Meaning only exists as experienced by someone particular in a specific situation in time and space. The meaning-making processes in these situations assume a configuration of previous experiences, and probably conventions, languages, agreements on symbols and metaphors, technologies and so on. "The work" doesn't have any meaning outside of these situations (maybe it doesn't even exist, depending on how you define it). The author normally has no control over these situations and thus cannot, practically speaking, determine any meaning. But probably there is neither a "the audience" that can "determine" anything. The audience likely consists of several elements that create meanings in different ways across space and time.
Related issues: The author/creator/performer had an intention that they themselves get to decide. But this intention is not universally and necessarily the same as "the meaning of the work".
Practically speaking, the purpose of the audience is often to understand the intention of the author/creator.
Discussions of authorial intent may be useful and interesting: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorial_intent
My experience was that the first book was fine, say 6,5/10. Just enough to move on to the the second, which I absolutely loved 9,5/10. Started reading the third with high expectations but it just didn't engage me at all. Didn't get through more than perhaps 25% of it.