danlo wrote:We've never really analysed Havelock in depth before, we've never questioned the exact level of his sanity, how much he knew or didn't know and how his younger days were spent. What was that level? Sure he was mad, but how much of it was actual madness and how much was part of an act. Or was it? Were some of Havelock's non-lucid moments a guise to weigh other's characters and guard against other's finding out too much? Was he, to some degree, caught up in Joyse's acting? Did he know much more of what was going on than he let on? Was it he who convinced Joyse that Mordant's predicament was analogous to Hopboard?
Here are a series of observations mixed with opinions: Havelock's insanity was certainly not a guise, though almost all of his actions supported Joyse's manipulations. His outbursts were unpredictable, but they did seem to follow a pattern. I think Havelock was very frustrated at his own inability to remain focused, which only added a dangerous edge to his madness. We were told at one point that Master Quillon was especially talented at treating Havelock in just the right way to preserve his lucidity----it looks like Quillon's way mostly involved observant patience. I think the saddest part is that it seemed Havelock knew exactly what was going on around him. The madness merely took away his ability to act reliably in response---he wasn't senile, or dumb, or insensate, or even oblivious. He was nuts.
Rather than Havelock's insanity supporting Joyse's strategy, however, what if Joyse's strategy was in part inspired by Havelock's insanity? The two fit together very nicely. Maybe Joyse realized early that Havelock's insanity, while very unfortunate, did not render Havelock useless, as most others seemed to assume. In fact, it worked just like another part of the overall hopboard analogy. Checkers strategy can be all about making stupid-seeming moves to draw your opponent out and give them a false sense of superiority, when in fact you have been forcing them to move in a pattern of your own choosing. The bigger question is, whose idea was it to adopt the passivity strategy: Havelock, or Joyse?
I think that's a trick question, though. At first, I would think it would be Havelock, who cast an augury at Joyse's birth which foretold his greatness. However, it seemed like Havelock always provided the methods to attain the goals that Joyse was passionate about. Joyse had the passion (always trying to save the world), and Havelock, who believed in him, was clever enough to devise the means to that end.
Mentioning the various auguries brings us to another whole discussion topic, which SRD has brought up before (via Mhoram's abilities and the powers of the Elohim) in TCTC: does an augury create the future? In other words, would the future of Mordant have been the same if those auguries had not been cast, or did the predictions become part of what shaped the future actions?
Back to Havelock-- Vagel was the one responsible for robbing Havelock of his sanity. I think from that point forward Havelock's primary goal was to get revenge on Vagel. With Vagel gone, his insanity lost its manic cackling dangerousness, turning him into more of a wacky old coot. I think Havelock was keeping his hold on sanity long enough to carry out this last plotting to its completion. I think fighting the insanity is what made him dangerous, because he couldn't afford to just let go.
Havelock is one of my favorite characters in MN. My favorite line of his is something like this: "What's the difference between an Apt and an Adept? DE-DE-DE-DE-DE-DE-DE!!!!!!!!"
DW
Your going down Danlo 
I've especially thought the sybaritic mouth indicated the false personality created by his madness, and is not representing the real underlying personality of Adept Havelock.