For me, it's about the world which we live in, not the one we wish we did: one of compositional conventions, perpetual 'golden hour light'. It's about decay, opinions wanting to be heard, leaving a mark, differing messages by different people. Who left them, what were they thinking and why. It's about the people who came before us, and the people who came after. The attempts we make to cover up these inconveniences with white-wash paint.
Chapeau.
Whenever one tries to share an "unconventional" photograph, less people will make a connection with the image, especially on photo forums (which are the speed-dating version of photographic enjoyment – you have two seconds to make an impression, or else). The good news is that when people do make a connection, that connection can be much stronger than the one they make with conventional material. Just my two cents, of course.
I like the photo. Like someone else said before me, it made me stop and think.
This is why I hate art crtiics and artists. It is also why I have routinely said that I am not an artist.
My definition of an artist: One who claims that his message is hidden in his work and that you have to be worthy to appreciate it.
My definition of an artist fan: One who claims he can see this hidden message thus proclaiming himself better than those who are around him.
My definition of an artist fan's friend: One who agrees with the fan so that he is also deep.
Basically, what we are left with is a crappy piece, a fan who doesn't know why it's good, but knows that he is supposed to think that it is good so he makes something up to pretend like he understands, and the people who listen to the people who are pretending like they understand agreeing so they can feel like they are part of the 'in' crowd.
I call it the "Ellsworth Toohey effect".