Passion Fruit Cheesecake Recipe

Two-Bit Stories:

My former boyfriend asked me what I found so compelling about Anne Rice’s Vampire Chronicles and Interview with the Vampire specifically.  He had read Interview as a 59-year-old man and had difficulty comprehending how the woman he knew, whose influences include Franz Kafka, Kurt Vonnegut, and Oscar Wilde, could be so attached to this particular gothic horror novel.

I couldn’t articulate an appropriate answer at the time, but what I should have said was, “The same things that send you to the Marvel movies each time a new one comes out.”  Anne Rice’s books and particularly Interview with the Vampire were the elixir I drank during the most transformational time of my life.  I was 15 or 16, listening to post-punk gothic bands like Bauhaus, Siouxsie, The Cure, and dark atmospheric New Romantic bands like Ultravox, Visage, and Japan. The boys I favored during that period were thin, pale, with long dark hair and a penchant for donning makeup and black pointed-toe boots to the clubs.

Louis de Pointe du Lac fit perfectly into that world.  Dark, gothic, tormented, conflicted, sexually ambiguous, in deep despair. Yum, yum…just my type.

Lestat de Lioncourt, on the other hand, seemed to my teenage self to be cruel and narcissistic, a braggart, and a predatory self-absorbed brat, emotionally devoid of true feeling. Reading the second book, The Vampire Lestat, didn’t alter my opinion. There was no nuance to Lestat. Where Louis was layers of stormy torment and shadow, Lestat was the sun: blazing, explosive, hot-tempered, emotionally volatile. Teenage Julie abhorred Lestat.

The 1994 movie with Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise almost doesn’t merit mention and deserves to be nothing more than a footnote. It was poorly cast and produced, stripping the book’s gothic sexual tension in favor of big-name actors—the only bright spot being 11-year-old Kirsten Dunst as Claudia.

Recently, while sifting through streaming services, I stumbled upon the  AMC remake of Interview and I was intrigued.  It had been decades since I picked up the Vampire Chronicles. When I first attempted to watch, I couldn’t get past a few episodes. Initially, I thought AMC had taken too many liberties. It didn’t follow the original storyline. The timeline had shifted by over a century. Louis was now a Creole pimp, the Pointe du Lac plantation left far behind in favor of brothels.

But bored with the other streaming offerings, I eventually made my way back. And by suspending my understanding of the story that shaped my teen years, I became ensnared within this new version. The vamps’ relationship was more nuanced than I remembered. Louis was no longer my archetypal ideal and Lestat hinted at something more complicated than the villain I remembered. It was a nice little watch, but nothing worth recommending to my friends…unless they were Rice fans themselves.

Last week, I made my way to the 2026 Season 3, renamed The Vampire Lestat picking up the story from the second book. The gothic romance of New Orleans has been tucked away in favor of something grittier and bombastic, a shift announced in the show’s opening credits. And unexpectedly, the show was frequently witty, and at times laugh-out-loud funny, often at the precise moment it seems least likely to be.

This is Lestat as I’ve never seen him before.  Perhaps this was Rice’s version all along, but I, the reader, was too immature and naive to see it on the page. 

AMC’s version provided context and made Lestat a sympathetic character. Growing up, his father and brothers dismissed and ridiculed him, his mother behaved in an incestuously inappropriate way. The mother-son relationship is complicated and emotionally charged. She drags him, age nine, to watch “witches” burned at the stake, an event that mars him physically and emotionally. His vampire maker, Magnus, abducts, terrorizes, and violates him, committing suicide just moments after violently transforming Lestat against his will while leaving no instructions on how to survive this new existence. This is a trauma he’ll carry forever. Later, his mother abandons him when they are both just a decade into their vampiric lives. 

Yes, his personality is still jam-packed with grandiosity, impulsiveness, and entitlement, but when viewed within the scaffolding of his early life imbued with incestuous love, devoid of a male role model, and punctuated by abandonment by both his makers, we can begin to understand the root of his psychopathy.  Lestat’s brutality is couched within a severe anxious attachment disorder organized around his abandonment terror. His egotism is defensive rather than empty. In the original books, I read him as dominant and commanding; here he is fractured and messy.

He genuinely believes he’s extraordinary, and inconveniently for us, he often is. But underneath all that filigree and gold leaf is a startlingly fragile man. He seems to need other people not merely to love him, but to continually reassure him that he is wanted. Rejection doesn’t register as disappointment. It registers as psychic annihilation. He craves extraordinary intimacy, then behaves in ways guaranteed to destroy it.  When someone gets emotionally close enough, Lestat becomes hypervigilant for signs that they might leave him, and then attempts to eliminate the possibility of abandonment through domination, surveillance, or violence. He attempts to blame his actions on the blood of Akasha. She may have given his rage more power, but the psychology is all his. “I control the chaos,” he lies to himself.

His theatricality isn’t mere vanity. Lestat performs himself. Clothes, music, language, sexuality, humor, entrances, gestures, even his suffering become aesthetic objects. Performance is partly his pleasure in life, but it is also psychological regulation. If he can turn pain into spectacle, he controls its meaning.

Hence rock-star Lestat. He converts shame into glamour, grief into music, anger into provocation, and vulnerability into persona.

He has classic narcissistic traits: grandiosity, entitlement, a need to be admired, unmitigated rage when humiliated, possessiveness, difficulty tolerating criticism and an almost comical conviction that everyone should find him fascinating.  Louis publishes a version of their history that Lestat (hilariously) finds intolerable, so Lestat’s response is essentially: Fine. I will tell eight billion people MY version…Also, there will be pyrotechnics.  But I wouldn’t call him a straight-up narcissist because he possesses something that complicates that interpretation: he has a substantial capacity for genuine attachment, guilt, grief and (eventually) self-reflection.

That distinction matters. A purely narcissistic reading makes Lestat flatter than this show does. He also has unusually poor affect regulation. Lestat experiences emotion at operatic volume.

Love becomes fusion.
Jealousy becomes persecution.
Humiliation becomes rage.
Loss becomes collapse.
Joy becomes ecstatic performance.

His impulses frequently outrun his reflective capacity. Once activated, he can become extraordinarily destructive and only understands the consequences of his actions afterward. That is one reason his violence against Louis and Claudia is important. In this version, it isn’t simply “he’s evil.” It is an extreme example of attachment panic becoming aggression that results in tragedy.

And he truly loves Louis, something I never recognized in my younger years. Rather than a mere heartless user meting out rage, he is frantic for Louis to love him with a matched intensity.  Is Lestat’s behavior romantic or healthy?  Absolutely not—it’s psychotic, but it is believable and recognizable. I can empathize with Lestat’s desperate need to be loved buried beneath his utter lack of understanding or capacity for healthy attachment. And when he destroys the very thing he yearns for, it haunts him. He’s layered and complicated, yet in essence still an abuser…and he despises what he is.

I wasn’t familiar with Sam Reid before the show, but the casting was pure brilliance. He’s able to balance the many facets of Lestat into a highly dysfunctional yet lovable character: sensation-seeking, insouciant, profoundly traumatized, prone to disorganized attachment, marked by narcissistic defenses and extreme abandonment sensitivity, yet still capable of deep love and empathy that easily become compromised by possessiveness and fear. Reid shows us all sides of the arrogant adult, terrified abandoned child, predator, lover, comedian, and grieving man elbowing one another for control of the same body. I especially love the interactions between Louis and Lestat in Episode 6, Montreal: Lestat hesitant, hopeful, tentative, yet allowing Louis in to see the mess—and Louis deciding not to turn away.

I wondered if nostalgia is why I became so caught up in AMC’s The Vampire Lestat. 2026 Julie doesn’t watch vampire shows. And, yes, it’s partially nostalgia —Louis, Lestat, their New Orleans. My teenage interpretation of the story, to more extent than I’d like to admit, shaped my younger years. I understood Louis, I rejected Lestat.  Through AMC’s lens, and 40 years of living, I can understand and love both characters now — Lestat plus all his mess perhaps even a bit more than Louis. The story itself has become a measuring stick against the girl that I was compared to the woman I have become.

Today’s Recipe:

There’s a lot of intensity in this version of our dear Lestat, but also a good bit of surprise. Today’s recipe seemed a fitting pairing…especially the passion part. It’s lighter and creamier than a New York-style cheesecake, bright with passion fruit, and aromatic enough to fill the room when it comes out of the refrigerator.

Passion Fruit Cheesecake

Wow your guests: light, creamy passion fruit cheesecake topped with a fragrant, jewel-bright passion fruit gelée


Ingredients

    **CRUST**
  • 2 cups vanilla wafer crumbs
  • ¼ cup granulated sugar
  • ¼ teaspoon salt
  • ½ cup (1 stick) unsalted butter, melted
  • **CHEESECAKE**
  • 32 oz (4 packages) cream cheese, room temperature
  • 1 cup granulated sugar
  • 4 large eggs, room temperature
  • 1 cup fresh passion fruit pulp without seeds
  • 1 teaspoon lime zest
  • **GELÉE**
  • ½ cup fresh passion fruit pulp with seeds
  • 2 tablespoons granulated sugar
  • ¾ teaspoon powdered gelatin bloomed in 1 tablespoon cold water

Directions

  1. Preheat oven to 350°F. In a medium bowl, combine vanilla wafer crumbs, sugar, and salt. Pour in butter and stir until the mixture looks like wet sand. Press the mixture firmly and evenly across the bottom and partially up the sides of an ungreased 9-inch springform pan. Place pan in the refrigerator to chill while making the filling.
  2. In a large bowl or stand mixer, beat the softened cream cheese and sugar together on medium speed for about 2 minutes until smooth. Add the eggs, one at a time, beating just until incorporated. Beat in passion fruit pulp and zest. Pour the batter into the crust and tap on the counter 2 or 3 times to release any large air bubbles.
  3. Bake 50-55 minutes until the outer 2-3” looks firm but the center is still jiggly. Remove from oven and let cool in the pan at room temperature for an hour. Cover loosely with foil and refrigerate for at least 4 hours.
  4. Once cheesecake is fully refrigerated, in a small pan over low heat, heat passion fruit pulp and sugar until sugar dissolves. Stir in bloomed gelatin until dissolved. Cool until just barely warm. Pour over cheesecake. Chill for at least 3 more hours, but overnight is preferred.

Recipe for Brazilian Passion Fruit Cake: A Sweet Adventure

Two-Bit Story:

I notice a lot of LA productions use the word “immersive” these days, but I find most of these so-called immersive plays wanting. They’re often essentially a standard theater built within an interesting environment plus an interactive bit pre-show or during intermission.  

Perhaps I’m jaded.

I was around for the LA Tamara days, the grand dame of interactive theater.  It was written by John Krizanc and opened in Los Angeles in 1984 at the three-story Hollywood American Legion Hall on Highland Avenue. It ran for nine years, and I still miss it 30+ years later.

The premise was based on the real-life artist Tamara de Lempicka and her encounter with Italian poet and fascist sympathizer Gabriele d’Annunzio in 1927.  By the standards of interactive theater, Tamara was exceptional. And not just because interactive theater was unusual for the 80s, although that helped. Some of the things they did are still remarkably difficult to pull off today.  What made it special was that the interactivity wasn’t an add-on—the entire play depended on the audience being physically present in the room and making choices.

There wasn’t traditional audience seating nor a single stage. You moved through this enormous, three-story building, following whichever character you chose. Multiple scenes happened simultaneously in different rooms, so you literally couldn’t see the entire play unfold. Your choices determined the story you experienced.

Today, a production may put you in a warehouse, give you a signature cocktail, have actors whisper in your ear, and call itself immersive. Tamara did something more elaborate. You could follow various characters:  Tamara, D’Annunzio, Luisa, the servants, the chauffeur, etc. If you followed one character, you literally lost another story happening somewhere else in the villa. And each time actors interacted, you could choose to follow someone else.  Each choice you made had consequences, a split second decision on which story you were going to experience. There was no way to see everything in a single performance.

Even your arrival was part of the experience. Before walking through the grand double-doors, you were issued an Italian passport. It identified you as someone entering D’Annunzio’s Il Vittoriale. It was stamped by a gruff Fascist official. Lose your passport, you may get deported. Keep your passport, and it could be used to return to experience another version of the story. Each time you visited, the ticket price dropped. On your sixth passport stamp, entrance was free. This was important, because this was NOT a play you could see in one night.

The first room you entered was the D’Annunzio villa’s central gathering area, during a cocktail party in progress. Waitstaff, which you later learn were actors, served classic champagne cocktails (the first time I had one and now a life-long love). Authentic Tamara de Lempicka paintings (borrowed from Hollywood actors like Barbra Streisand and later replaced with fakes) lined the walls. You sipped your cocktail, wandering around the room, making your way to the dining table, dirty dishes and remnants of a meal still in place.  Someone had picked their peas from their meal, placing them neatly to the side. The play, it seems, had already begun.

And when the cast began their performances, choices must be made…who did you follow, where did you go? Did you stay with the party you arrived with or split up so you can learn more? 10 actors, 12 rooms…a “choose your own adventure” book in the flesh. You climbed stairs. You went into bedrooms. You entered the oratory and smelled the scent of musk commingled with piety (to this day, I don’t know what that scent was…frankincense? Myrrh?). You discovered characters already in rooms. You’d watch fellow audience members disappear down a hallway and have absolutely no idea what they were witnessing. You were constantly aware that another story was happening somewhere else.

The entire building functioned as a stage. At any given moment, ten actors were performing simultaneously, different audience members followed different actors, scenes remained synchronized enough that the narrative didn’t collapse, actors maintained character while navigating the crowd.

Then came the intermission, dinner and drinks, where you and dozens of strangers essentially became immediate companions and story archivists:

“What did you see?”
“Where did you go?”
“Did you see what happened with the chauffeur?”
“Wait, you saw that?”

As you continued on, you made different choices based on what you’d learned… you realized the servants’ stories were just as important as the main characters.

And at the play’s end, you understood you had seen only one possible story, when a thousand more options existed. You couldn’t wait to return, to follow someone else, perhaps the chauffeur into the basement next time.

You saw the play three times.

You could have gone a dozen more.

Two-Bit Recipe:

“Passion is a word we use when we talk about love. It is also a word we use to describe a crime. Sometimes it is also a fruit.”  — Zava, Ted Lasso

As often happens, my recipe today has absolutely nothing to do with the story above.

I baked my version of this cake with the seeds included and I enjoyed this rustic version. It reminds me of a lemon poppy seed cake. As it bakes, the seeds gently release their aromatic oils, perfuming the entire cake. Each bite of the finished cake breaks the soft, velvety silence of the sponge with an unexpected, playful crunch—a bold, crackling finish. However, I think most people would probably prefer to keep the seeds to the syrup only —so that’s the way I’ve written the final recipe, but feel free to keep the seeds if you enjoy the crunch.

Brazilian Passion Fruit Cake (Bolo de Maracujá)

This traditional dessert is tropical sunshine baked into a cake. The sponge is infused with the bright soul of passion fruit and doused in a sticky passion fruit glaze. It’s a cake baked for, sultry afternoons, a lush treat to be enjoyed slowly beside a steaming cup of tea as the day winds down.


Ingredients

    CAKE
  • 2 cups all-purpose flour
  • 2 teaspoons baking powder
  • ¼ teaspoon kosher salt
  • 4 large eggs, separated
  • 1½ cups granulated sugar
  • ½ cup unsalted butter, softened
  • 1 cup passion fruit pulp WITHOUT seeds (about 12)
  • SYRUP
  • 1 cup granulated sugar
  • ½ cup water
  • ¼ cup passion fruit pulp WITH seeds (about 3)

Directions

  1. Preheat oven to 350°F. Grease and flour a 10-12 cup bundt pan. Mix together flour, baking powder, and salt. Set aside.
  2. Using an electric mixer, beat egg yolks, sugar and butter for 6 minutes or until mixture is pale and creamy. Transfer to a large bowl. Clean the mixer bowl very well and set aside.*
  3. Add the flour mixture in three additions, alternating with 1 cup passion fruit pulp, beginning and ending with flour.
  4. In bowl of stand mixer, whisk egg whites to soft peaks. Fold egg whites into batter in two additions.
  5. Pour batter into prepared cake pan and bake for 50-55 minutes or until a skewer inserted comes out clean.
  6. Meanwhile, make passion fruit syrup. place remaining ¼ cup passion fruit pulp, sugar, and water in a small saucepan over low heat, stirring until sugar dissolves. Increase heat to high and bring to boil. Boil for about 8 minutes or until syrup becomes thick and syrupy. Set aside to cool.
  7. Remove cake from the oven. Using a bamboo or metal skewer, poke holes in the surface of the cake. Reserving ¼ cup of the syrup, pour the remaining syrup over the hot cake. Cool cake completely before removing from the pan. Pour the remaining ¼ cup of the syrup over the top of the cake.

* I abhor trying to clean the stand mixer bowl in the middle of the recipe. If there’s any remaining butter in the bowl, the egg whites will not whip so you must scrupulously clean it. If you have both electric beaters and a stand mixer, use the beaters for the butter mixture and the stand mixer for the egg whites. Clean both later at your convenience.

Two-Bit News:

Upcoming 2026 Events About Town