Posted by LP on November 25, 1997 at 12:39:33:
In Reply to: Re: Santy's Faith posted by Michel Pontmercy on November 25, 1997 at 01:01:49:
: : (Cecilia look! We've got fans!)
: Can I have your autograph?
(laughter) I'm not quite that important.
: : : : Santino might very well have believed in the old legends.
: : : Would he?
: : Lots of others did. And Santino was in a postition to hear more rumors than most.
: Perhaps, but this does not necessarily work with the argument that Santino had no Catholic beliefs to speak of either.
True.
:I agree with your point that the rules of the coven where not truly based on Christian beliefs so much as couched in those terms for greater understanding among those he was preaching them to. However, if Santino was basing his faith on a more secular idea then it stands to reason he was keeping his eyes firmly on the ground and not in that of legends. I think that if anything he would have looked upon legends of the Mother and the Father as simply something which might make his followers question him, but not something which would shake the foundations of his own beliefs.
I agree. In the early years Santino did not have enough information upon which to base his beliefs. However, as the years progressed the belief in the Mother and Father could have taken hold. Evidence of them was as much, if not greater than the evidence of Christ. I don't think his belief in the Mother and Father would have come as some miraculous revelation to him. However, as the years progressed his faith and belief in them could have grown stronger.
And yes, the old legends would have been a threat to his power base.
: : I'll even throw in a quote: (Santy to Armand) "In all parts of the world one found such tales. And one could easily dismiss them as fanciful save for one thing. The ancient heretic Marius had been found in Venice, and there punished by the Children of Darkness. The legend of Marius had been true." (VL 302)
: Let me suggest another interpretation to this quote then:
: The legend of the Father and Mother meant that there was a chance Santino's followers would question his teachings. If nothing else the fact that more powerful beings than him existed on earth could shake his followers faith in him. So, what must Santino do?
However, the legends of the Mother and Father would not, I don't think, been the one which would have been the threat. All the legends said that the were stone statues, taken care of by Marius. Yes they had once walked, but even the legends on *that* were sketchy. It was the legends of Marius which were the real and true threat to his power, because of Marius there was proof. Marius walked and lived among the humans. He did not follow Santino's Great Laws. He was therefore a heretic, and had to be destroyed. Santino was caught between a rock and a hard place in this situation. He didn't know what powers Marius was capable of, yet since he was a heretic he had to be destroyed. I don't think that the knowledge of more powerful beings would be much of a disintegrating factor. The vampires knew that they existed, but the Great Laws which they followed *and believed* made those vampires heretics against Satan, and therefore they were not fit rolemodels to follow. It was the *way* the heretic vampires lived which was the problem, not the very *fact* that they lived.
: He has enough evidence to find out the legend is true, he finds Marius's location and then what - "The ancient heretic Marius had been found in Venice, and there punished by the Children of Darkness."
: Did Santino need to kill or control the Mother and Father? No. If he heard the legend he'd know killing them would mean his own death. Likewise he could probably guess that having them in his possesion would mean enormous danger and responsibility. Did he need Marius dead? Not really. If anything Marius did him better by being alive. Let him care for the Mother and Father and let Santino be free to continue on his rule.
I don't think Santino wanted to care for Those. And I never got the impression that he cared one way or the other if Those were cared for or not.
: However, Marius and Those Who Must Be Kept did still present a threat to his authority. So he removes that threat. The Coven attacks, Marius's home is destroyed, Marius himself is hurt and the Coven can now go home safe in the knowledge that they (with Santino leading them) are still mighty and right.
Okay. I see no problem with this.
: We can then make two guesses about Armand:
: 1. Santino knew about him ahead of time and knew it would be an excellent example to his coven if he could take the legendary Marius's own Child and turn him into a Coven member.
: 2. Santino didn't know about him ahead of time and simply improvised something which ended up having the same effect.
No problem here either. Though I still do think that Santino would have known about Armand. Armand, I think, was not aware that he needed to shield his presence. If Marius never told him that other vampires might come after them, then why would he tell him that he must shield his presence?
: : Finally!!! Someone has asked the question!!
: Lestat and Santino's relationship is a particular interest of mine [smile]
I can now see why!
: : Lestat makes the point that Marius was not killed because Akasha loved him, not just Lestat.
: But does he mean this or is he just trying to spare Marius's feelings since he knows Marius would read the words later and take them to heart? After 2,000 years of service Marius is given the cold shoulder (no pun intended) in favor of this young fledgling. I don't think this is a sign that Akasha preferred Marius's happiness over Lestat's, or even cared about Marius all that much.
"She shook her head; another flare of anger. 'Don't try my patience, Marius,' she said. 'I spared you for a very simple reason. Lestat wanted you spared. And because you are strong and you can be of help to me. But that is all there is to it, Marius. Tread with care.'
"A silence fell between them. Surely he realized that she was lying. I realized it. She loved him and it humiliated her, and so she aought to hurt him. And she had. Silently, he swallowed his rage." (441)
I'm not saying that she preferred Marius' happiness over Lestat's for I don't think she did. I'm saying that her love for Marius was a factor. Akasha was not the cold unfeeling being that everyone makes her out to be. She made *really* stupid mistakes, but she was hurt when Lestat turned against her. Otherwise she would never have been so angry.
I don't think Lestat would try to spare Marius' feelings in this regard. The words were already spoken. The hurt was already caused. And before the book was even published Marius had dealt with it. Everybody had "struck a balance". Yes, it could have been said to ease the pain some, but Lestat doesn't exactly have a great deal of stock in the false platitudes market. (Also, this would have come months after the event. While marius might not have been willing to listen in the following "bitter" nights after Akasha's death, to wait *months*?)
Marius wanted out of service from Those. He said so at the beginning of the book, before anything had even started, and he reiterated it at the end of the book. If anything it was Marius who did not love Akasha: "'Maybe I wanted to believe she was a goddess; until she woke. Until she spoke to me. Until she smiled.'" (470)
: Think about it - Marius would have been a much better choice of companion than Lestat.
No way. Na-uh. Akasha had listen to him and his talk of right and wrong, good and evil, for _two_ _thousand_ years. Even Akasha wouldn't have been stupid enough to believe that he would immediately switch 2,000 years worth of beliefs and arguments just because she said so. She had an argument alredy planned out for him when she arrived at the Sonoma compound. She and Marius immediately went head to head, and there is absolutely *no* indication that she was surprised by it. The closest thing would be "Akasha's fingers thightened on mine." as though she didn't want to have the conversation. And when she woke:
"She laughed softly as she looked at him. He could not beat the sound of it. He wanted to hurt her. He wanted to destroy her, all her monstrous children be damned! Let us all perish with her!
"It seemed she nodded, that she was telling him she understood. THe monstrous insult of it." (31)
Marius was never on her side once she awoke. Only when she was passive and allowed herself to be taken care of by him.
:He'd served her for years, which to Akasha's way of thinking (and I will say up front I do not consider her particularly bright so I am only making conclusions based on what her thought process seems like, not what I would personally think myself)
That's okay, I don't think she was particularily bright myself.
:means that Marius would serve her again once she started making demands. Marius was already powerful and legendery and respected by those who knew him or of him.
See above. He would never have gone along with it, and I think that deep deep down Akasha knew it, even though she tried to turn him at the compound.
:Contrast that with Lestat who was a relative no one (save for those who wanted to kill him - which would not make him ideal leadership material) was a young and reletively weak fledgling besides and had no skill for leadership.
Agreed. But he was her "prince".
: If Akasha cared for Marius - enough to want him alive for her own reasons alone - she would have picked him for her consort. But she abandoned him and chose Lestat instead. Therefore I don't think a list of those Marius loves can be counted as those who lived.
I disagree. She wanted to be around Lestat, his brashness, his learning which she tried to mold into a likeness she could control. She held him in thrall with her blood and thought she could manipulate him to her side. he didn't consider the fact that Lestat has this little thing against being manipulated, though he did go along with it at first. He was captivated by her, but his consious kicked in.
Marius was already far too set in his ways for Akasha to be able to use him.
: : Anybody ask why Daniel survived?
: My guess is because he was Armand's fledgling and would have caused upset to Lestat on Armand's behalf. Also she would have had to track him down to kill him and he was with the others still. It could very well be that either she did intend to kill him and was going to do it after meeting with the others, or that he was simply spared as an afterthought because she would have had to go out of her way to do it and, since he was already alive and with the others, she might as well take the same effort and persuade him to her cause.
I suppose it is anybody's guess. That's as good a reason as any.
: : Okay, here are my theories:
: : 1) Marius was trapped under ice. But Akasha didn't want this to be permanant. Pandora needed someone to help her, and it ended up being Santy. And then Akasha was too busy to get around to destroying him, especially since he was now with Marius.
: Which would make him the same as Daniel then, more or less. I can see this as a possibility.
: Now, onto some of my own thoughts and interpretations.
: : pg 237: Santino goes with Pandora to help her find Marius.
: This one is an unknown all around. Was he friends with Pandora? Marius? Just there at the time? There's just not enough information to guess.
Just for the heck of it, The Vampire COmpanion says that Pandy "urged" him to help dig Marius out. I know it doesn't count, but hey, it's there.
: : pg 266: Santino speaks "with courtly politeness" to Marius, while he is hostile or indifferent to everyone else, really.
: I've my own theory here.
: Santino was once a bastard of the highest rank (I agree with those who compared him to Methos - I would have done it myself if someone hadn't beaten me to it).
Me!
:Marius was one who was hurt the most by what he did because of Armand. Santino is now "reformed" for lack of a better word and trying to do what he can to at the very least not set off hostile waves with the others.
Mich, he bristled with Mael!
:Marius, then, gets special treatment for having had such bad treatment before. The others are comparatively neutral to him and don't need such a show. Marius, however, needs the extra effort to prove that Santino was not the man he was.
I suppose my question is does Santino really care?
: : pg 277: "They were all of them magnificent in their own way. The tall heavily built Santno was elegant in his priestly black,
: And you wonder where I get the idea of him as religious from ;)
: : with his lustrous black eyes and a sensuous mouth." No one else, other than Maharet, is given such an in-depth look by Marius in this section.
: It is Marius's point of view but Lestat is still the one writing it in the end. Given Lestat's habit of elaborating on things this could just as easily mean Lestat found Santino attractive as it did Marius.
Lestat adds that about Santino, but not about Louis or Armand? I don't recall Stat having any problems talking about Louis' fine attributes, or describing Armand's cheribic face.
: As for why Marius keeps looking at Santino I think it again goes back to the burning and kidnapping - Marius, after years of separation caused by this incident now has his beloved Amadeo back again. Santino, being the cause of this separation, would then warrent extra attention to see what he would do and how Armand feels about him.
Hmm. Yes, I could go along with this, quite easily.
: I agree that the description is mostly complimentary, but Marius's feelings about it are unclear (and this is again perhaps Lestat's influence as our typist). Does Marius truly find Santino attractive or is he remarking to himself upon the irony that this being who should (and perhaps is) so hateful to him does not have the courtesy to be as outwardly ugly as his soul once was?
*grin* I like that!
: : And as the facts are, Lestat never met Santino. There was no trace of Satino in Rome when Lestat went there, and another mention is never made until QotD.
: I don't have the book in front of me at the moment but I believe all Lestat says is that the Roman coven didn't know where Santino was, not that Lestat himself did not run into him. True, this does not mean he did only that this avenue of possibility is not necessarily out of our reach.
: : "As for Santino, the Italian, I knew almost nothing of him. I had expected nothing. He was young. Perhaps my cries had never reached him. And why should he listen if they had?"
: If Lestat and Santino had met in the past (which they would need to to make him rank as a beloved of Lestat and one who must live) then it's also possible that after two centuries of separation Lestat isn't sure of the relationship.
: This might also explain why Santino watches Lestat so calculatingly in Queen of the Damned. Santino might be wondering what has become of Lestat after all this. It might stand to reason there could be some estrangement between them due to Santino's uncertainty about Lestat's feelings regarding Akasha.
: : If Marius and Santino had something sub rosa, then it explains two things:
: [snip of Marius's privacy and Lestat's respecting it]
: Taken it as a given that all theories we are putting forth here are very tenuous ones given the lack of cannon in the books,
*grin* Easily a given. (Welcome to graduate level debate everyone!)
:I don't think we can take what we know and lead to the conclusion that Marius and Santino were lovers.
I highly agree. It was merely one theory as to how Santino might have survived. I don't actually think that they were lovers, but I can defend something with the tenacity of a pit-bull.
:To what you said, let me add that Santino is still the torturer and kidnapper of Armand. Having a child myself I can assure you that I would not want to be overly cuddly with anyone who took him away from me and, at best and with some extremely extenuating circumstances, I might have a cool respect/politeness for the one who did it but even then is pushing it (and assuming my child was not harmed in the bargain).
I agree again. It is rather unlikely that such a thing might happen. But under the right circumstances not impossible.
: I think it makes more sense to guess that Lestat and Santino knew one another before the fact, only Lestat kept quiet about it. Why? Well here is some conjecture:
: 1. The only time Lestat could have done it would have been when he was travelling with Gabrielle, which also means most likely Italy.
: 2. That time of Lestat's life was extremely painful. He'd just lost his lover, his home, his family (for all intents and purposes - he didn't think he would see them again) and is now loosing his mother who spends less and less time with him.
: 3. Lestat, as I mentioned before, goes mute on any times of extreme pain, unless he can gloss it over (Kill myself in the Gobi? Don't be silly, I only wanted a tan!) Therefore we have reason one for why he would keep quiet about it.
But if he found a friend, would that be painful? And Santino would have to be a damned good friend to be saved from Akasha's wrath. Remember, Lestat was somewhat upset by Laurent's death. He considered Laurent a friend, though not a close one.
: 4. Santino would be considered public enemy no. 1 by Marius, Armand and possibly Santino's former coven. While Lestat does have no problems in exposing Marius and Those Who Must Be Kept, he also felt in his heart of hearts that Marius could protect himself from such a thing (Lestat, after all, didn't draw a map to Marius's location, only told everyone the legends were true). Santino, on the other hand, probably could not, especially since Lestat was of the belief that Marius could set vampires on fire with his mind without even being there (he thinks it's Marius doing it at the end of The Vampire Lestat, not Akasha). Therefore there is reason two to keep quiet - Lestat is attempting to hide Santino's avenues of safety (a possible friendship with Lestat) because Santino probably could not save himself if tracked down.
Okay, now this is a good reason for not mentioning it. But then, why nothing in QotD? Lestat has a tendancy to go on and on about those he cares about. Not just a few scattered lines here and there.
: Just my theory. Although now I think I'm as tired as Heather and probably babbling ;)
This is one damned fine theory!! And now here is pretty much my only problem with it:
"As for Santino, the Italian, I knew almost nothing of him."
There is no way that Lestat would have said that had he and Santino been good friends. If they had been good friends, even a long time ago, he would still have known something about him. In BT there was no reason to hide anything, with *maybe* the exception of sparing Louis' feelings. But Lestat might still have been sore at Louis for not aiding him. But what would Lestat's saying he knew about Santy hurt Louis? Or do you mean that he said that so gloss over the pain of Santy's not coming to his aid, with all the rest of the lines as further excuses? If this is so, then why the "And why should he listen if they had?"? It just doesn't fit together. The theory is fine without one sentence or the other, but both together punch a hole in it.
Nothing short of being very close and/or dear to Lestat would have spared Santy in the theory. And for that to happen, Lestat would have to know the person very well.
But Damn! I *like* that theory.
Your not babbling. You're just keeping me up really late at night, and making me fall asleep thinking about the theory. (I did. It's true.)
LP.