The term "master" in this context is not, of course, one that Forever Knight invented; but it does invite one to consider the nature of the relationship between the vampire-who-makes and the vampire-who-is-made. For Nick (who in many ways represents the modern North American take on semantics), the opposite of "master" is "slave".
One might think that Lacroix, who came from a slave-owning culture, would feel the same way. However, he explicitly doesn't; and I think this is perhaps a case of cultural (and linguistic!) mistranslation. English is not Latin, in other words. Nor is it medieval French. (Nor is the exchange between Nick and Lacroix in "Killer Instinct" in medieval French; but that's another matter.)
For myself, I think the antonym that Lacroix is trying to convey is "apprentice". He is the master vampire, and has taken Nicolas to be his apprentice at that trade. It is certainly a relationship that would make perfect sense contemporaneously. Probably not, though, the first one that would first come to a twentieth-century viewer, especially an American.
no subject
One might think that Lacroix, who came from a slave-owning culture, would feel the same way. However, he explicitly doesn't; and I think this is perhaps a case of cultural (and linguistic!) mistranslation. English is not Latin, in other words. Nor is it medieval French. (Nor is the exchange between Nick and Lacroix in "Killer Instinct" in medieval French; but that's another matter.)
For myself, I think the antonym that Lacroix is trying to convey is "apprentice". He is the master vampire, and has taken Nicolas to be his apprentice at that trade. It is certainly a relationship that would make perfect sense contemporaneously. Probably not, though, the first one that would first come to a twentieth-century viewer, especially an American.