In contrast to your reading of this piece, I found it not only touching but it awakened my interest in her work. I don't share your assessment that she was a "character who, in all reality, is probably not as interesting as the post seems to suggest". But then again, I'm not even sure what you mean by that.

My interpretation is that GP does not intend to be dismissive of Molly or her husband.

I read "The writing is so reverent and personal, that a reader wonders if they are reading about the subject, or about the writer."

It's a reasonable question, but not an important one -- the reverence is the whole point. GP alludes to this in their last sentence, I think.

Thank you for being open-minded enough to understand. In life there are many self-imposed halo effects on the people you love. I believe this is one of them. Honestly I've had too many deep stare-downs in the world of addiction, sickness, and loneliness - I choose to forget many of them. There has been a Molly (though we never married) in my past, too. But 20+ years forward the effect she had on me has eroded and left behind a truth of who she really was that's raw and unforgiving. But I want to remember the "Molly" of my life that was fun and carefree. And maybe I'm casting my own experiences here on the author, most likely I am. Things like this are hard to put into words.

I am choosing to read it as, “I found this interesting but fear HN may not.” Best I can do as it feels right to assume the best after reading the linked piece.

This is an extraordinarily useless comment. In a piece that lays it bare, you somehow completely missed the meaning of why to write on love.

Even now you prove her point.

I choose to believe that to her husband, she was the most interesting.

Yes, because "interesting" is subjective.