Do I get credit?

It has been brought to my attention in a few essays recently read and in a few conversations with people that there are many of my fellow artists upset that they as artist have been taken out of the equation with regards to the interpretation of their works of art. People have decided to appreciate and interpret art devoid of what the artist intended the art to communicate. Is this wrong? In any normal conversation it is pretty important when, for example, I tell someone, "The movie was great because of yada yada..." My intention in communicating my feelings perhaps are important to interpreting this statement. But then we get into the question of whether or not art is the same kind of communication as verbal communication. And most would perhaps say nay. There are three things to take into consideration -- the artist, the artwork, and the interpreter. In this arrangement the artwork tends to upset direct communication between artist and interpreter. This kind of communication is sometimes not always apparent within the artwork itself. Does this make the piece a "bad" work of art if the intentions of the artist are not somewhat apparent in the piece so that onlookers have a grasp as to what the intentions are? Or is the work of art valuable despite whether or not we as the audience can infer or grasp the intentions of the artist. I would suggest that when possible, knowledge of context and perhaps authorial intent is beneficient to more deeply interpreting a work of art rather than merely walking up to it without the knowledge. But this is in no way a denial of the power of a work of art without knowing anything about the author or context. "Art" most characteristically is art precisely because it is designated as such. If it somehow were to lose it's artistic title, then was it ever art to begin with or merely a fad? From the previous statement perhaps "art" is something timeless which remains art because it continues to give meaning to human beings across cultures and time. Without fitting this criteria is it art? So an original artwork is selling for $6 million down the street (an original Picasso cubist painting let's say). Can you say this is art because it still gives meaning to people, or is it merely a historical artifact with worth, given that Picasso will not be painting anymore (at least I don't think so). Do people really care about Picasso's intent? And then there is another question that arises. Perhaps an artist decides to paint a painting bright blue -- a study of color. Is one going to wonder of the artist's intent or even understand how to begin an interpretation of the work? Let's compare this to one of Gaugin's scenes. We tend to need a little more help interpreting art with representations of people-like things and scenery (context, intent, etc). On the other hand, is the significance of authorial intent merely a product of our culture? What about those works of art in which we know nothing about the artist? Do they lose credibility as art? I don't personally think so. Perhaps a richer and more broad range of interpretive lenses are missing, but the credibility is in tact if the art is in fact art. Why is the artist unappreciated then in most cases? Precisely because true art takes on a life of its own when the artist let's it loose. This is not to deny that the authorial intent is embedded within the work itself in just such a way that perhaps one is able to tap it. Since true art has it's value in the meaning it gives to the lives of human beings, it is the human elements that are remembered and interpreted: those elements that point to possibilities not yet realized in the present. But when I say true art this is in contrast with commercial art, which I would suggest occupies many galleries, museums, homes, etc...even some of the paintings of "masters artists." Forgive the cynicism , but the worth of original artworks nowadays is pushing the limits of an elitism that is just ridiculous. These pieces of sh** are being sold for millions of dollars while some of the true artists I know are working 9 to 5 jobs with the real talent to create masterpieces (David don't give up hope).