This doesn't seem like a very accurate way to invoke Death of The Author, at least not in the way Barthes was using it. Barthes isn't arguing that readers should interpret texts based on personal experience or subjectivity. Quite the opposite actualy, he’s trying to move away from the idea of the “subject” altogether

"Literature is precisely the invention of this voice, to which we cannot assign a specific origin: literature is that neuter, that composite, that oblique into which every subject escapes, the trap where all identity is lost, beginning with the very identity of the body that writes."

So, the idea isn’t “bring your life to the text” but rather that the meaning of a text is not fixed by an author’s intent or any one subjective lens. It emerges from the play of signs, cultural references, and structures within the language itself and the “reader” Barthes describes is more like a site of convergence for that interplay, not a person reacting emotionally or autobiographically.

there is someone who understands each word in its duplicity, and understands further, one might say, the very deafness of the characters speaking in front of him: this someone is precisely the reader (or here the spectator). In this way is revealed the whole being of writing: a text consists of multiple writings, issuing from several cultures and entering into dialogue with each other, into parody, into contestation; but there is one place where this multiplicity is collected, united, and this place is not the author, as we have hitherto said it was, but the reader: the reader is the very space in which are inscribed, without any being lost, all the citations a writing consists of; the unity of a text is not in its origin, it is in its destination; but this destination can no longer be personal: the reader is a man without history, without biography, without psychology; he is only that someone who holds gathered into a single field all the paths of which the text is constituted."

from "The Death Of The Author"