Futile?

"Once the author is removed , the claim to decipher the text becomes quite futile" (Barthes, 877) I don't understand why he is using the word "futile" to explain this situation.

Google defines futile as:

Incapable of producing any useful result; pointless.

     I don't think at all that after the author is removed that trying to figure out the meaning of a writer is pointless and more so, I don't agree that is is incapable of producing any useful result. Just because it's author is not alive anymore to actually tell or explain what they meant by the writing exactly, the writing is still capable to providing useful information to be taken into account. That may the very reason that authors like to write published pieces. It Leaves a piece of them for people to enjoy once they are gone. I don't think that trying to decipher a writing is pointless. The only part of this that i find to be pointless is if you were to have a closed mind about what something means without considering other possible choices or definitions. I would not want any reader to have a closed mind while reading something that has room for interpretation. I think it is important to discuss with others what they may have thought it was about like we do in class. That helps me to be able to see the writings from all perspectives.

     Possibly what he meant by this is that the fight to figure out one simple meaning for something is pointless because there are many and all people may see it differently. That I could see more understandable. Is the Author really committing author suicide or do they realize and want their readers to all take something different away from their work?