been the "book that started it all" but had this been the first of Rice's books I read, it would've been the last. It took me years to read it, I was so bored by it! DEFINATELY not Rice's best work.
LibraryThing member lunaverse
Vampires. Angst. Blood. Lust. Love. A plantation. A little girl. A coven. A writer. An interview. Some stuff in between.
LibraryThing member 1morechapter
ā āI wanted love and goodness in this which is living death,ā I said. āIt was impossible from the beginning, because you cannot have love and goodness when you do what you know to be evil, what you know to be wrong. You can only have the desperate confusion and longing and the chasing of
Iāve always been afraid to read this book or watch the movie. I donāt do well with the horror/supernatural genre in general, but since I liked Twilight and LOVED Dracula, I thought I might as well try Anne Riceās book for the R.I.P. Challenge. I read it in a period of only two days. It was sufficiently creepy, much creepier than Twilight of course, but not nearly as bad as I feared it would be. I actually enjoyed the book much more than I thought I would, as I am a complete wimp when it comes to this genre.
Minor spoilers aheadā¦.
First of all, Iām surprised that this was Anne Riceās first book. Itās very well written, and from everything Iāve heard and read online, itās probably her best novel. The main characters ā Lestat, Louis, and Claudia ā really do come āaliveā on the page (hee hee ā little vampire joke there). I found Claudia to be especially creepy and am looking forward to seeing how well she is portrayed by Kirsten Dunst in the movie. I hated Lestat at first, but I did feel sympathy for him in the end. It did seem that he cared more for Louis than he let on, and vice versa. Louis does seem to be a mystery, always wanting good and hating himself for the evil he does. I am glad that weāre left wondering a bit if the āloveā he has with Armand, though, is erotic or simple companionship. If itās the former, Iām glad Rice wasnāt explicit in this regard. Iām very curious to see how these relationships play out on screen with Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt, and Antonio Banderas. Interesting casting choices there! Iāve read that Rice was pleased with the movie so thatās encouraging.
Iām not sure if Iāll continue to read any of Riceās other novels in the Vampire Chronicles, but I am interested in her latest religious books and her memoir. Iām intrigued by her turning from atheism to Christianity and do want to find out more about that aspect of her life.
Show More
phantom goodness in its human formā¦ā āIāve always been afraid to read this book or watch the movie. I donāt do well with the horror/supernatural genre in general, but since I liked Twilight and LOVED Dracula, I thought I might as well try Anne Riceās book for the R.I.P. Challenge. I read it in a period of only two days. It was sufficiently creepy, much creepier than Twilight of course, but not nearly as bad as I feared it would be. I actually enjoyed the book much more than I thought I would, as I am a complete wimp when it comes to this genre.
Minor spoilers aheadā¦.
First of all, Iām surprised that this was Anne Riceās first book. Itās very well written, and from everything Iāve heard and read online, itās probably her best novel. The main characters ā Lestat, Louis, and Claudia ā really do come āaliveā on the page (hee hee ā little vampire joke there). I found Claudia to be especially creepy and am looking forward to seeing how well she is portrayed by Kirsten Dunst in the movie. I hated Lestat at first, but I did feel sympathy for him in the end. It did seem that he cared more for Louis than he let on, and vice versa. Louis does seem to be a mystery, always wanting good and hating himself for the evil he does. I am glad that weāre left wondering a bit if the āloveā he has with Armand, though, is erotic or simple companionship. If itās the former, Iām glad Rice wasnāt explicit in this regard. Iām very curious to see how these relationships play out on screen with Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt, and Antonio Banderas. Interesting casting choices there! Iāve read that Rice was pleased with the movie so thatās encouraging.
Iām not sure if Iāll continue to read any of Riceās other novels in the Vampire Chronicles, but I am interested in her latest religious books and her memoir. Iām intrigued by her turning from atheism to Christianity and do want to find out more about that aspect of her life.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Aerrin99
I didn't quite know what to expect with this book. I've seen the movie, I've heard the hype, and I'm not sure I would have ever picked it up had it not been given to me by someone who's taste I trust very much. In some ways, this book surprised me. It was slower than I expected, although not in a
It does several things that appeal to me very much. The first is that it captures atmosphere, and personality, beautifully. In places the language of the book feels over-heavy, but its central conceit - that it is entirely told in the words of a man born in the eighteenth century, now over two hundred years old - not only explains this, but helps build and shape it into something really interesting.
The second is related, in that Interview spends a great deal of time asking very interesting questions about the nature of immortality, morality, and human nature. Does a man ever escape the age in which he is born? Can he? How much change can a person accept before they are unwilling or unable to accept any more? When time means nothing, what then does life, or death, really mean? What /does/ hold meaning? Can there be good or evil when one lives outside of these confines?
Louis is an insufferably emo narrator at times (although it's this quality that gives us so many interesting questions posed with such convincing inner turmoil), and the book gets much better when first Claudia, and then Armand appears. Every character in this book is drawn for some purpose, to explore some question or aspect of nature, and it gives me the feeling that there is a great deal beneath the surface, if I wanted to dig.
I have mixed feelings about this book, I suppose, but in the opposite manner from my usual. Typically, I find myself racing through a book, adoring it in the read, and then finding the faults upon reflection. This book was a slower read, not as instantly engaging, but I find myself more and more invested in it the more I think about it, or talk about it. I was hindered a bit, I think, by the movie - which is actually such an excellent adaptation of what occurs in the book that much of the need to find out what happens next was stolen away.
I can see why these books are considered to be classics of their genre, and I will probably pick up at least The Vampire Lestat to see where it goes.
Show More
bad way. This is a book that takes its time in building a time and place and atmosphere that wraps you up completely. It's not a book I could skim, or read while distracted. It's a book that demanded I immerse myself in it, and that I pay attention or get lost in the language.It does several things that appeal to me very much. The first is that it captures atmosphere, and personality, beautifully. In places the language of the book feels over-heavy, but its central conceit - that it is entirely told in the words of a man born in the eighteenth century, now over two hundred years old - not only explains this, but helps build and shape it into something really interesting.
The second is related, in that Interview spends a great deal of time asking very interesting questions about the nature of immortality, morality, and human nature. Does a man ever escape the age in which he is born? Can he? How much change can a person accept before they are unwilling or unable to accept any more? When time means nothing, what then does life, or death, really mean? What /does/ hold meaning? Can there be good or evil when one lives outside of these confines?
Louis is an insufferably emo narrator at times (although it's this quality that gives us so many interesting questions posed with such convincing inner turmoil), and the book gets much better when first Claudia, and then Armand appears. Every character in this book is drawn for some purpose, to explore some question or aspect of nature, and it gives me the feeling that there is a great deal beneath the surface, if I wanted to dig.
I have mixed feelings about this book, I suppose, but in the opposite manner from my usual. Typically, I find myself racing through a book, adoring it in the read, and then finding the faults upon reflection. This book was a slower read, not as instantly engaging, but I find myself more and more invested in it the more I think about it, or talk about it. I was hindered a bit, I think, by the movie - which is actually such an excellent adaptation of what occurs in the book that much of the need to find out what happens next was stolen away.
I can see why these books are considered to be classics of their genre, and I will probably pick up at least The Vampire Lestat to see where it goes.
Show Less
LibraryThing member dragyn
Re-reading this as an adult I find it doesn't have quite the same shine it did when I was younger. Still a good book but a little drawn-out and frustrating. I can't help but feel for Louis as his world slowly collapses around him but at the same time I can't stop wondering why he just sits
Show More
passively back and lets it happen to him, the damsel in distress. Show Less
LibraryThing member MrsLee
A long dreary monologue of a male vampire. Navel gazing at its finest. Mansplaining comes to mind. OK, there is more to this book than that, obviously, or so many people wouldn't love it, but after reading half the book and not having the tone or focus change, that was enough for me. I tired of the
Show More
bloody killings, the vampires stuck in the rut of their unhealthy relationships and on and on. The story had sucked enough of my time as it was. Show Less
LibraryThing member Kristelh
Anne Rice has taken the ancient legends and brought them to life with her eroticism and violence. The story is told by Louis in an interview one night to a person referred to as āthe boyā. Louis has been a vampire for 200 years and has immortal life. Louisās story introduces us to Lestat,
Show More
where it begins for Louis and then Claudia. Through Louisās story, the reader learns the price of immortality. Louis is unlike other vampires. He has doubts, he believes that what he does is evil and he has a conscience. I for one, unlike others in the book, know that life as a vampire is not anything to be desired. I would not want to be deprived of the light of day and to endure the loneliness of a solitary isolated life. The characters were interesting. You could have some sympathy even if only for short periods of time for the various vampires but overall, it was pretty difficult to have any attachment to these unattached beings. The author has great skill in making a subject so horrible feel erotic. There were themes of love between men, love between a man and child but of course, Vampires donāt have sex except as they kill. Their love is different. Some would complain that the sentences were too filled with details but the author achieves the creation of an image of this dark world. I thought the book was easy and fast to read. Itās not my kind of book. Itās a first in a series but I wonāt be reading the rest. I did like this quote from 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die by David Punter, āā¦we find ourselves immersed in a nighttime world that sometimes seems to be the negative image of the world we perceive through our limited human senses.ā Show Less
LibraryThing member amcheri
I read this book many, many years ago and wondered if I'd enjoy it as much now as I did then. I mostly did. I was a bit disappointed with Simon Vance's narration, though. That surprised me. I've loved his work on several other books but not this one.
I'm glad I reread the book but have no desire to
I gave it 3.5 on BookLikes.
I'm glad I reread the book but have no desire to
Show More
keep going with the series. I gave it 3.5 on BookLikes.
Show Less
LibraryThing member shieldsk2
One of the sexiest books I have ever read. Full of crisp descriptions and moody as hell.
LibraryThing member bfrazier02
After reading the Twilight saga and falling in love with vampires, I couldnāt help but pick up Interview with the Vampire while shopping at Borders. Little did I know that this book, bought on impulse, would keep me up all night reading, and leave me sad to say goodbye when it finally ended.
Told by the point of view of the main vampire Louis Anne Riceās choice of how the story was told made Interview with the Vampire all the more interesting. Because the story was told in first person by the vampire whose life the main focus, I was able to hear his thoughts, feelings, and actions during events in the novel. This made the story all the more entertaining because it had a human approach to everything going on. Although Iām not a vampire, because this story was told by its main character, there was a more realistic feel to the novel that made me keep reading.
My favorite part of the novelā¦well, thatās going to be difficult to decide. I think itās a tie between the characters or the setting. The way Anne Rice created the characters made them seem real. Or, as real as vampires in the 19thcentaury could possibly be. Their personalities, physical traits, and real-life qualities all make these characters seem to come alive. On the other hand, the way Anne Rice created the setting made it feel as though I could smell the flowers in New Orleans or hear the sirens and chatter in Paris. I was so captivated in the setting that even I, a person who normally skips over long paragraphs filled with descriptions, found myself reading word for word of that same paragraph I used to skip. So, to be honest, itās going to have to be a tie between these two great parts of a really good novel.
Had it not been for my impulsive judgment to buy this book, I would have missed out on one of the most gripping and thrilling adventures of my summer. Although I am not, nor have ever been, a 19th century vampire, I felt as though I was through the descriptive and captivating writing of Anne Rice. This was one of those books that left wanting more and hoping for a sequel. And I would recommend it to anyone and everyone who enjoys a good read. Especially those who love the concept of vampires.
Show More
Interview with the Vampire, written by Anne Rice, is a rare book that captivated my interest from the start, and held me on the edge of my seat until the very last word on the very last page. Told by the point of view of the main vampire Louis Anne Riceās choice of how the story was told made Interview with the Vampire all the more interesting. Because the story was told in first person by the vampire whose life the main focus, I was able to hear his thoughts, feelings, and actions during events in the novel. This made the story all the more entertaining because it had a human approach to everything going on. Although Iām not a vampire, because this story was told by its main character, there was a more realistic feel to the novel that made me keep reading.
My favorite part of the novelā¦well, thatās going to be difficult to decide. I think itās a tie between the characters or the setting. The way Anne Rice created the characters made them seem real. Or, as real as vampires in the 19thcentaury could possibly be. Their personalities, physical traits, and real-life qualities all make these characters seem to come alive. On the other hand, the way Anne Rice created the setting made it feel as though I could smell the flowers in New Orleans or hear the sirens and chatter in Paris. I was so captivated in the setting that even I, a person who normally skips over long paragraphs filled with descriptions, found myself reading word for word of that same paragraph I used to skip. So, to be honest, itās going to have to be a tie between these two great parts of a really good novel.
Had it not been for my impulsive judgment to buy this book, I would have missed out on one of the most gripping and thrilling adventures of my summer. Although I am not, nor have ever been, a 19th century vampire, I felt as though I was through the descriptive and captivating writing of Anne Rice. This was one of those books that left wanting more and hoping for a sequel. And I would recommend it to anyone and everyone who enjoys a good read. Especially those who love the concept of vampires.
Show Less
LibraryThing member a_crezo
The movie failed to do this book justice in any way whatsoever. In fact, so did the movie for Queen of the Damned, which was a complete abomination and had almost nothing to do with the story at all (save the character's names, I think).
LibraryThing member LaurenGommert
This is the first book of the Chronicles that I read and I love it! Louis narrates which provides us an intimate, otherwise unseen, view of Lestat's true nature. Louis isn't my favorite character, but his story is amazing, and of course, learning more about Lestat's early years is enticing. The
Show More
novel spans from Louis' birth into the blood through current day. And, as always, Anne Rice's story telling is outstanding! Show Less
LibraryThing member Cecrow
Louis' story is a very human portrayal of a vampire's education and experiences, from rebirth in immortal form to the present day some two hundred years later. It is also one of moral angst. "It struck me suddenly what consolation it would be to know Satan, to look upon his face ... to know that I
I've little interest in vampires, but within thirty pages of Anne Rice's first novel her smoothly flowing prose captured me. The entire narrative is presented as dialogue, so that we are always in the framing story. This sometimes has a jarring effect. Despite all the quotation marks as reminders, something said in the context of the frame often required a moment to reorient myself. There's a simple remedy I'm surprised the author didn't use, but I grew accustomed to her approach. Louis' dark ruminations might occasionally be too frequent or too prolonged, but the novel always kept me engaged and exceeded my expectations.
Show More
belonged to him totally, and thus put to rest forever the torment of this ignorance." His greatest horror isn't that he thrives on drinking blood, but that in becoming a vampire he might have been condemned to embodying evil. Can a vampire exist as a moral being and live in good conscience, or is his only recourse to renounce all concern for human morality as Lestat appears to have done? Claudia represents a third approach: transformed at too young an age to assemble a mortal's mind frame, the question simply doesn't interest her. Only Louis cannot leave it alone. The interview serves as self-assessment, "the boy" his sounding board.I've little interest in vampires, but within thirty pages of Anne Rice's first novel her smoothly flowing prose captured me. The entire narrative is presented as dialogue, so that we are always in the framing story. This sometimes has a jarring effect. Despite all the quotation marks as reminders, something said in the context of the frame often required a moment to reorient myself. There's a simple remedy I'm surprised the author didn't use, but I grew accustomed to her approach. Louis' dark ruminations might occasionally be too frequent or too prolonged, but the novel always kept me engaged and exceeded my expectations.
Show Less
LibraryThing member EmScape
This is a tale more philosophical than active. While Rice has a rich mythology to draw from, she seems rather too preoccupied with the nature of the vampire vs. the nature of humanity. Is her protagonist damned at the start, or must he earn it?
While Part Three ends with a climax, and Part Four
While Part Three ends with a climax, and Part Four
Show More
should contain a denouement, it's more a rambling about pain and loneliness than any kind of wrap-up of the book's plot. I only intend to read the rest of the series because I am quite taken with the Taltos and am aware that the series merge. Show Less
LibraryThing member Bookmarque
If I pick up one of Riceās early Vampire Chronicles, I inevitably read it all the way through. Itās been many years since I read Interview though. Even now I can remember the first time I read it. Completely absorbed me. I remember my contempt and growing hatred for Lestat. His arrogance and
From this vantage-point, however, it is hard to read the tale with that fresh perspective. I know Lestat through and through now. His exploits and motivations are ingrained on my memory and knowing his backstory makes me understand him more and sympathize with Claudia and Louis less.
They do deserve some sympathy though. Itās obvious now that Lestat was both using them to mark time as per Mariusās request, and experimenting with them; pushing the boundaries he so loved to push. He also needed to forget Gabrielle, Nicholas and Armand.
His silence about his origins and motives, as well as his silence about his and Louisās newly formed species is needlessly cruel. So much could have been avoided if he just unbelted with some info. And he had plenty after having searched for and found Marius, not to mention his time with Armand. But, giving so much of his power away would have made Lestat unbearably vulnerable in his eyes, so he kept silent.
The creation of Claudia was just him pushing the boundaries. I think in the next book he says he did it merely to see what would happen. A spur of the moment dare in the face of all that was vampire proper. When he wasnāt immediately struck dead or lit out after by other vampires, he got bored with it. Then when she came to hate him, it was already too late. I donāt blame Claudia her hatred. And Louis was no help. He was just overwhelmed and doing the best he could.
One aspect that never struck me before was Armandās longing for Louis and how terrible it would have been for Louis to know that he was a second choice. If Armand couldnāt have Lestat as acolyte and companion, he would take Louis. Also, I bet that Armand saw a lot of Nicholas in Louis and hoped that he could save this second of Lestatās āchildrenā. In the end, I think he did. The pain of Claudiaās death would have eaten Louis alive.
But instead of Louisās decline, we get that of Lestat. The first time I read it, I was mystified as to why he would ensconce himself away in a moldering mansion living off of the blood of alley cats. I didnāt know the desperate self-loathing he lived with that drove him to these fits of unworthiness. Not long after Louis leaves him and his new acolyte as well, I know that Lestat goes into the earth a second time.
If only the rest of the series were as good as Interview and Lestat.
Show More
petty cruelty made me nearly as angry as they did Claudia and Louis. Riceās use of language was unlike any other I had read up to that point. I suppose her prose is a bit purple, maybe a silver shade of lavender, but it is gorgeous and rich, too. Her ability to place you on the very spot is uncanny. By the time I finished it the first time, I had a romantic notion of wishing it to be true; vampires among us, living lives of quiet desperation.From this vantage-point, however, it is hard to read the tale with that fresh perspective. I know Lestat through and through now. His exploits and motivations are ingrained on my memory and knowing his backstory makes me understand him more and sympathize with Claudia and Louis less.
They do deserve some sympathy though. Itās obvious now that Lestat was both using them to mark time as per Mariusās request, and experimenting with them; pushing the boundaries he so loved to push. He also needed to forget Gabrielle, Nicholas and Armand.
His silence about his origins and motives, as well as his silence about his and Louisās newly formed species is needlessly cruel. So much could have been avoided if he just unbelted with some info. And he had plenty after having searched for and found Marius, not to mention his time with Armand. But, giving so much of his power away would have made Lestat unbearably vulnerable in his eyes, so he kept silent.
The creation of Claudia was just him pushing the boundaries. I think in the next book he says he did it merely to see what would happen. A spur of the moment dare in the face of all that was vampire proper. When he wasnāt immediately struck dead or lit out after by other vampires, he got bored with it. Then when she came to hate him, it was already too late. I donāt blame Claudia her hatred. And Louis was no help. He was just overwhelmed and doing the best he could.
One aspect that never struck me before was Armandās longing for Louis and how terrible it would have been for Louis to know that he was a second choice. If Armand couldnāt have Lestat as acolyte and companion, he would take Louis. Also, I bet that Armand saw a lot of Nicholas in Louis and hoped that he could save this second of Lestatās āchildrenā. In the end, I think he did. The pain of Claudiaās death would have eaten Louis alive.
But instead of Louisās decline, we get that of Lestat. The first time I read it, I was mystified as to why he would ensconce himself away in a moldering mansion living off of the blood of alley cats. I didnāt know the desperate self-loathing he lived with that drove him to these fits of unworthiness. Not long after Louis leaves him and his new acolyte as well, I know that Lestat goes into the earth a second time.
If only the rest of the series were as good as Interview and Lestat.
Show Less
LibraryThing member les121
Extremely creepy. Suspenseful and entertaining from the first page to the last.
LibraryThing member SweetbriarPoet
I don't think I want to continue this series. Although I like the idea and the way the story began, all of the philosophical moments felt contrived. I thought it would have been much more successful if the story was just told, and the audience left to draw their own conclusions from the actions.
Show More
Instead, the main character becomes flat and whiny, almost someone I didn't care about one way or the other. Although this might have been the point of indifference in the book, I doubt that Rice was wanting to take it so far. I had hoped I would love the storytelling- but, for me, it was too apparent, too in-your-face with the good versus evil tidbits. Lacking in depth. Show Less
LibraryThing member AdonisGuilfoyle
My blood lust for reading about vampires has been well and truly sated, but I had to give Interview with a Vampire a try before moving on. The film adaptation, with Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise, has never appealed to me - Hollywood gothic doesn't really work - but the original novels are such a classic
In the foreword to my library edition, Audrey Niffenegger suggests that Ann Rice 'discovered' the 'existential despair, the tedium and attractions of immortality, the moral quandaries of the vampire diet'. And interviewee Louis is certainly a literary template for vampire angst - he never shuts up! For three hundred pages, give or take incidences of death, destruction and relocation to a different country, Louis harps on mortal sin, God and the devil, love and hate, the beauty of life, the futility and torture of immortality, and how lonely undeath can be. Whenever Lestat threatened to put an end to his 'suffering', I was thinking, 'Yes, please, do!'
The premise of a centuries-old vampire telling his story to a 'modern day' mortal is simple and satisfying, and Louis' narrative voice is a suitable blend of nineteenth century formality and cynical experience, but his 'existential despair' gets boring very quickly. I prefer the truly evil vampires, like Lestat, who accept what they are and kill to survive, not dithering do-gooders who don't want to hurt anyone. Get over yourself, Louis. And pint-size vampirette Claudia, who does have a valid complaint after all, is a disturbing character - a grown woman trapped in the body of a five year old. I had trouble imagining what she would look like, dressed up like a doll and coming onto Louis (*shudder*).
Although this is only the first novel in the series, Interview must be the last nail in my vampire coffin. I have absolutely no desire to read about Lestat or Armand, sorry to say!
Show More
staple of the genre, that I felt like I was missing out in some way. In the foreword to my library edition, Audrey Niffenegger suggests that Ann Rice 'discovered' the 'existential despair, the tedium and attractions of immortality, the moral quandaries of the vampire diet'. And interviewee Louis is certainly a literary template for vampire angst - he never shuts up! For three hundred pages, give or take incidences of death, destruction and relocation to a different country, Louis harps on mortal sin, God and the devil, love and hate, the beauty of life, the futility and torture of immortality, and how lonely undeath can be. Whenever Lestat threatened to put an end to his 'suffering', I was thinking, 'Yes, please, do!'
The premise of a centuries-old vampire telling his story to a 'modern day' mortal is simple and satisfying, and Louis' narrative voice is a suitable blend of nineteenth century formality and cynical experience, but his 'existential despair' gets boring very quickly. I prefer the truly evil vampires, like Lestat, who accept what they are and kill to survive, not dithering do-gooders who don't want to hurt anyone. Get over yourself, Louis. And pint-size vampirette Claudia, who does have a valid complaint after all, is a disturbing character - a grown woman trapped in the body of a five year old. I had trouble imagining what she would look like, dressed up like a doll and coming onto Louis (*shudder*).
Although this is only the first novel in the series, Interview must be the last nail in my vampire coffin. I have absolutely no desire to read about Lestat or Armand, sorry to say!
Show Less
Subjects
Awards
British Fantasy Award (Nominee — August Derleth Fantasy Award — 1977)
Gaylactic Spectrum Award (Nominee — Hall of Fame — 2001)
Language
Original publication date
1976-05-05
Physical description
352 p.; 6.85 inches
ISBN
0345337662 / 9780345337665
Local notes
The Vampire Chronicles 1