I can decide for myself that "road" is a metaphor for "apple" and treat the poem as advice to make brandy from the apples that have rolled the least distance from the tree when they fell. But does that really mean anything to other people? Can you in fact discuss this interpretation, or is it so absurd as to boggle the mind and defy rational discourse?
The other thing that bothers me is, with Death of the Author, you end up with an echo chamber. You don't try to understand somebody else's idea, you're trying to make his/her words say your ideas. Which sounds absolutely counter to the very purpose of writing things down. Why would you write if people won't read what you've written? If you won't put new ideas in their head, but only become a vessel for their current thoughts?
Socrates said he didn't see the point of writing for others, given that you won't be there to tell them what your words mean. Well, someone wrote that he said, since he himself didn't write. In any case, I find these words highly prophetic.
Frost's poem is probably a good example: Clearly it has a pervasive meaning in our culture in a way that the author didn't intend. Would it be intellectually honest to ignore that alternative meaning?
Here's the thing... why even worry about the artist's intentions? Once she has written the piece, her involvement is over as far as I'm concerned. Personally, I adhere to the school of thinking that says the meaning of piece of art belongs entirely to the reader/viewer/listener/whatever. Now, that may not be the consensus position, but it's not exactly something I pulled out of the air either. Roland Barthes had some similar'ish thoughts, for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_the_Author
All of that said, I'd also prefer to spend my time working with issues that involve hard data, as opposed to mostly subjective interpretation and heavy dependence on cultural norms, memes, etc. I love reading, but don't give a whit about academic literary criticism.