I’m a horribly uncreative person myself, but I do find it partially delusional how so many creative people take ownership of their entire process. I feel like a lot of that stuff happens subconsciously and it’s more like having a waking dream than designing a bridge.

That’s why I itch when people discuss intent (whether or not they use the word): because even the authors stated intent might be truly authoritative. That is to say, if someone lives in a sexist society, and derives a sexist plotline, then they can’t wiggle out of it by saying, “I didn’t intend to be sexist” or “But I’m absolutely not sexist!” In today’s Twitter-connected culture, people bypass reading the text and just read the authors tweet; that’s how the Matrix was established as an undisputed trans allegory you have to be mentally deficient not to recognize.

But if I were a creative person, I think I’d be more interested in how the art worked independently of the author, though certainly it would be fun to see how an authors work develops. I would ALSO be interested in the author’s creative process, but it would be based around how different processes create different work.

Edit: And, I would, I admit, if I had an attraction to an author, use the work to try to understand them better … but that’s a tertiary concern for the public.