One flaw I think the Hollow Knight lore analysis scene inherited from its spiritual forefather—Dark Souls lore analysis—and that it still has yet to uproot and fix, is that so-called analysts just don't seem to understand that characters have subjective points of view.
DS genuinely, really struggles with this. It's my most major criticism of the series' lore presentation—the authors frequently fail to hide their hand in the storytelling, making it very obviously artificial when they choose to give or withhold information. Characters can just gain knowledge from the aether, unprompted, while you are entirely locked out of it. Item descriptions randomly alternate between being framed by a character's point of view, and just being omnisciently narrated, sometimes between sentences in a single lore blurb.
This is a way in which Hollow Knight genuinely outdoes Dark Souls by a lot. But because so much of the methodology "common sense" of the Hollow Knight lore analysis community is just copied from that of Dark Souls, this becomes a huge blindspot. When you're accustomed to analyzing a story where Word of God gets randomly telefragged into the word of what should be fallible sources, you aren't going to be well-equipped to handle a story that takes pains to incorporate every character's biases into everything they do and say.
This is why "the Vessel plan could have worked as intended, theoreically" is a common take among self-proclaimed Hollow Knight lore junkies, despite being observably, objectively false. Even just the first game made this obvious, and Silksong doubled down on it, yet still, a huge chunk of this community that prides itself on its deep, clever, insightful thinking has failed to recognize the very basic fact that the Pale King misunderstood how Void works.
