[MSJ]

I was talking about a (hopefully hypothetical) situation when he failed to convey said intent and people generally understood him wrong. He would simply not be aware of it, continuing to tell the story the way it can't be interpreted (and its flow subsequently foreseen) by most of the readers, because readers missed something crucial that Bakker thinks is there. In this situation reader interpretation is by default incorrect, since failure to execute wouldn't be evident to the author.

It's actually not even that important who would be at fault here - readers, because they genuinely missed something in their reading, or the author, because he failed to convey his intent. There would be a breakdown of communication that will only become clear in the next installments, which are, in our case, already underway. If the series is finished, such a breakdown can't happen, since the author at that point is no more than another reader, as opposed to someone who controls what's being read.

So my initial point is, again, contingent on the series being incomplete.

Ah, thank you for elaborating. Makes a whole lot more sense. Remember, you have to spell things out for us with tiny brains, lol.

[Madness]

...

So my initial point is, again, contingent on the series being incomplete.

Most interesting.

[Wilshire]

Just finished treading though this thread.
Smilerloki, thanks for taking the time to answer. Much of what you said has articulated thoughts/feelings that I've had but either couldn't describe, or couldn't directly identify for lack of clarity.

[SmilerLoki]

You are most welcome!