[Analysis] But WHY is Lace a child?
I'm not gonna argue the point that she is again; I've beleaboured this enough elsewhere & I'm not gonna do it again. Tl;Dr - Everyone including herself says she is & nothing & no one says she isn't.
I'm actually going to adress the idea that this somehow detracts from the themes or how it's connected to those.
Now, Hornet adressing her as "child" in the dialogue wasn't in the trailer, so, the decision was made to add that. Why do you think this is?
When TC realized that ppl couldn't tell from the design from the trailer, they added Hornet referring to her as such in dialogue, because it's important that we understand it.
If the idea was that we're supposed to at first think she's a child but realize she isn't, then this would be reflected in dialogue somewhere, someone changing their mind. (Like how Sherma gradually comes to realize the citadel isn't all it's cracked up to be, or how Caretaker doesn't trust Hornet at first but comes to view her differently after she proves herself.)
Also they wouldn't just randomly add it, like if the central idea of her character was that she's "forced to pretend" it would have been present in the trailer from the start.
No. Ppl couldn't tell she's meant to be a kid from her design, so they made it clearer. Again, because it's important.
The LL journal entry, the last word on her character, emphasizes this: "Silk-spun child, possessed by the void".
#0 Children are People. (Duh.)
I shouldn't have to state this but ppl are genuinely saying that Lace being a child would make GMS right to abuse her or detract from the point that the story IS making, which is that she's a real person & worth saving.
Too often children are not treated as real people, but as dolls, status symbols, possessions... (GMS IS very much that sort of parent)
I'd say that if you say you need to be an adult in order to not be a possession you've kinda missed the point. Treating a minor child as a possession is still wrong.
Also what GMS wants from her offspring isn't really a performance of youthfulness. That's not the pressure she's under nor an idea that ever comes up. If it was, her needolin dialogue would be something about being sick of pretending, not desperate pleas of "See me, your daughter/child!" -that rather reflects someone who is in fact still emotionally dependent on a parent's love & terribly unwell because she's not getting what she needed/deserved.
What GMS actually wants/demands is loyalty & that her offspring be her mini-me's. (conflincting desires - she's not loyal & submissive in the least)
And no amount of loyalty that Lace performs is enough/ gets seen, it's just expected/ taken for granted ("see me cut! See me serve!"). It's loyalty that she performs until she realizes it's never getting counted/appreciated, & then it's treason time.
Lace's "weakness" is not an end onto itself, but rather a side effect/ cost GMS incurrs in exchange to make her "loyal" & so that she "will not fade". She was to be an eternal companion of sorts, but without having the power to rival her as a fully godly offspring would.
That, and to make her at all while sealed/trapped - "better a child spun mad/frail... than none"
She certainly doesn't care how it hurts Lace to shape her as she pleases/ doesn't think for a moment about what's good for Lace (like getting a brachycephalic dog, or declawing your cat), but her frailty/weakness is actually a flaw in GMS' eyes & why she still pines over the "strong" Weavers that she views as sharing more of "our nature".
It's rather why Lace thinks she's "pathetic/broken" / an inferior replacement.
#1 Generational Trauma/ Cycle of Abuse Motif (To save the next generation, there needs to be a next generation to save.)
A central aspect of the story is a cycle of cruelty begetting cruelty perpetuating itself endlessly. GMS screws the Weavers, they screw their faithful, the citadel bugs screw the commoners, the Weavers also screw their own descendants like Hornet & Eva... (Herrah tried to stop this but had little time/ never knew if she suceeded or not.) The system as a whole screws the surrounding tribes, some of which who also turn cruel & desperate in response, like with Groal etc.
The leadership changed 3 times (GMS -> Weavers -> Conductors-> GMS again) but the mistreatment & exploitation continued unabated.
It's all about breaking vicious cycles.
The story also has a parallel/ microcosm of this with the Wardenflies. (as I've talked about here)
To break a vicious cycle is to keep it from perpetuating into the future, so the same thing doesn't happen to the next generation / is at least partially prevented.
So, it means that it's very integral that Hornet saves someone who is younger than her, a younger generation that could've gone the same way, but won't, because Hornet put a stop not just to GMS but the whole fucked up system, too.
#2 Exploration of Control/Abuse (some victims of child abuse are... children.)
If a story is going to talk about abuse & control, it makes sense to talk, among other things, about abuse & control happening to someone who is currently a child.
"What about the PoV of adults suffering from controlling parents" you might say... well, that PoV IS represented by... GMS' other offspring of all different ages, going from Lace (child) to Widow (old woman - like those ppl controlled by their elderly parents well into middle age.)
Why arbitrarily exclude "child" from the life stages represented? That's the age most ppl are when abuse first happens to them & hurts them most acutely. Why can't the PoV of a child be represented at all? Why can't young /adolescent gamers see themselves in her?
There's also the idea of abuse happening to those who are especially vulnerable. Like those who are sick - the silk construct's frailty could be seen as disability/sickness, or just someone who can't run away because of financial dependency. Or even a munchhausen type thing; It could mean multiple things, really. But however you read it...
Lace is "sick" AND a child or adolescent. Because being a child is another factor that makes people extra vulnerable to abuse! Maybe the single biggest factor.
Phantom is never called a child despite having a similar "sickness", if you want an adult who can't escape cause they're sick, here they are.
In Phantom's case you could read them as having another extra factor of vulnerability in being LGBTQ. (queephobia doesn't exist in the setting as it does IRL, but Phantom's banishment might be seen as coming from that same emotion as "powerful egomaniac wants their kids to be the mini me" like Elon Musk hissy fit that one of his children doesn't want to be a son.)
"but she's older than she looks" yes and we're told in the same breath that her mind matches her body, in a setup that's framed as straightforward exposition of her character that you get as reward for beating her. It's like the guy in twillight is 17 but has been 17 a long time... but basically 17 in all ways that matter, including how he interacts with other characters, who is a peer to him etc.
The fantasy elements here have the effect/meaning of reflecting a sense of stasis, that the terrible situation won't ever end. In reality it would end, but it can feel like it never will.
Widow doesn't have the expectation of being free when GMS' drops dead (as she's immortal), Lace can't expect to be free when she grows up cause she's created so that she "will not fade"/ (just like all of the citadel ends up in a sort of enforced stasis of control - as GMS' puts it, "They are ours... bound forever") - it's like the "death is not permitted" thing, especially given the implication that Phantom got discarded in part for getting old.
That stasis will end when GMS is dispatched / when they get free from her & there's definitely an aesop that it could never have lasted.
But what happens is that the stasis is over, time will start passing again. (or, rather, the terrible situation that felt like forever won't be forever after all)
She's still 12 but now she's free to eventually she'll turn 13.
As I said before, she was made to be static to serve as an "immortal companion" - Hence why it would not a good end for her to become some other immortals' eternal companion but with a romantic spin. Rather, she needs the clock turned back on by someone who will guide & support her at first but also let her go once the time comes for that.
After she's gotten to actually be cared for properly, get a proper guardian/parent (which she never had), & gotten to actually be a child & (not a doll/tool/trophy/ mini-me).
Like are ppl seriously arguing that an abused child being taken from an abusive parent & getting a good guardian wouldn't be a good thing?
It's interesting how many ppl have this strawman or projection ppl who point out Lace's canon age "think she can never grow up"... that's not an opinion I've ever actually seen anyone hold. Of course she'll grow up (that's how being a child usually works) she just hasn't yet.
She's that youngest kid still stuck in the toxic household after her older siblings all moved out/ fled. (& constantly in their shadow. An inferior consolation plan "better than none" , [you best be] "better than them"... parental favoritsm. Her character doesn't make sense if you don't count the Weavers as her sisters. Cause then who's the favorite? Her? She doesn't feel like she's the favorite... obviously the thing with favoritism is that even the favorite isn't truly loved, as the "love" is conditional. But her inferiority complex is in large parts about being inferior to the Weavers specifically. "better than them". )
So I think that's fear of trust talking, maybe in part from ppl who can relate to being manipulated. It will absolutely be hard for Lace to learn to trust after knowing only manipulation disguised as love, but that's not a problem you can sidestep by rushing into a romantic relationship before you're ready, that's why many ppl reenact patterns from their childhood with partners / end up with partners just like their shitty parents.
Having been rescued while she was "still young" , she can learn trust with a trustworthy guardian. If/when she falls in love eventually, she'll have already learned trust.
But I guess that goes more into the "breaking the cycle" aspect.
The 2nd point is that a story about toxic families might in fact feature a child currently living in a toxic family, among other possible perspectives.
#3 Parallel to the 1st Game ("this time we save the day without sacrificing a child")
Another big aspect of the story is Hornet finding herself in the same position as her parents & trying to pull off what they couldn't do. Or perhaps being faced with an apocalypse for a 2nd time now that she is older & wiser than when she was young & outclassed, & more in a position to do something.
What happened in her parents' time, when the whole Dreamer plan was being hatched, is that kids got thrown in the void, or that it was decided to effectively kill/sacrifice a child to stop the apocalypse.
So, here she prevents that same thing from happening, and manages to win without needing to kill/sacrifice a child / let her be consumed by the void.
Hence, "This one, the dark shall not take".
Note that Hornet was fully ready to kill Lace (or what's left of her) if that's what's needed to save Pharloom, if this is in fact necessary (and tells her as much/ is pretty apalled at GMS for being willing to torch her own kingdom for just 1 person...), but I think she was also really glad she didn't have to / willing to try as she might to make do without another such injustice, if it could at all be avoided without dooming Pharloom.
In order to have her save a child from being thrown into the void, there must be a child at risk of being thrown in the void.