Hello, everyone! When thinking about an issue pertaining to a work of fiction, does the "primary vs secondary sources" rules matter when coming to a conclusion? Does this wildly held belief hold up in the world of fiction where things are up for interpretation? An example would be, at the end of a novel, the protagonist appears to clearly die, the other characters in the novel acknowledges the protagonist's death as well. However, in an interview, the author states the main character did not die, they were just in a coma. Or in an officially licensed source book, the staff reliably relays the author's intent and says, on the author's behalf, "that the protagonist is not dead and is in just a coma". I notice this is also the case in many video games, the layout of the story is presented from many different character's points of view; leading to it being absolutely impossible to rely on the source material itself, since some events actually contradict themselves. However, in the game's officially recognized source book, the layout of the plot is made clear so that you would know which character's story is actually canon. In cases like these, don't the officially recognized source books and Word of God trump the source material? Isn't that the intent of these materials being published?