More than 99% of my own music is instrumental, just to establish that right away so you know where I'm coming from. I'm also a pretty poor singer, which has a further deterrent, I'm sure.
So, like some here have already gone into, I've opted for the "make what you will from it" approach when presenting my songs (which I still firmly call songs!), or at the most share the basic conceptual backstory for its creation, if there is one that I feel is needed to be established beforehand for a specifically intended effect.
Generally speaking, though, I favour that freedom of interpretation, and the feedback I get often surprises me when people see something in my songs that I had not. Even myself when listening to music, rather than having things strapped into to just "that story", as it were, I often find it a more rewarding experience to not know. A good example, I absolutely can lose myself in the work of people like forum user Adachi from Japan, not 'despite' I'm not understanding the lyrics but because I don't understand the lyrics!
However, I was "cursed" with being the son of someone who was a renowned lyricist in his days (which is just too big of a shadow to live under and thus an even bigger deterrent, I might add), but that has also given me an appreciation of the ideology of the storyteller, where the tune serves more as the "necessary packaging" with the lyrics absolutely the vital element as the focal content. A valid standpoint too, particularly if words is what you're the most comfortable with.

So I think there is perhaps not a strict 'yes' or 'no' answer to the initial question? It so much relies of the intent, and to some extent abilities, of the artist.

Last edited by Icelander; 09/11/20 03:41 AM. Reason: Afterthought
Just because you can, doesn't mean you should!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
BBox 2022 Audiophile, Mac Pro Intel, OSX 10.6.8, 800x600 (TV VGA)