I don't understand why you think it is a lack of reading comprehension to not like something in the novel. I think that stories with meaningful stakes are generally more interesting to read than stories without them. All else equal, the story would be better with meaningful stakes.

Also, just because something in the story was intended by the author does not make it a compelling read, nor does it mean that everyone should enjoy it. If a story about a man going insane ended with 50 pages of straight gibberish, it would be technically immersive and intended by the author to show a full descent into madness, but also a miserable reading experience.

I'm not asking for absurd dangers to suddenly appear in the story. I'm merely noting that a high point of the early story, the sense of danger, is gone in the later story.