This is completely false. This would require one to have objective knowledge of the thoughts of every other human being in existence. Surely the only Being with this capacity is God, if she exists…no?
Or are we to believe that good writers are, in fact, Gods in a literal sense?
Consider, if this were true, there would be no such thing as literary interpretation; indeed, no such thing as interpretation at all really.
Anyone who believes language is objectively set in stone is uneducated.
Anyone who hates Destroyer or J Gold based on the review is totally free to do so, precisely because it’s open to interpretation. Personally, reading the review as J Gold hating Destroyer seems absurd to me. Hilariously though, this proves that good writers have no idea how their writing will be interpreted. Gold has a Pulitzer, and is therefore objectively about as good as a writer can get, and yet he was completely unable to calculate a tone that would be exactly the same to everyone given this very comment thread about it.
This is not humorous, feel free to take it as an aggressive claim if you want. Since language is open to interpretation, I am free to find what I perceive as a rather offensive interpretation of Gold’s writing as a misreading of an aim of satire I interpret it as. You are the one acting as if you have a monopoly on the meaning of his words.
My only joke was in regards to being awarded badges for scooping J Gold.