Both, sorta.

Art is a form of communication. It is up to the author/artist to ensure the message they want to convey is both clear and understood to their target audience.

However, no matter how hard you try there will always be some who don’t interpret it as intended. These typically fall outside of the target audience, but their interpretation is still valid.

If the target audience still misinterprets, their interpretation is valid, but the artist did a poor job communicating their intention. This does not necessarily mean the art is bad though.

Death of the author, baby

A work can have multiple meanings, even unintended meanings. It can even have no intended meaning.

Its creators define its intended meaning, if any. Valid interpretations can create other meaning from it.

Audience

Creator can also percieve it and be part of the audience

Audience. The creator is part of the audience and will have their own valid interpretation, whether or not anyone else agrees with them

Both, but ultimately audience is more important since they are more numerous. Also there are works of art we seen with very little context know of their creation.

Yeah, definitely. Their interpretations may not completely match, but they’re both involved in it.

Meaning is subjective and not intrinsic, so there can be no such thing as “the” meaning of anything.

The artist can have an intended meaning, but the audience not only can but will find their own meaning in it. It might be the case that the audience gets the same meaning from it that the creator intended, but it might just as easily be the case that they get some entirely different meaning from it.

None of them are right or wrong - that’s not even a coherent concept in that context. They just are whatever they are.

Audience. It doesn’t matter what an artist intends if it is not perceived in that way. It’s up to the creator to make the audience perceive something.