In my non-musical life I tend to be very objective, logical and deliberative. But music is a right-brained endeavor, much of it to do with beauty, emotion and effect. When confronted with composer inconsistencies, I tend to go with my own instincts. Then if I need to pull back on the reins, it's easy enough to do. Years ago I used to think of the role of the pianist as a medium--that is, a nearly invisible middleman who interpreted the paper score for the audience with the prime goal of accuracy in rendering the music. Nowadays, I see that role differently, whereby the pianist is a co-author who acknowledges that the composer's score forms the true basis; however the performer also allows some of his or her own individuality to imbue the performance as well. While the composer/genius indeed created the paper map, it's left to the pianist to convey to the listener--not a piece of paper with symbols and signs on it--but the actual territory with all its breathtaking panoramas. And, of course, there is always and necessarily responsibility and accountability in doing so.
I agree with your current vision. In fact, it is interesting to me that in America (perhaps England and Germany too?) the Billing for a piano recitial will say "David April, Piano [or Pianist]," but in the countries of the romance languages it will say "David April, Interpreter."