>>heh? how is that a narrow view? Anyone could throw a couple images together and present it as poetry, and then blame the reader for not getting anything out of it. <<
I know that's not an attack on me per se, but that is inflammatory nevertheless. Yes, to blame someone for not "getting it" is the height of conceit. However, in my view, art is as much about the intent of the creator as what the person gets from the work, whether that's a good, bad or indifferent response. I don't hold to their being an inherent "right" or "wrong" way to view art or there being any ultimate purpose to art.
>>Without meaning, the creation has no depth - it isn't art - it just is.<<
Buddhism teaches that life has no ultimate meaning, but it is not nihilistic. Life is still of value because it is. And art may have no meaning, but after its conception it takes on a value, positive or negative, and in turn, ultimately will gain some meaning – even meaninglessness is meaningful.