DOG_M_BEAR

In his eyes, every bug looks like a distinct speck of light in the darkness. That's why he built his palace at the bottom of the kingdom—so that whenever he looked up, he would see a starry sky where every single "star" moved according to their own rhythm.

Is Lace actually a child, or is she an "adult forced to play a child"?

I think the answer is the former—Lace is a child.

The reason I believe Lace is a child—or more precisely, that she is not written as an adult in the story—is because if Lace were an "adult who is fully mature on the inside but forced to play an immature child, feeling pained and oppressed by it," then Hornet would become the absolute worst asshole I've seen in recent years.

First, let me clarify that from the perspective of "chronological age," Lace is "an adult," as character dialogue tells us she has lived for a very long time. However, what I am discussing is being a minor "narratively and mentally." A similar example is Aang from Avatar: The Last Airbender. According to the plot, he is technically over 100 years old (having been frozen in ice for a century), but his mentality and the role the story assigns to him still treat him as a teenager, not a 100-year-old grandpa. I believe Lace is given a similar character treatment in Silksong—she is treated as a minor.

Based on the game's content, we can gather three facts that no one would dispute:

Hornet is fundamentally a kind, good person, a hero.

Hornet is deeply aware of Lace's trauma and pain and wishes to help/save her.

Hornet repeatedly uses the word "child" to address or refer to Lace.

Given these three points, if Lace were an adult "forced to play a child and suffering because of it," the premise that "Hornet is a good person" would completely fall apart. This would even make Hornet a massive jerk. Knowingly calling an adult who doesn't want to be treated as a child "child," while being fully aware of their pain, is, in my opinion, just as malicious as intentionally misgendering a transgender person (knowing they suffer from severe gender dysphoria) or calling someone with extreme body anxiety a "fatass." This is not how a hero acts; it's the behavior of the most one-dimensional bullies.

I know that sometimes when two people are exceptionally close, they might use specific terms to address each other—like female friends using derogatory or misogynistic terms as an alternative expression of being "besties." However, in Silksong, Hornet and Lace have clearly known each other for a very short time, and Hornet's personality doesn't seem like the type to do this.

Therefore, if the premise that "Lace is an adult" were true, Hornet constantly calling her "child" would only be a severe insult or continuous psychological torture for Lace; at least, I cannot think of any other well-intentioned interpretation. Furthermore, the final ending scene where Lace and Hornet's weapons rest side-by-side (regardless of whether you interpret their subsequent relationship as relatives, master and apprentice, friends, or lovers) would only symbolize that "another cycle of abuse is about to begin." The Sister of the Void ending would become a bad ending for Lace, and the thematic essence of the story would be heavily corrupted.

By contrast, if we consider Lace a child narratively, Hornet's characterization remains intact, and "child" becomes a relatively objective statement rather than a degradation of Lace's character.

I think it's pretty obvious—yes, my logic on this matter isn't based on any subjective preference for "Lace being a child." On the contrary, it is pure proof by contradiction. Since "Lace is an adult" completely clashes with how the plot is actually presented, then out of the two possible options, "Lace is a child" is clearly the more accurate one.

Establishing a character's narrative role is indispensable when discussing the canon lore. If a specific character interpretation directly impacts whether the overall story makes sense, I believe it absolutely warrants a discussion.

We mean she is their mother narratively and conceptually.

Their connection is defined by the roles of mother and daughters, rather than just some random crazy woman forcing a group of poor girls to play "house" with her.

GMS doesn't need a biological bloodline to be their mother. Technically, GMS and Lace aren't blood-related either—Lace is a creation of GMS—yet they are still seen as mother and daughter in the story. The same logic should apply to Weavers.

As for the "She lied" accusation, I don't think it's a cliché line like "You kidnapped and brainwashed us! You're not our real mom!" Instead, it's more likely that GMS reduced Weavers' entire existence to just being "daughters."

It's like toxic parents who don't want their children to have their own lives or relationships, expecting them to serve them forever.

Rather than GMS deceiving them about being their mother, it’s more of a manipulation along the lines of: "You are only allowed to be my daughters. You are no one else, and you can never become anything else."

It’s not so much that FS is denying GMS as their mother; rather, she is furious that GMS NEVER treated them as REAL daughters. To GMS, they were just toys labeled "daughters," yet she still had the audacity to call them her daughters.

Side Note: Just in case, I want to add that I couldn't care less whether you like Lacenet or not. What I do care about is that people shouldn't deny their technical "kinship" in the narrative just for the sake of shipping. This connection is essentially the same as saying "the Knight is Grimmchild’s adoptive father"—it's really not that deep. If you want to ship them, just go for it!

Considering he deliberately gave up his former gargantuan form, all those claims that he's "insecure about his height," "doesn't want to be seen as a mortal," or "wants to look powerful in front of others" just don't make any sense.

Honestly, he might even be happy if someone calls him short—because it means that even if he's as bright as a lightbulb, at least in terms of height, he's similar enough to his citizens.

I feel like he's probably more troubled by being too bright and blinding, or by the fact that bugs worship him so much that it's hard to interact with them as equals. (That's why I think he really likes Monomon.)

I love imagining a scene where Hornet encounters Ogrim after the events of Silksong.

It’s just a headcanon, but perhaps Ogrim would shower the long-lost Hornet with praise—much like he did when he met the Knight—and begin to compare her to PK.

However, he might suddenly stop, apologize dejectedly, and explain that the King had once told him not to suggest Hornet took after him in front of the Weavers, even if it were meant as a compliment.

Ogrim always assumed this was due to Deepnest’s resentment toward Hallownest, or perhaps some strange Weaver custom where "pointing out how much a daughter took after her father" was considered a grave insult. Eventually, he would ask Hornet curiously if his theories were true.

Hornet might ponder for a moment, let out a sigh, and reply, "There is no such custom, neither in Deepnest nor among the Weavers. He (PK) simply... misunderstood." Upon hearing this, Ogrim would laugh, remarking that even a King can make such blunders, and that perhaps if there had been more communication with Deepnest, such a misunderstanding could have been avoided.

>>>Notice: Please read from right to left. <<<

Sorry, I forgot English comics are read from left to right when I was drawing this...

This comic also includes spoilers for Hollow Knight: Silksong.

20 pages in total.

Summary: Interactions between PK and young Hornet.

Hasn't anyone considered that, if this theory holds true, how could THK evade PK's inspection?

Were all the previous vessels idiots who didn't know to disguise themselves?

Moreover, if THK was really "smart" enough to know it had to disguise itself, why would it risk coming before PK? And why did the Knight in the cutscene climb up just to die?

It makes absolutely no sense.

To prop up the view that "Pale King is a cold-blooded baby-killing enthusiast," they forcibly turn all the vessels—including THK and the protagonist—into a bunch of truly "mindless" fools who would charge forward without hesitation, even with a meat grinder right in front of them.

Even more contradictory is that, even if we assume the Pale King is truly an evil murderer (oh, that's so stupid)... wait, we actually have another character who did the "killing unqualified vessels" thing.

Yet most fans still regard that character as an admirable hero, even though she tries to kill the protagonist twice in the game.

Of course, we all know Hornet has her reasons for doing so. Based on the game's text and the main theme it aims to convey, we all know that it cannot be interpreted this way.

But if we ignore the facts and force the "evil Pale King" theory to hold at all costs, Hornet becomes someone who knows full well her father is an infant-killing lunatic, yet still helps that lunatic father protect his damned kingdom and assists in slaughtering the remaining siblings who luckily escaped death.

It's just plain stupid even reading it as text. The entire message the game intends to convey is utterly destroyed.

What truly happened in Hallownest is a tragedy; the game's theme is the confrontation between order and instinct.

It's not the absurd story of "Someone did bad things, so everything that happened afterward is what he deserved. But he stubbornly refuses to die properly, causing everyone to suffer along with him. Yet those victims are all fools, willing to sacrifice their lives to perpetuate the tyrant's personal interests, including being separated from their daughter who was born not long ago."

If the game really wanted us to think that way, it wouldn't make us feel that Hallownest as a whole is a beautiful place.

There wouldn't be Elegy for Hallownest, there wouldn't be a character like Ogrim, and the condemnation would be much stronger—like what TC did in Silksong.

It would be more like something that's beautiful on the outside but rotten inside, a decaying thing that deserves to perish as such.

What Grand Mother Silk truly desires is "to be a mother," not "to have a child."

I know the two sound similar, but they are fundamentally different. The biggest distinction is that when one "wants to be a mother," the child becomes merely a means to an end rather than the end itself.

This also means that as long as it serves the purpose of making her "more of a mother," she is willing to "filter" her children to obtain the one who best validates her status—the one who ensures she remains a "mother" forever.

Between Lace and Phantom, she chose Lace; between Lace and Weaver (Hornet), she chose Weaver (Hornet).

GMS does not embody the idealized "altruistic" mother figure; instead, she is a mother who views everything from her own perspective. A significant reason why she protects Lace in Act 3 is that Lace is currently her only child. Only by protecting her and keeping Lace alive can she continue to hold onto her role as a "mother."

To be clear, I am by no means saying that GMS lacks maternal love or that she doesn't love her children. Quite the opposite—this is certainly maternal love, and GMS loves her children to death.

It is simply that she cares about her own feelings more than she cares about them.

This ritual doesn't need to delve into Hornet's own memories and pull physical things out of them. Instead, it’s more like supercharging the Needolin's power, allowing Hornet to play the Elegy of the Deep for the entire land of Pharloom.

I think this approach could also neatly resolve the moral controversy that some people argue about (though I personally don't think it's a big deal) regarding obtaining the fourth Old Heart—turning the act of taking that heart into something truly unavoidable and necessary.

Hornet would have to battle those past memories. Some are real memories (the Pinstress trio), while others may not even exist (a duo battle with Lace and Phantom). This process would feel like a more direct form of self-reflection, perhaps allowing us to delve deeper into Hornet's inner world while also addressing her feelings about her identity as a "Monarch."

We know Hornet has always resisted the possibility of becoming a Monarch. Is there a chance that, through this ritual, she could transform the "Monarch Crests"—which she might possess but doesn't want to use—into something she can more readily accept, and that would be more helpful for the future (perhaps even another ending)?

I'd love to see Hornet embrace her traits as a Pale being and wield them in service of her ideals, just like she does with her other tools. Instead of her constantly insisting "I'm different from them" or "They're all awful, and I'm one of them too," desperately trying to shed some stereotypical label or always feeling like she doesn't fit in with mortals.

What I mean is that Hornet acts as if she's been brainwashed since childhood, constantly told that there's an evil part inside her. This makes her believe that a portion of her very nature is bad, and she worries that if she ever becomes a monarch, she might turn out just as terrible as "those villains." That's why she feels compelled to keep proving she's not like that.

But we know that being a Pale Being isn't a label exclusive to evil creatures; it's simply an attribute. That attribute comes with certain traits, just like blood type or zodiac sign.

The primary basis for this theory is the description "Two children born entwined, apart," the shape of the Conjoined Heart, and Hornet's evaluation of them: "For one to love another so similar to themselves, is that selfless or vain?"

I believe they were meant to be born as a single individual, but due to various factors, they were born as two separate beings, hence described as "born entwined, apart." In a sense, they are the same bug, only complete when together; thus, the Conjoined Heart takes the shape of two leaf-like objects touching each other—it is the Green Prince's heart, but also his and his partner's heart. Perhaps it's two halves of the same being who fell in love: "For lovers born on beat exact" may not simply refer to them being born at the same time, but also imply that they are "too similar"—they love each other, but also love another version of themselves. This better explains why merely loving each other results in them being "forever cursed."

This theory makes Hornet's comment about them seem less harsh; she might simply be stating her objective interpretation (though somewhat sharp). It also explains why Team Cherry designed the Green Prince's story to end in death—without his partner, he can never be whole again; he cannot live alone, and only dying by his partner's side is true redemption for this character.

Lace: Haha, I'm going to deliberately sweep these glasses off the table!

Hornet: You don't need to do that on purpose to get my attention. Even if you do nothing, I still value and care about you.

According to the description of Queen's Station by Ellina the Chronicler in the book Hollow Knight: Wanderer's Journal, we can know that Pale King is not just an engineer, but also an engineer with concepts of sustainable development and environmental protection.