The title of this piece (not yet in a Gallery) is 'Two Angry Aliens Go Eyeball to Eyeball'. I think it is a fun piece, but also a good piece of art given the symmetry of the two aliens, and the judicious use of negative space. I like art that is fun and makes me smile, but apparently that is not acceptable in some art circles unless it evokes empathy, sympathy, sorrow, longingness, or any other emotions that the artist feels should be obvious to the viewers based on their dysthymic view of the world.
Art doesn't have to have a bunch of manufactured drama around it. Although I think there exists a certain segment of people who thrive on the drama. The other day I was in a gallery, and the artist just happened to be there and I was taking in his piece when he showed up. I felt the work was pretty good, and things were moving along just fine in our conversation up until where I pointed out that a large segment of the painting, in isolation, looked like every dentist's nightmare.
Immediately, and without warning, the conversation got ugly and this guy started berating me for failing to recognize the obvious that the loneliness of the part I was looking at was transitioning into both anger and dispair over the loss of someone close. He huffed off without even giving me an opportunity to respond.
Good grief. I guess I just ran into the next Andy Worhol right in downtown Arden, NC! Honestly, I don't get it when someone gets offended because the viewer doesn't see the message the artist intended. But to each is own, I guess.
As for my art, I personally don't care if the viewer doesn't 'get it'. I am happy whenever it evokes any response from the viewer. I think art is, and should be, about evoking a response of any sort. If it moves the viewer toward a negative emotion or a positive one, I'm OK with it regardless of what I intended.