Okay, well, the problem is really very simple, and it’s the same problem we have in threads about “where’s the audience” or “where’s the text” when we try to apply conventional theories of film, theatre or literary studies to RPG’s.
In conventional criticism, we have this thing, a performance, a novel, a film, that is packaged and delivered to the audience, reader, whatever. The audience takes in the package and relates themselves to it, but it never relates itself to them, not actively.
And that’s why 99% of conventional criticism and theory is about as much use to RPG theory as food criticism. They’re talking about what’s on the plate, we’re concerned with what to put in the oven. Related? Sure, but we’re all about the process, not the result.