Poor Louise Colet

Let me start by saying that I do not understand Barnes's motives or ideas. He jumps around and I can't tell whether he's praising Flaubert or not. In the last chapter, "Louise Colet's Version," he seems to be bashing Flaubert to the utmost. I want to know why he included this chapter. He portrays Louise's side of the story and she talks of how Flaubert was a liar who humiliated her. He shut down her writing, was untrue, and was overall demeaning towards her. Does not this portray Flaubert in a poor, almost disgusting light? I feel that it does. It makes Flaubert seem insincere and makes you almost want to discredit the truth of his novels. However, perhaps Barnes is only trying to say that it is a waste of time to look at the author of novels. Flaubert may not have been an excellent individual, but he was able to write incredible works of literature.
What confuses me the most is the fact that the chapter right before this one defends Flaubert. Barnes offers complaints about him yet defends him to the utmost and shows Flaubert out to be an exemplary person. He seems to be contradicitng himself. Once again, the only explanation that I can find is that Barnes is trying to discredit looking at authors. Maybe he's saying that readers only need to look at the book instead of the writer behind it. Author's lives have so many different interpretations from other people. There's not just one way to look at Flaubert's life. Similarly, there's not only one way to look at a book. This seems to be a connection perhaps. However, I dont' understand how any of this fits into the larger picture of the book. In fact, I'm not even finding a larger picture in this book. I do enjoy this novel, however, I'm not finding a very prominent meaning. Maybe it'll all be wrapped up at the end.