Interview with a Vampire part two

Hello and Good evening,

For this week's blog, I am going to talk about the latter part of the novel “Interview with a Vampire” by Anna Rice and the essay “Anne Rice and the Queering of Culture” By:  George Haggerty.  This blog assignment was to finish the novel and to read this essay and analyze it while answering a series of questions.

    My favorite part of the book was the ending.  The ending concluded that the vampire did not succeed to prove his point of being a vampire because of the reactions of the boy asking to change him into a vampire.  To me, the best part is at the ending after he wakes up from being bitten by this vampire named “Louis”:

    “When he heard the vampire's voice, he leaned forward, listening very carefully, then hit the button again for another place and, hearing that, still another.  But then at last his face brightened, as the reels turned and the voice spoke in an even modulated tone: “It was a very warm evening, and I could tell as soon as I saw him on St. Charles that he had someplace to go...”
    And quickly the boy noted:
    “Lestat...off St, Charles Avenue.  Old house crumbling...shabby neighborhood.  Look for rusted railings.”
    And then, stuffing the notebook quickly in his pocket, he gathered the tapes into his briefcase, along with the small recorder, and hurried down the long hallway and down the stairs to the street, where in front of the corner bar his car was parked.” pg.340

    This part of the book was the ending of the story where The “Boy” leaves to find Lestat most likely with the objective of being turned into a vampire himself so he can experience the supernatural powers and immortality that a vampire has.

    If I was the “Boy” interviewing “Louis”, the vampire, I would have a different reaction to what happened in the actual story.  I would go with the different path because I believe that eternal damnation is worser than immortality.  Immortality is never actually certain because there are many ways that vampires can be killed and once you are killed, you are not going to heaven.  So a question I would pose is do you think that the pros over come the cons or the cons over come the pros.
   

George's Haggerty essay talks about how the novel “Interview with a vampire” and about anne rice and one main topic in George Haggerty's Essay: “Anne Rice and the Queering of Culture” goes on is Homosexuality.  Homosexuality is, according to Haggerty, is present all through the book:

    “Rice may well be tapping the Vampiric past in her delightfully lurid tales, but she is also tantalizing the homophobic present with her sleek and sultry undead.  It strikes me that the homoerotic of Rice's vampires are at least as culturally telling as anything that happens in Byron, or LeFanu, or even Stoker.  Rice makes her vampires homoerotic bonds that surface everywhere in Rice's Vampire Chronicles function as part on the self-consuming culture that has produced them.  For Auerbach, “Rice's infraction of the final Stoker-instigated taboo brings a special electricity to Interview with a Vampire, giving its predators a glamour more socially engaged vampires lack” (154).  Glamour is part of what Rice's gorgeous creatures and late-twentieth-century cultural conservatism.  To understand this relationship we need to answer several questions...”

    Saying this, George Haggerty point of view is saying that through Anne Rice's Vampire books, a series of homophobic showings that are presented in this novel and in particular, the book we just finished reading, “Interview with a Vampire.”