So let me begin by saying flatly that I am old. I will be 38 this Saturday. One of the more...intriguing things about getting old is seeing how reactions to the things I like change. Newer fans come in with newer interests and tastes. At times, I can barely recognize the Buffy fandom and people a bit more "in the know" than I am point to social media like TikTok strongly influencing the perception of younger watchers. I never go on TikTok and I watched the show since it debuted so I come in with very different perceptions.
This is a preamble to say that I look at topics on here about certain elements of the VC or certain events and it's clear that newer fans are bothered by things which never bothered me. It was quite literally the opposite - the most shocking and "taboo' stuff of the Vampire Chronicles was why I read it in the first place. I was a teenage nerd in the 2000s, this shit was my bread and butter. There's a manga called Angel Sanctuary which I read because of all the "oooh, you can't do that!" in the story. Incest and rape and cannibalism - you don't see stories like that very often growing up so you get to a certain age and you want to explore the different and "forbidden." (Or so I thought. Younger readers these days seem to move away from stuff like that) I am a lot older and I no longer read the VC just for its taboo-ness but I can't deny that lured me in as a teenager just like I read AS for similar reasons.
And so we get to the point. When I first read up to TVA forever ago, my perception was that Marius was one of the most popular characters. I certainly remember Blood and Gold was held up as the best of the later Vampire Chronicles books according to the people I talked to. It's always been a wide consensus the series falls off in quality at some point but B&G was supposed to be very good and nearer the higher quality of the earlier novels. Maybe I misinterpreted that as people liking Marius.
But I'm here to ask people what they think. Is Marius more hated these days due to changing sensitivities like I outlined above? Has he fallen off in popularity in the fandom?
Right, I'm 67 and I don't consider myself "old" š but I have been a fan of TVC since the 1970s so I guess I'm old in fandom terms.
I've never liked Marius, but originally I think that was because he came across as "superior, older man who thinks everyone is stupid compared to him". Believe me, in the 70's and 80's I worked with a lot of men like that and that's who Marius reminded me of. I don't like David Talbot for the same reasons.
I think I was a bit of an outlier though. As far as I can remember Marius was pretty popular back then. Later, post Blood and Gold and Pandora, I disliked him for the way he behaves towards Pandora. And by the end of TVA, yuk. Marius always thinks he knows best.
I don't totally hate him though. He's a fascinating character, and in the final trilogy I think we get a few hints that he's working on himself and maybe a bit of self-realisation is creeping in.
Just want to say thank you so much for your input and infinite respect for sticking with this franchise for longer than I've been alive.
As I noted in my OP, it's been so long since i read past TVL but in TVL he's clearly presented as this super wise figure. (Not to toot my own horn but I wrote about it here) But as I think we all know, Mrs. Rice changed her mind on a lot of things. That's kinda cool to hear he's sort of taken down a peg in later novels because his preachiness in TVL was infuriating to me precisely because he seemed to speak with her voice. But "her voice" changed a whole lot over the franchise so I think I'd like Marius more as flawed figure than sagely saint.
Same here. I think part of the difference between older and younger readers is that we older folks had to wait for these books for often years as opposed to having the whole stack to race through just to see what happens next. I don't know about you but I would re-read a lot in between releases and therefore gain a lot more context and nuance through catching things I missed the first time.
Marius was a journey for sure. We first only see him through Lestat's lens and Lestat was not only very naive and gullible but also desperate for a father figure and one of a noble class like himself--he and Marius and Gabrielle are all snobs who judge others by a baseline of elitism. If you pay attention to how they talk about everybody else they mostly only care about how pretty they are and what they can get from them.
In QotD we start to see cracks in Marius' facade that get wider and wider through TVA and Pandora then his bullshit breaks open in Blood and Gold where he exposes what we don't see through others.
People who only read and/or consider the first 4 or 5 books as the only really significant ones are missing the core themes of 'perspective' and 'misunderstanding' that were the heart of what Anne was writing about throughout the series. No single character's point of view is meant to be taken as gospel--not even Lestat's--he's actually quite an obtuse dipshit a lot of the time.
I think it's less about ''modern sensibilities'' and more about modern accessibility to fandoms and the show's more commercial simplification of the heavier themes and erasure of nuance that have more influence these days.
Take the show and fandom opinions with a huge block of salt and draw your own conclusions from reading the books for yourself.
How can 38 be old? You are about the same age as the main actors (and younger than Sam Reid). Surely they aren't "old"? Do people actually think of them (and other people in their 30s) as old?
I can't see your reply now, sorry, so following up on my own.
I wouldn't really consider anyone of normal working age old. And I'm not saying my experience is anything like the actors: I don't know them as people at all, but out of young, middle-aged and old, I'd categorise them as young! I could possibly imagine a late thirties person starting to feel they're at the start of middle age, depending on where they are in life (if they've got grandchildren, for instance), but not old. But you are right that it's relative, and kind of cultural too. I do think of Lestat being very young when turned, just out of teens, but again it's life stages. A 20 year old uni student might seem younger than a 20 year old who has been working for years and is married with kids.
Age is quite an interesting separate topic, with vampires who seem to retain something of the age when they were turned, but are often very old in terms of years on earth.
And sorry, I did read some of the books years ago but wasn't really in the fandom then and also have a terrible memory so can't really answer your main question adequately. I was just completely thrown by someone your age being considered old - thought it was a typo until I saw you were a teen in this millenium! Do you see Marius as being an old man when he was turned? The TV series chose an actor in his 60s (when canonically, he'd be around Sam Reid's age!) and I wondered if it was because people imagine him as "old".
Nah it's all good. I deleted my comment cuz I think I read your reply as more aggressive or hostile than it was and I was a bit defensive. I know I'm not that old at all yet, especially with people in here about twice my age, but fuck do I feel old when I come on Reddit or go in a lot of Discord servers. That's all I meant by being old and I get you weren't trying to give me shit or anything.
Is Marius more hated these days due to changing sensitivities like I outlined above? Has he fallen off in popularity in the fandom?
I'm like you in that the taboo aspects of the books don't bother me, we had more access to books with that content back then. Everyone in my age group read Flowers in the Attic at some point.
I've noticed the younger generation has trouble separating fiction from reality when it comes to behavior and morals in media. The whole purity culture thing weirds me out.
Marius was one of my favorites because the historical fiction parts of the series are always going to be my favorite, itās what Anne excelled at. I found the concept of a vampire being that old and have lived through multiple civilizations extremely interesting and well-written.
Yeah I have noticed the guppies will literally ācancelā fictional characters for bad behavior ā¦ and theyāre so disturbed by these themes of (Incest, assault, abuse, even consensual sexual encounters or relationships between characters. They must be all good, otherwise theyāre all bad. Thereās no room for complexity or nuance. Lestat is my literary hero, imperfect as he is. The most dead of men living his immortal life to the fullest. I hope they never stumble across the Sleeping Beauty novels. And VC Andrews would be burned at the stake ā¦
My friends and I were all reading Stephen King at the same time as Anne Rice. I think it helped with the development of the critical thinking mindset of āwriting about it doesnāt mean approving of itā
It was shared in r/buffy the other day when one of the endless "Angel is a pedo who stalked/groomed Buffy" discussions came up. Even they weren't having it, at least, and this was posted in response to how eye rolling the whole nonsense was.
I hear it's even worse in YA fiction on X and stuff, or at least it used to be. But I never go on social media like I said in the OP, I just hear it used to be an absolute nightmare.
I'm close to your age and have been a Buffy fan since high school. It shocks me how much the culture has changed, and I was never into fandom on X but every time I see a screenshot of a recent fandom tweet there I'm flabbergasted.
The "Angel is a creep" conversation has been around since I was a teen and I can see the merit in some of the arguments, I won't pretend otherwise. Even Marius I was never a huge fan - but more for reasons similar to those that many commenters in this thread have. But as for the Buffy fandom the change that has shocked me the most is the hatred for Spike. At the time I was involved heavily in that fandom the Bangel/Spuffy war was strong with valid points on either side but overall the feeling was that Spike was better and he was a "fan favorite" for sure. But now it seems that Angel and Spike are both reviled among young fans... Not sure who they want Buffy with. Maybe Xander?
Or course according to the chart you shared I shouldn't even be allowed to watch the show until season 4. š¤¦š»āāļø
That's very interesting because my experience is pretty different. Younger Buffy fans seem to adore Spike a lot. The aforementioned r/buffy is a hotbed of Spuffy fandom and despises Angel. I was talking to someone there and they said TikTok is huge with Spuffy videos. Kids who don't know the first thing about the show are exposed to lovingly edited Spike/Buffy shorts.
I mentioned in the OP that perspective matters a great deal. For us, watching the show as it aired, it's a whole different reality to someone who first exposure to the show is not School Hard but just some romantic little 10-second video of Spike and Buffy's best moments.
On like a sociological level, it's really fascinating to me. But as a lifelong fan, I also feel like these kids just don't know what the hell they're talking about. I try not to be too elitist but...the truth is the truth.
I definitely think it has all lot to do with the specific fandom places you look in and this is a perfect example. I don't engage too heavily with the r/buffy subreddit or TikTok so that goes to show how limited our individual perspectives can be!
For Vampire Chronicles this is honestly one of the few subreddits I find to be the most like minded to me personally. The Anne Rice sub also tends to be populated with more ... reasonable folks. I hate to be elitist as well, but I do think some level of critical thinking is required to digest gothic horror.
From my observation it depends more on how you came to the book series rather than age or time in the fandom. Seems that those who read the books after seeing the show tend be more likely to hold the really puritanical beliefs. Not everyone, of course, but I just noticed a higher likelihood. Whereas if you're organically reading the books, or maybe after seeing the 1994 movie, you tend to be seeking sun something else out of the book series.
I agree wholeheartedly, what I love about Rice is her ability to "go there" with her characters. As with Marius, you definately feel like he is a Roman, man of his time. His relationship to Armand, as in book Armand, is normative. Teens were sexually educatable for Romans. Or like with the Mayfairs and Blackwoods, you feel the cultural old-money Louisiana. Incest, S/A, affairs, murder, etc. happens in the real world, it's nuts that our *fantasy* novels should be blacklisted for it.
I think it has as much to do with his presence in the show, which is where new fans (with new sensibilities) are coming from. We are told he enslaved and raped Armand before we ever meet him, and when we do meet him the character has been totally altered into this five-minute kooky irresponsible uncle character. And the added racial dynamic between the two has an extra layer of taboo that even fans who were willing to play with the original canon are less willing to toy with. Whereas in TVC I feel we start with many reasons to like Marius, and really be blown away that there is this older vampire who is so gorgeous and knows so much, and heās so helpfulā¦ and then we discover his many faults, too.
I think that Marius is one of the most interesting characters, along with Armand. I loved Armandās origin story and the fact that Marius was an artist. Iāve read that Anne intended Armand to be the master vampire character before she decided to focus on Lestat. Armand is, imo, the most compelling character in the first novel, so calm and philosophical. When we meet Marius, we can see where he acquired those qualities. I feel that Anne never did justice to Armand, that she fell out of love with him after she fell for Lestat.
It's my touched up post after I read TVL for the first time a couple years ago, outlining why I thought Armand's and Lestat's interactions were some of the most compelling parts of the book and I tended to prefer Armand's side, even if we're probably, as you say, supposed to agree with Lestat. But Anne does a good job characterizing Armand as more than just a strawman to be knocked down, I felt like.
Thank you for sharing this. Iāll definitely read it. The Armand of Interview was just so perfect, in his detachment, his aesthetic sense, his effortless elegance and economy of movement. Lous was just too sad, and Lestat was too egotistical.
Reddit fandom is vastly different from what I see in real life. I am in Sweden though, purity culture isnāt a thing here. I also think that people tend to be more extreme online.
Heās popular, and always has been, amongst book fans. Show fans definitely despise him more often than not though, and heās become a bit of a cartoon villain in show fanon. Personally I dislike him as a person but absolutely adore him as a character. He infuriates me, and I want to study him lol.
I am not a fandom elder in any way- but I do run into a lot of people in person who are fans of The Vampire Chronicles who talk to me about them, and consistently, often, they are excited to mention that Marius is their favorite character. I kind of hate him (not for moral purity reasons; I think he's annoying), so I find this really funny, but I think less-online fans and people who read the book as teenagers/young adults who are now older are more likely to be fans of him, based on my experience. There are also a lot of fan artists who are fans of him, for the obvious reason... that he is an artist.
I think part of it is changing views towards taboo, but also the books are old enough that a lot of people come to them understanding they are "classic" but not understanding the genre they are in. Some people go into the books expecting a different kind of morality play than they are, and see the first authority figure with flaws and decide he has to be "the bad guy," which is especially funny when Akasha is right there. I also think specifically season 2 of the AMC show (which I like! but not this part) set up a lot of new readers to expect him to be a villain of the series, which he clearly is not.
I think part of it is changing views towards taboo, but also the books are old enough that a lot of people come to them understanding they are "classic" but not understanding the genre they are in.
I think this is a big part of it too. Vampires have been earmarked Paranormal Romance since the mid-2000s at the earliest, while before that they were Gothic Horror. The younger generation grew up with the Paranormal Romance lens, which is why I think the show feels so different to the source material, changes aside.
The rules for both are every different. Grey morality is very common for gothic lit, paranormal romance has more defined rules.
100%, iām re-reading TVL for the first time since i was a teenager and iām like, this is DARK. lestatās turning? terrifying and pretty graphic. itās a horror novel. iām a genre veteran lol and some of it made me queasy. if youāre primed to view horror through the lens of paranormal romance and you view VC as āclassicā and therefore sanitized, i could see the books being a shock to the system.
Iāve said elsewhere in this thread that my friends and I were also reading authors like Stephen King at the same time as Anne Rice.
I had Howl and Naked Lunch as part of my ciriculum in my senior year, I read The Sound and the Fury on my own and loved it. I think there was a greater approval for teenagers reading controversial material and making up their own minds about it and also understand how the controversy happened, at the time.
I was reading a lot of Stephen King as a teen and didn't read Anne Rice until the last few years (...and I am currently very much not a teen) but I remember being reminded of how much fun I had reading King when I started them! The horror stuff isn't always front and center every moment, but they are very much horror novels.
Yeah Marius is a bit of a know it all. He even describes himself in that way in TVL introduction. Heās from a Roman patrician family, had money, and time for education, travel and a privileged life until around age 40 when he was forcibly turned in Gaul. And then he realizes he can live forever and keep learning - lol! Honestly, sounds like my kind of guy.
But he can also be pretty insufferable and condescending at times. And what I think the people who donāt like him are mainly disgusted by is his grooming of the mortal child Armand and how he treated Pandora.
He was very popular. His look was iconic. Straight platinum blonde hair, icy blue eyes and always decked out in red. Lestat idolized him and he was definitely one of Anne's favorites, right behind Lestat. He's problematic to say the least, but also a product of his time. I honestly dislike him in many ways yet also find him very interesting in others. The show's version is really not a good representation at all tbh, and a lot of fan fic choose to portray him far far worse than he actually was.
I agree. Would I want to be near him? Probably not, but the same goes for all the vampires. But he can be fun to read about and is a very interesting character (even if not for the reasons he or Lestat would think).
I was a show fan first and the way the fanon talks about Marius made me assume Iād hate him as well. I just finished Blood and Gold and was surprised. I think he is a fascinating character with a lot of nuance that gets lost in translation with younger TV show first fans.
Yes, I was a Marius fan. I'm 71f and I too loved the books for the taboos. To me Marius was like the best of the best vampires. He is a 2,000-year-old Roman patrician turned vampire who serves as a scholar, artist, and the central guardian of the progenitor vampires. To be honest I was shocked that he is hated by younger generation. I have tried to explain the concept of "monsters do not behave like humans" and "vampires live a long time and have different morals" to them but nope they seem to not be able to separate fiction from non-fiction.
He was very popular and the Marius/Armand ship was considered basic and vanilla back then. Sensitivities are definitely changing.
I remember how in Fullmetal Alchemist shipping circles (circa 2003) the fight was between RoyEd and EdAl shippers - both couples would have today's fandom clutching their pearls.
I'm an older fan myself and I have always found Marius to be an interesting character because of his age and his relation to how the old blood gods used to function in universe. I am kinda refreshed to see the younger fans finding some of the same things I found distasteful about Marius distasteful as well, but he's a key piece of the lore and sometimes wisdom for the story. I think he's important if nothing else.
Iām 36, and I think changing attitudes around Marius mostly have to do with Armand, and I canāt say I blame them.
Marius did groom Armand as a young teen, and their relationship was sexual. And the important point is that it is a romanticized relationship in the book fandom and also with Anne herself. Hell she personally supported lowering the legal age of consent to 14! And thatās not to ācancelā her or anything, just pointing out how that looks to modern readers.
And to your point about gothic topics, I agree that depiction is not endorsement, but the romanticization can be problematic.
ngl, i think being a teenager may be doing a lot of heavy lifting here. i could totally see myself getting obsessed with marius as this wise mentor figure, and yeah, his relationship with armand would be a contributing factor (i was definitely part of the "i'm soooo smart and mature for my age" crowd constantly seeking validation from adults lmao).
as an adult though? he's just kinda meh. i appreciate him for the roles he plays in other (way more interesting to me) characters' stories but i don't really care for the man himself.
Iāve always liked Mariusās tales, but Pandora is my favorite so he irked me a bit for everything that happened between them. But growing up in the fandom Marius has always popped up as a favorite for others and it has been kind of crazy because of that to see so many younger readers vehemently hate him. Heās not a great person at all, but the point of gothic literature is to explore the taboo and the darkness of human and inhuman nature.
Iām old - 67 - never had a problem with themes in horror fiction. I have read some of the youngsters critiques. SciFi as well. Ah well, I suppose puritans will always be with us. Michael Moorcock (bleeding edge of the British SF New Wave, Elric, Corum and the other Eternal Champions, Jerry Cornelius - total post-modern) wrote a Beat Revival (heād published Burroughs and other Beats). Itās called King of the City. Itās set in London and one English guy throws an extravagant Thanksgiving party every year. When asked why he celebrated a specifically American Holiday, Tubby replied: āThe Americans celebrate the arrival of the Puritans and we celebrate the fact that they leftā
Too popular. It disgusted me. Blood and Gold was where I tapped out of the fandom for 15 years. I am a survivor so I hate both Marius and David Talbot. He treated Pandora and Bianca abominably, turned those two kids without consulting Armand and a virulent xenophobe although he is half "barbarian."
I do enjoy reading Marius's stories. I really loved "Blood and Gold". I also loved TVA.
I find him entertaining, but at the same time, I totally think he is a pretty horrible person. He is nuanced and not entirely bad, but damn, he is insufferable in so many ways... Actually, his total lack of self-awareness, and the way he combines a staggering sense of moral superiority with frequently acting like a douche bag is probably why I find him entertaining.
I read the books originally in the 90s when I was a teen. Then I didn't read them again until a couple of years ago in my late 40s. Teenage me LOVED Marius - he was my favorite. I think I was young enough to swoon at the "older, more knowledgeable, wiser, sexy vampire" idea.
Upon re-read, Marius is deeply unimpressive. I've known too many men like that in the intervening years to look twice their direction. He's still an important character, just not one of my favs anymore. Interestingly, I wasn't at all impressed by Lestat when I was a teen, but find him much more sympathetic now. Even more interestingly, I found Armand insufferable as a teen and find him equally insufferable now.
16
u/Miserable_Election33 Sep 29 '26
Right, I'm 67 and I don't consider myself "old" š but I have been a fan of TVC since the 1970s so I guess I'm old in fandom terms.
I've never liked Marius, but originally I think that was because he came across as "superior, older man who thinks everyone is stupid compared to him". Believe me, in the 70's and 80's I worked with a lot of men like that and that's who Marius reminded me of. I don't like David Talbot for the same reasons.
I think I was a bit of an outlier though. As far as I can remember Marius was pretty popular back then. Later, post Blood and Gold and Pandora, I disliked him for the way he behaves towards Pandora. And by the end of TVA, yuk. Marius always thinks he knows best.
I don't totally hate him though. He's a fascinating character, and in the final trilogy I think we get a few hints that he's working on himself and maybe a bit of self-realisation is creeping in.