*Frustrates over the lack of "la" between "de" and "pointe"*

But that's irrelevant.

Well, frustrate against Anne Rice and Wikipedia, because that's the canon of his name. :3

Yeah, I know. I'm always annoyed by how even the mainstream uses French names because they're "classy", but apparently no one is capable of understanding the fact that there is a logic behind those little "le", "la", "du" and so on.

But that's just me being a French grammar Nazi, DELICIOUS IRONY IS DELICIOUS

She speaks New Orleans French, which is called Creole for a reason. It's not French.

Creole? In New Orleans? Don't you mean cajun..? Creole is mostly in Haiti, don't think it spread much farther than the Carabbeans (sp?) either...

I know Creole is different enough from French to be another language entirely, so if it indeed is Creole, then it chances everything and my qualms are probably baseless since the grammar of Creole is surely different from that of French.

However, if it's Cajun, then it's still considered French, though it's a pretty heavily modified local dialect... therefore the grammar rules hold, although I'll freely admit that it's entirely possible family names could have been modified with time and become a bit of "garble" that's not theoretically correct.

In either case, well... Rice has, at best, good reasons why drop the "la", and at worst, a good excuse about it... haha.

I thought it was Creole. :3 My mistake.
I speak Quebec French. Rather, I understand it, getting the words out in response are hard for me.

<.<

>.>

Ah ben crisse, chu ben amusé de l'apprendre. R'marque, t'es canadien, c'est comprenable.

^ Is a Québec French reading test! Woot woot. I put several colloquialisms in written form, so if you can sort this out and read it, you're good.

PS : Well really though, Québec French is... French. The differences are small and limited to speech, and anyone who tries to speak "well" will go towards international French rather than some kind of weird pastiche (pastiche which is kind of what informal speech turns into, though).

I love Interview with the Vampire. I enjoyed some of Anne Rice's books but then they started spiraling towards hell and that really pissed me off. I liked Louis, and Lestat to a point (hence a point), but I also quite enjoyed Armand, but him like many of her characters (example Lestat), began spiraling with her books.
Well anyways really amazing drawing of Louis, and now it makes me wonder what your interpretation of Armand would look like. ^.=.^

I liked Louis... and I hate how her fans are always complaining about how Louis is whiny and just want two dimensional Mary Sue bullshit characters. Louis had depth. I guess she can only manage that when she's depressed. :P

Louis had chasms of depth. He wasn't whiny at all. He just liked to think.
Which is more than I can say for Lestat >:O

Louis was also a vampire in the classical mold of the Byronian hero. Tortured and suffering. I don't understand how people can prefer a preening, self important twit like Lestat over a character that actually has conflicts.

OH... EM... GEE... -happygleedance!- I loved Louis. I definitely agree with you and Lafitte on the depth of his character. There isn't nearly as much love for Louis as there should be. I think it's interesting that you chose such sharp features for him. I like it. Much different than I imagined him but it really fits.