Do many interpretations equal a flawed work of literature?

Do many interpretations equal a flawed work of literature?

When interpretations arrive at different meanings for a text, does this suggest that the meaning of the text is uncertain or that it has been read incorrectly by one or both parties?

When is a text NOT interpreted multiple ways? Has a work EVER been interpreted just one single way? I find this hard to believe that one interpretation exists for every piece of literature out there. When a text is interpreted multiple ways it is not because of a flaw in the work itself. It is rather a product of the diversity of the readers and their individual personal economy. Each reader brings something to the table based upon their own personal experience and background. And, as Professor Downing says, this is called hetereoglossia. Each person is going to gloss a piece of literature different; they will interpret it according to what goes on their minds. And therefore, since no two snowflakes are alike, and no two people are alike, it is impossible for all people to think the same thing about a work of literature. So let’s not bash the piece of literature itself, it is what it is, and it is up to us, as individual readers, to interpret it how we see fit- all infinite interpretations that there may be.