Why can literary criticism create conflict between authors and critics?

Conflict between authors and critics often arises because critics frequently act as "lawgivers," asserting authority over what a work "really" means or which pieces deserve respect. This role can lead to resentment, especially when critics are perceived as misguided, malicious, or pedantic, potentially discouraging authors who are exploring new modes of expression that challenge established tastes.1

Tension also occurs because authors and critics may hold fundamentally different views on the ownership and purpose of a text. While authors may feel their work is a personal creation, critics often operate on the premise that once a work is published, it belongs to the public. Critics may argue that works are not self-explanatory and that their responsibility is to the public and their own exacting standards of judgment, rather than to the author's self-esteem. Consequently, authors may feel antagonized when critics identify unintended meanings, label their work as imitative or incomplete, or treat the author's stated intentions as secondary to the critic's own interpretation. Ultimately, this friction is a byproduct of the critic's role in providing a fuller understanding of literature than the public might achieve alone.12