･ׅ 𝜗℘ ･ׅ who in the world am i? ♡ ah, that's the great puzzle. ֹ🗨️🪡 ၄၃ႄˑ ˳
i am blythe – your doctor, analyst, theorist & the rook on this side of the board. ♡ care for a visit? you might find the tea will quite enjoy your curiosity.
welcome to wonderland – not quite the one you were expecting, i'm sure. this one was made by my own needles, threads and fabrics. you found a ticket, thus you must follow some select rules already steeped and brushed.
♡ for context: blythe is a character. i'm not actually a doctor, it's her character ｡°(°¯᷄◠¯᷅°)°｡ (and yes, i am 19.)
♡ you entered wonderland on your own accord and accepted the ticket on your own. therefore, it is expected and required to be respectful and polite. i will not doormat for you if you are mean, and you will be blocked without any chance of unblocking. (and truly, it's not that hard to be nice or polite. it's much harder to be rude or mean to gain attention. that won't work here – go somewhere else.)
♡ unwanted riddles and chatter along the lines of rudeness will be unanswered and you will be blocked. that won't work here – respect goes both ways and i won't double over to make sure you get your way. you are in my wonderland, not your own. ♡
♡ be civil and respectful human beings. i'm sure the world won't end if you just be nice while you're here, yes? ♡
= ･ׅ 𝜗 ♠️ ℘ ･ׅ =
some tea parties have already taken place in your absence. it appears their tickets haven't found you yet, yes? my condolences, time is quite loud and disruptful today – these spools will retell our discussions of old. enjoy yourself and remember to knock twice before entry. ♡
“a deep dive of harlequin's side of the moonless night, and how that affects him as a character forward” – here ♡
“fools, smiles, and seems – an analysis on the specific threads chosen and the meanings they sing” – here ♡
““jesters and harlequins”, huh? you must be a little mad to call the fools by such a name! unless...” – here ♡
𝆬 𓈒 ✧✦ ˙ 𝆬 𓈒 𝅘𝅥𝅮𝅘𝅥𝅮⠀♟️🪡 greetings. ♡ thank you, i'm glad you enjoy them so much. your words mean a lot to me. ♡
i love making theories that make sense out of what seem like red herrings, and honestly, i love the freak circus so much for this. everything feels connected even if it doesn't at first – it's a very well written vn and i can't wait to see more of it's lore. ♡
i've been a little lore theorist for forever and it feels so good to see everything make sense in a way that leaves no clues left behind. to review days 1 & 2 of the freak circus through a new lens after verbalizing the dots that've been connected for a while now is truly an amazing feeling. ♡ everything seems to be done or said for a reason and it's only one of the reasons i love the freak circus so much. ♡
Hi!! Just discovered your blog and I really do like your analysis and theories, to which I want to ask, do you have any ideas or opinions on the text on The Freak Circus Tumblr account? As I find it very curious, Fools, Smiles and Seems, yet each of those words is tied to one of the characters.
Fools for Columbina and how the fools represent her and maybe how her story is one to fool others (especially Jester's version) Smiles for Harlequin as revealed in one of the latest amas, yet the curious one is Pierrot's, "Seems" which means "to give a certain impression, appear, or convey a particular quality or feeling." And considering Pierrot's color seems to be orange and not red, it makes me wonder if Pierrot is hiding something from us, like sure he is hiding maybe something he knows about what happened on the moonless night?
Jester's version of the villainizes Harlequin, Harlequin's version is fairer, blaming everyone, the mirror one shows a more sympathetic story towards Harlequin, and while we haven't gotten Doctor's, TT's or Pierrot's version, I wonder if Pierrot's shield is one where he is both trying to move on from Columbina and live his own life, and one where he tries to forget about something he did, or didn't do. 🐛
greetings. ♡ sweetest of days for you and all of you.
more answers under the cut since they're pretty long, haha. ♡
= ･ׅ 𝜗℘ ･ׅ =
i'm so glad you asked, because i've always wondered why the fools wore pink – the same color worn by columbina. do the others see her as a fool? perhaps is that why pierrot doesn't like calling them "fools"?
columbina was characterized as kind and sweet, even to other monsters – which is what caused pierrot to fall in love with her. "with no claws and almost no fangs" means she was weak.
and that's why pierrot doesn't like the term for the assistants in pink "fools" coined by the others – because it pertains back to columbina, that the trait he fell in love with, kindness, was a foolish decision from her.
= ･ׅ 𝜗℘ ･ׅ =
also, another thing. columbina asks harlequin if he's going to save her in the scene after jester is caged.
"I'm scared, if they try to touch me again..."
"Will you save me?"
"Save...?"
because dying wasn't certainly what columbina was thinking when harlequin was going to "save her". if you were her – and you see harlequin break through his cage to get to you, you'd think, even for just a second, that he'd save you, right?
but he did save her – putting her out of her misery. and if she did survive the moonless night, hypothetically, the humans wouldn't stop their mission to relocate and sexually harass columbina. and she would've pleaded them to stop upon seeing them do things like kill and eat the ringleader.
she was a fool to think he was going to save her traditionally, but he did save her... in a way... she didn't have to suffer anymore.
(and even if he did save her traditionally, like a prince charming of sorts, i don't think the humans would've stopped either. they would just focus on hurting harlequin instead and relocate columbina anyway.)
= ･ׅ 𝜗℘ ･ׅ =
as for smiles... i, personally, think is pertains back to the undertale analogy i mentioned before. smiling and laughing to cope with distress, tragedy. laugh the pain away. even if what they're laughing about isn't funny... columbina's death wasn't funny... eating her wasn't funny... he shouldn't have smiled – but he did.
and if we consider that harlequin leaned into the role as villain, indulging in fleeting pleasures and temporary joys to cope with the longterm trauma of the moonless night... smiles makes a lot more sense, right?
= ･ׅ 𝜗℘ ･ׅ =
this was the most straightforward and obvious answer to me, at the same time, i struggled to put it into words??? just, bear with me—
there will be a deep dive analysis about pierrot and his side of the moonless night sometime in the future, thus i'll treat this as a sort of opener for it – there's one scene that completely contradicts what i thought about pierrot in the moonless night.
"I'll find a way... We'll be together forever..."
i won't dive into what i think of the scene to avoid repeated theories in the pierrot analysis, but this contradicts what we thought about pierrot – that he isn't what he seems.
and from the beginning, we know he's hiding stuff from us. the slip ups in the recent ama's, covering up the accidental slip of the word "delicious"?
he isn't what he seems. he's hiding so much from us because we'll be scared, and he doesn't want that.
remember? "—tried to hide his claws so she wouldn't prick herself on his skin."
So. Why did Harlequin decide to be such an ass to Pierrot throughout all this time? Was it solely for attention? Pettiness?
Try to put yourself in his shoes for a moment. Immediately after Columbina was consumed, after the ringleader was killed and they seized control of the circus, everyone finally got the time to start processing what happened.
Everyone responds to grief differently. But somebody like Pierrot? Somebody who is based on the sad, lovesick clown of the Commedia Dell'arte? He would've lost all motivation. He would've been in a near catatonic state afterwards. What's the point of living if his sweetheart wasn't in his life anymore? He can hardly even believe that his childhood friend would do such a thing either, even if it was the only way. He would be in denial about Harlequin. He wouldn't want to believe that he actually did that. I think he wouldn't even be able to get out of bed in the beginning, no matter how much the rest of them tried to cheer him up (if they were even in the right state of mind to attempt that, that is.)
Harlequin must've seen that and known that he would lose Pierrot too if he didn't do something. After the traumatising ordeal of having to eat somebody he cared for, he would do anything in his power to prevent losing another member of his newfound family. I'm sure that Jester taking on the role of a leader did help in some ways, but it wouldn't have given Pierrot any kind of outlet.
He had already done something unforgivable. He might as well don the title of "Villain" and torment Pierrot if only to see the life return in his eyes, give him a reason to live. Even if that reason is just to get revenge on him.
Atleast then, Pierrot would be okay. Atleast then, he would make sure his former friend made it another day. Even if it hurt him. This was better than the alternative. This was his cross to bear.
He would gladly be Pierrot's punching bag. It's what he deserves, after all.
greetings, it's me, and i had a thought. just a tiny thought.
= ･ׅ 𝜗℘ ･ׅ =
in the game, pierrot tells us he calls the fools "jesters and harlequins" because he doesn't like the title of "fools" that everyone else has given them right? we understand, of course, why he calls them "harlequins" even if there is only one harlequin in the circus, truly.
but "jesters"?
and isn't it ironic that pierrot calls the fools by the names of the two who are the most involved with columbina's death?
Another illustration with the studio @春醴记工作室!
I’m so happy to see Harlequin receiving so much love! Thank you, everyone! So many beautiful and adorable artworks of our lovable little green menace! Happy Birthday, Harlequin!
And just like Pierrot, I ended up making another little tribute haha
Also, only today did I realize Harlequin’s cake flavor would actually be different… oops! =u=''
The TFC characters are so interesting, but I think Harlequin is my favorite. It's a shame he gets so mischaracterized by the fandom. People say he only killed Columbina out of malice and jealousy, which I believe did influence his decision, but obviously, that wasn't all.
They were starving to death, desperate to escape that hell. Pierrot was on the verge of dying, and Columbina herself was in great danger if left alone with humans. They would do terrible things to her once the others could no longer protect her... She even begged Harlequin to save her. Unfortunately, he did save her... but not the way she expected.
In Harlequin's distorted worldview, perhaps her death was a release from something worse.
He didn't do it just out of malice; he did it to save everyone—himself, Pierrot, Jester, Ticket Taker, Doctor... and even Columbina. Harlequin isn't the monster many think he is.
He is indeed cruel, but that cruelty didn't come out of nowhere. It came from years of abuse, mistreatment, suffering, and trauma, just like everyone else in the circus
greetings, just a wandering lurker on the internet... a lurker who's had ideas about harlequin for a while now. ♡ i've got an analysis i've been thinking about in particular. (it actually started as an analysis on harlequin's side of columbina's tale but it turned into an analysis of harlequin's character afterwards too, hahah (´｡•ω•｡`)♡)
let's get into it – a deep dive into harlequin's side of the moonless night and the effects of the moonless night had onto present day harlequin.
(i also initially started writing this to answer the question of "why was harlequin envious of pierrot and columbina?" but i got carried away and may have dumped all my thoughts about harlequin into this analysis... oops? ps this might keep on being updated after posting, hehe. ♡)
(also happy birthday, harlequin ♡ !!)
(tw about talks about murder, sexual harassment, sexual assault & sexual trafficking.)
(alsoooo psps credits to @aadamoriss for making me notice this first detail among the others. ♡)
in the one of the newest ama's on the official tfc blog, pierrot says this when asked about a favorite memory he's had about his past.
and in a previous ama, harlequin says that he has a perfume with the scent of night-blooming jasmine – of course, he didn't seem to say it was his favorite but it's certainly a choice to have that scent in particular, especially one visitors seem to like, is it not?
maybe harlequin is more sentimental than we thought. he deflects all questions trying to understand or reach him with sexual innuendoes and connotations, yes, but he has a heart underneath all that, surely...
surely the sexual desires are (true,) but a coping mechanism. columbina did say they developed their own shields and emotional defense mechanisms concerning the moonless night. (we discuss this more about this later on. ♡)
using little details like this, i've gathered some that could point towards a deeper motivation for harlequin beyond envy of pierrot and columbina's love.
= ･ׅ 𝜗℘ ･ׅ =
i've always had a thought about how jester in particular framed the night they consumed columbina. specifically how he frames harlequin as the "villain" compared to pierrot's longing and love for the sweet angel. though ticket taker gives us more intel on the moonless night itself, it helps to understand that while jester definitely mixed the truth with some lies to turn it into an almost fantastical tale (no moonless night in jester's retelling), some parts of that had to be true.
pierrot loved columbina for her kindness, and he grew protective of her in the face of humans who planned on using columbina (implird to be sexual) for her beauty because of that. he even tried to hide his claws so she couldn't prick herself on his claws – so she wouldn't be scared of him. (i think this part is true, specifically the "hide his claws so she couldn't prick herself" part since he does the same thing with mc.)
in jester's retelling of the tale, harlequin sees this, was envious and went after columbina, unclear of his intentions. jester's narration calls this seduction rather than courting out of love (what pierrot does). columbina's line afterwards is "(insert line about bina saying she sighs for him too etc etc)" which implies she atleast felt something towards him.
but why was harlequin envious? why is he envious? why does he try to go after anything pierrot wants?
to answer this, first, let's go back to the answers from the ama. from various ama questions that have been answered (and posted publically), pierrot met harlequin first among the group, actually being quite shy in certain ways during those early days and alone. even more so, harlequin was alone since pierrot says harlequin's parents weren't around when he met harlequin.
from this ama, when asked who jester would pick to lead the circus if he and ticket taker weren't an option, he says harlequin because "he understands how [their] world works", and harlequin would leave if it meant it would help his family according to another.
and add in this ama, if it also addresses his earlier years prior to meeting the others, it means harlequin has been through enough to learn what needs to be done to survive, even in the earlier days.
in comparison to pierrot who is a heart-ruler (someone who makes decisions, guides their life, or navigates situations based on emotions, empathy, and intuition rather than strict logic or practical calculation), harlequin would prioritize surviving rather than the heart. he doesn't fall in love as easy as pierrot does, and he knows what needs to be done when times are dire and they can't afford to prioritize love when their lives are on the line.
(hence why he made the move to eat columbina, jester couldn't move (shackled or hungry, but the point is jester couldn't make the initiative), pierrot is barely hanging on and isn't one to lead, not even able to respond when jester asked if he was alive, doctor isn't one to lead either, equally as hungry and weak, and ticket-taker is weak enough to struggle speaking without breaks. but harlequin still had the strength to break the bars. he took the initiative because no one else could.)
pierrot is a heart-ruler, and he saw his rival for columbina's love kill her. he was laughing manically, through his own anguish and the weight of everyone else's, to survive.
but did harlequin actually love columbina or was he seducing her?
i have some crumbs of information that could mean something, but my hypothesis is that harlequin also loved columbina, but didn't want to let go of his attachment (familial, romantic or otherwise) for pierrot either.
but he didn't let that affect a motivation that surpasses that, one much stronger than the love for one, the other or both – the need to survive.
= ･ׅ 𝜗 1 ℘ ･ׅ =
now, in this ama, neko says that jester took the lead because no one else could. too consumed by grief, sorrow and anguish. take into account what i said about harlequin before – surely he would have enough willpower to keep leading the group through columbina's death if he didn't have a deeper liking for columbina... right? but he couldn't. jester had to keep them going.
so he was affected by columbina's death too. deeply.
and might i say, harlequin was one of the two who were the most affected by columbina's death in the long run as well. (we'll come back to this later. ♡)
= ･ׅ 𝜗 2 ℘ ･ׅ =
do you remember in undertale, where the monsters would often laugh to cope when they experienced something tragic, when they were hurt or killed? you wouldn't laugh at something like that, that's not funny. mant monsters acknowledge that, that they shouldn't be laughing at something like that, that's not funny... but they still laugh. that's a psychological defense mechanism, not sadism.
apply that to harlequin – him laughing during columbina's death, down to the idea of temporary, fleeting happiness to cope with something that would scar you for a long time.
"No... no... no..."
"EAT!"
"Why... are you smiling?"
No.
"Hah... hahahahahahhhaha!"
"HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!"
"Why... did you do that?"
"Sorry... [Harlequin]."
He wasn't... (= he wasn't actually laughing. he didn't find it funny. it hurt him too.)
makes more sense, right? he didn't feel sadistic about columbina's death, nor did he find it funny, he laughed as a coping mechanism to cope with what he just did.
= ･ׅ 𝜗 3 ℘ ･ׅ =
"Maybe he'll be the first to fall."
"And then one by one we'll all wither away in this pit, [Harlequin]."
"I will, feed him."
"Wait..."
[Jester is caught and placed into the cage.]
take a look at this exchange between jester and harlequin directly after pierrot is attacked and caged by the humans who saw him a threat to them wanting to get closer to columbina. i propose to you my interpretation of the scene that came from deeper analysis – what if they were discussing plans using their shot in the dark change to survive relating to columbina?
we don't see anything, we are shown a black screen, but by now the group is realizing the gravity of their situation under the ringleader as he slowly starves them and attacks the monsters for entertainment. the humans in the prior scene couldn't touch columbina with pierrot around (and a fate far worse than theirs would come for her if the humans had it their way), and i do think he, too, was protecting the others. but with pierrot gone, columbina was more vulnerable.
they caught jester next (perhaps they had a plan jester was meant to execute but he was caught and harlequin was placed in the position of initiation on what to do next.), and with jester gone, they had begun realizing the worst is coming to worst. (and i think it's here where harlequin's idea started bubbling to the surface. columbina asks him if he's going to save her, and harlequin... would end up putting her out of her misery instead of being her hero. because if columbina was alive after the moonless night and they had somehow survived, the humans wouldn't stop their pursuit and they would continue getting hurt.)
columbina, the weakest one, was scared. scared that they'll touch her more, assault her again and do something despicable to her, since they already planned on taking her away from the others, their intentions with her are most likely sexual trafficking.
perhaps it would make sense if harlequin took the initiative to protect columbina in the pierrot's stead, for her sake or pierrot's, and it would be here the thoughts of eating her if worst comes to worst would start bubbling to the surface. if we assume he did love her like i said before, harlequin took the chance and either stayed with columbina and kept her company, protecting her in place of pierrot to ensure their family wouldn't be separated or hurt, or both.
so it's jester who acts as the final nail in the coffin that solidifies harlequin's next actions.
jester manipulated harlequin into doing the last resort option harlequin was thinking of, not wanting to do it unless it was truly the last option available, hence why he apologizes to harlequin after columbina is bitten.
another possibility is that this conversation with jester and harlequin happened before the initial scene with columbina and the humans saying she was pretty before pierrot stepped in and got caged afterwards. if this one is true, it means that harlequin had already thought about it and shunned it to the back of his head as a last resort option. i, personally, like this option better because of jester's first line – "Maybe he'll be the first to fall." jester talks about that possibility, not that it happened, because he would've said "He was the first to fall, and then we'll all wither away one by one in this pit, [Harlequin]" if pierrot had already fallen.
the 'maybe' (indicating that the scenario in his words are hypothetical, not literal) and 'he will be the first to fall" (the 'will' supports the hypothetical the 'maybe' is referring to, instead of pertaining to a situation that had already happened – the 'maybe' and 'will' wouldn't be there if the situation being talked about had already happened.) supports the sentence pertaining to a hypothetical situation rather than a literal one. an optimal sentence, if the scenario was literal, would be "he was the first to fall among us" (removing the 'maybe' and substituting the 'will' for 'was' to indicate the situation in the sentence had already happened. adding 'maybe' and 'will' turns it into hypothetical, whereas this is literal). had enough of me being an english teacher yet? hahaha ♡
harlequin already had the first thought of eating columbina if worst comes to worst, which it did. the exchange, then, would imply jester nudged harlequin (mind control, or otherwise, that's also a possibility i like but the main point is that jester made harlequin do the last resort option of eating columbina, but he did not make that option) into deciding that a sacrifice truly is necessary.
also while we're talking about the significance and literary anatomy of jester's line, "Maybe he'll be the first to fall." makes sense if this happens after pierrot stands guard in front of columbina and the others as a barrier ensuring they couldn't hurt her or any of them but before pierrot is hurt and caged. jester talks about a possibility highly likely to be true considering their circumstances that pierrot will be taken down first, then they'll get taken down one by one after their first line of defense is taken away.
(......can't believe i spent a paragraph hyperanalyzing and breaking down the meaning of a single line of dialogue...... (lll⚆ᗜ⚆)
= ･ׅ 𝜗 3.5 ℘ ･ׅ =
"And on a moonless night where the sky seemed dead,"
The monsters realized there was an angel among them!"
(The monsters realized a sacrifice would be necessary.)
perhaps it wasn't "the monsters = all of them" like harlequin's retelling makes us think but rather harlequin in particular realized a sacrifice would be necessary should all of them be caged and left to starve. the others were shocked and horrified when harlequin killed columbina, so they weren't in on it (except for jester because none of his lines suggest he was stunned or shocked by harlequin's actions, supporting my interpretation of harlequin and jester's prior conversation; "We have no choice." in harlequin's retelling and "There's no turning back now." in mirror columbina's and his own retelling) otherwise another conversation would be held about it and they wouldn't be that scared. all of the puppets had tears after columbina's puppet disappeared (after they had eaten the sacrificial angel), so they weren't villain monologuing to and about columbina while harlequin made the move to bite her. in the version told by mirror columbina in tt's tent, they didn't villain monologue just yet, they were distraught, in anguish and grief first.
remember, by now the gravity of their situation is sinking in, they're starving and getting caught when they try and act out plans to survive (jester; there's also a chain sound when jester says "I can't move. [Pierrot] is alive...?" so he might also be chained down and caged because he was dangerous?). prior to this in the conversation between jester and harlequin before jester got caged, that conversation must've been before pierrot was caged judging from how jester worded his sentences. they're being locked up to starve to death because they are dangerous to their goals and missions. by the time harlequin was caged and columbina was chained down, everyone was weak and starving. hope was dire unless someone did something.
Moonless night.
"Maybe this will be our last one."
"I'm so hungry.."
"Me too... how long as it been... since we last ate?"
"I can't move. [Pierrot] is alive...?"
"..."
notice how harlequin doesn't speak a single line of dialogue in this exchange before he breaks free from his cage and eats columbina.
in the previous line of dialogue with jester and harlequin, he doesn't speak either. of course, he's listening to jester, but he could also already be formulating a last resort plan in case everyone gets caged. one that had to be done now otherwise death got their hands of them, or perhaps... convincing himself he didn't actually care and felt nothing for columbina, telling himself he loved the thrill of their rage and hatred to lessen the emotional burden and overwhelm on himself?
"You know, my sweet flower..."
"Maybe it's not you I love."
"Maybe this feeling is something else. My heart beats for a different reason."
"Or maybe I just want what I can't have, if I do this, maybe then..."
it was lucky harlequin was the one who made that plan since everyone else was either unable to move, or so hungry they didn't have the strength to move anymore.
and remember how harlequin would prioritize surviving rather than the heart? if he was a heart-ruler like pierrot, chances are he wouldn't eat columbina, and they would've died. but he knew if they didn't eat something soon, they would all starve to death.
pierrot wouldn't do something like this – not that he could.
and when asked why he hates harlequin so much, this is his response:
though we haven't gotten any other incidents harlequin has done to irk such pure distate and bordeline hate from pierrot, the moonless night seems to be, as of recent, the main reason why pierrot and harlequin hate eachother. harlequin killed his lover.
(and well, to be frank, i don't think pierrot would be this mad at harlequin over let's say, him causing pierrot to crash the truck but harlequin's shenanigans towards pierrot definitely help make the fire of hatred in pierrot grow stronger.)
he couldn't focus on the wider reason behind it because he loved columbina, the one they killed. pierrot loved her. pined for her deeply. sighed for her. harlequin knows the deeper reasoning for the kill – they wanted to survive, and she was the weakest one.
he killed her, yes, but that doesn't mean he wasn't affected by her death.
let's go back to ripple effects the moonless night had on the rest of the troupe, specifically focusing on harlequin. let's also take another look at this ama answer:
"Everyone was broken, grieving and suffering, and he stepped forward, guided his new family."
now, keep that in mind (specifically that first part) because let's first analyze harlequin's present day actions and coping mechanisms that were ripple effects from the moonless night.
right off the bat, harlequin's intentions with mc.
if you follow harlequin into the tent, he initiates something inherently sexual (atleast it's implied to be, we know present day harlequin, hahaha ♡) before pierrot comes in and stabs him, letting us escape. if harlequin is indeed fucking fools in the tent (aka let's assume it canon for this analysis hahaha ( ੭ ˙ᗜ˙ )੭♡) and he does participate in one night stands with humans, then his intentions with us would be the same until later in the game where he might actually fall for the mc.
it's pretty clear that harlequin may not feel anything for the mc in the same way pierrot does immediately in the first few days . likewise, he wasn't immediately infactuated with columbina if we assume pierrot fell fast and harder, likely pursuing her for an ulterior motive (getting back at pierrot? attachment to pierrot that sprung internal jealousy? genuine love for columbina with an additional motive to get back at pierrot/relating to an attachment to pierrot?) just like with mc.
now, come back to the undertale comparison – using laughter or temporary, fleeting joy to cope with tragedy, hurt, pain and to shield oneself from damage. it's an inappropriate way to cope with emotional distress, even if they acknowledge that that's not funny. columbina's death wasn't funny, but harlequin laughed anyway. he smiled anyway.
apply it here too. clearly, columbina's death hit pierrot and harlequin the most. it hit everyone deeply and broke everyone for a while, yes, but pierrot and harlequin were hit with the largest blows... because they loved columbina.
pierrot still hates harlequin for what he did – killing his lover (and just from the fact that pierrot still hates harlequin's guts, that he knows the underlying reason of his hate for harlequin despite his constant annoying pierrot and making him upset, his feelings towards harlequin's actions are still strong regardless of whether he still loved columbina or not... which he doesn't, but it's justifiable that he still hates harlequin for what he did), and harlequin... is using temporary joy and relief to cope with the underlying emotional trauma gnawing at him.
harlequin placed himself into the role of the villain and went along with it for the sake of everyone else in his family. and the temporary joy thing applies to his shenanigans and constant hobby of annoying and teasing pierrot, making him angry and rage, down to stealing his new love interest.
(notice how in jester's retelling, there is no moonless night, and thus no way to justify harlequin's actions when he kills columbina. in mirror columbina's retelling, harlequin can be justified, and harlequin puts the blame equally on everyone in his own retelling – only jester leans into villainizing harlequin by removing the moonless night itseld. jester villainized harlequin in a way that makes everyone else think he's the villain... from jester's retelling. such a stark coincidence, huh? from the one who nudged harlequin to eat columbina in the first place.... but also jester clearly spun the tale into one akin to a fairytale to be able to tell it to his audience, mixing drops of the truth with lies, so...)
"Are your eyes on me? Uhg."
Is your hate on me?
"Hah... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!"
"Oh... Rage... Pain!! I love it... I LOVE IT!!"
Someone had to do it... obviously.
There's no turning back now.
No... no no no...
EAT!
this exaggeration of harlequin's sadism for the rage and annoyance pierrot has around him was exaggerated for the show, yes, but i don't think all of that was entirely false. i think harlequin did lean into the act of loving pierrot's (and maybe everyone's) rage in the long run. not immediately after the moonless night, he was broken too. most likely suffering and in anguish since he didn't take the initiative instead of or alongside jester like he was in the version told in ticket taker's tent.
but in truth, he didn't not care as much as he wanted to appear like he it. he was in just as much anguish as everyone else was in, probably not as much as pierrot but he wasn't immune to the pain like he wanted to appear as.
those one night stands he does with the fools, humans or otherwise? the constant bickering and seeking out to annoy pierrot? the manic laughter and seemingly joy after killing columbina?
it's a coping mechanism.
he's not as immune as he wants us to think. he doesn't not care unlike what he wants to look as. he seeks temporary bouts of pleasure and happiness to silence the gnawing darkness and emotional scars for just a moment.
he's... more sentimental than we thought.
= ･ׅ 𝜗℘ ･ׅ =
the hyeprfixation on harlequin is real... i've been having so many thoughts about this green man since i started looking deeper in the lines from scenes that described the moonless night. not sure if i have any more, but we'll see. ♡ additionally and finally, sincere apologies for any spelling errors and typos – this wasn't proofread, ahahaha. ♡
additional thoughts : ֹ🗨️🪡 ၄၃ႄˑ ˳
– oh my god harlequin's an anti-villain. (an anti-villain does wrong things for what they believe are the right reasons, blurring the line between good and evil.)
– notice how in jester's retelling, there is no moonless night, and thus no way to justify harlequin's actions when he kills columbina. in mirror columbina's retelling, harlequin can be justified, and harlequin puts the blame equally on everyone in his own retelling – only jester leans into villainizing harlequin. jester villainized harlequin in a way that makes everyone else think he's the villain... from jester's retelling. such a stark coincidence, huh? from the one who nudged harlequin to eat columbina in the first place.... but also jester clearly spun the tale into one akin to a fairytale to be able to tell it to his audience, mixing drops of the truth with lies, so...
