Kerfa, known as a “madman” to his neighbors, is someone who embodies, in a sense, what it means to be free from imbalanced constraints. He is depicted as a madman, spouting accusations against a tyrant in a verbally nonsensical way. In Sia an unusual, if not untethered emphasis is placed on the unravelling of his character. But what does this unravelling reveal about him, and why is he singled out as a threat to the king if all he does is speak in mysterious language? Its simply because what he is speaking is a type of nonsense that can be understood because of the heavy use of metaphors. At one point he said something to the effect that the emperor wanted to turn him into a hippopotamus that he rode on in order to better rule his country. He asked him to help because he recognized that Kerfa could reach the people, but Kerfa refused because he had a conscience, which was why he should have accepted. He acted mysteriously more than logically, which is a typical trait of people exercising their consciences.
But what forms did this conscience or altered consciousness take in Kerfa? That word, consciousness, crops up in my mind because one of its forms: sleeping, is precisely what Kerfa accuses the emperor of doing. Another metaphor, this time used to compare it to a death of the mind. A light tap on the hand for the situation he’s placed Sia in, but none-the-less suitable for provoking all kinds of reactions to the listeners as if by saying that he’s “waking them up” in a sense. This never truly happens because of his social status, which despite the fact of his riveting affirmation of equality to a court official, remains unchanged.
Along those same lines he is the only person throughout the film who remains essentially unchanged, instead of changing into the reflections of others. He was the only main figure, save Sia, who didn't weave lies into the plot, and in doing so preserved his character's stability. Sia’s fiance becomes the new emperor, Sia the new Kerfa, but Kerfa himself is always himself. He was a man who had no one in life and therefore died with no one. As he puts it when talking to Sia (who is a very central figure): “All stories have madmen, but no madmen have stories.” The way the camera depicted him sauntering through the foliage, living in a house outside of town...outside of the activities of other human beings with each other set the structure for his character to resemble an un-glorified, non-pretentious supporting role, such as that of merlin.
What is even more significant is that this quasi-merlin figure is equally opposing the emperor in an indirect, subtle way, in tandem with his usual modality of going volcano on him. In a way Kerfa repels his authority because he not only opposes his actions in word but through the subconscious use of a symbol he attacks who he is. In the film the use of symbols are how, among others, the child running through the palace courtyard with a pink kite that can never gain altitude (symbolizing the ineptitude of the government and its inability to stay afloat), the subconscious mind teaches not only the cliche in question's but an entire nation's collective consciousness how to improve itself. Kerfa’s symbol is his homemade cape that he wears in mockery of the emperor, which is made blindingly apparent in the one scene where he has a private dialogue with the emperor.
This is the pinnacle of his social-aloofness because what he is essentially doing is dethroning the king...and in this story there is nothing higher to dethrone, even if it is Sia’s savage captors. The king has the final power over all collectively conscious minds. Except for Kerfa, who has his own consciousness, enough to pass it on to Sia, who will emulate him. And enough where he “knows how to wake up when he dies.” And how? Simple. He is the old king, the true king, the king who always was, but then wasn’t but is again.
