To what extent can a poem take on a life of its own and how much control should its creator have over its "life": AKA a Frankenstein poem?

I am beginning my post with a short quote, but only to lead into a question.

From the Lynn reading The Purpose of New Criticism, Lynn tells us "Only the poem can tell us how to read the Poem."

I take this statement to mean that poem once published takes on a life of its own, and that the authors intentions of the poems meaning should not have any swing on how readers interprete it.

I mostly agree with that, however...

 I have a few questions regarding this statement. The first would be, what do YOU take this to mean, "Only the poem can tell us how to read the poem?"

Also, what if two readers interpreted the poem differently? Technically "the poem" told the readers two different things, does the poem then have two different meanings? What if the author clearly intended the poem to have only one meaning?

Certainly I am on board with texts taking on a lives of their own. I appreciate the beauty of a poem meaning separate things to separate people. But do you think it is possible for someone to get the meaning of a poem wrong, or is meaning relative?