"Questionable artistic value?" This nonsense comes from the whole myth of "credibility." I call it a myth because all that matters is the sound coming out of the speakers. Kiss's first few albums were full of exciting, catchy hard rock (a lot of it more complex than the material on Zeppelin's first two albums, if that's your criteria); "artistic value" in music is a bit of a self-defeating term, because everyone has different tastes, and what's not good to you might be fantastic to someone else.
At the risk of sounding like I'm attacking you, which isn't my intention at all, I'd like to hear the reference points by which you're able to listen to music and discern what "artistic decisions" its writing has involved. In other words, let's hear some of your songs, please. I'm curious about what you'd consider "answered artistic value."
Take it with a nudge and a wink, not a scowl. Again, tastes differ, and I only get a bit vexed when someone attempts to apply pretentious terms that are extraneous to the actual sound of the music -- implying that those whose tastes are different enjoy "less artistic value," whatever the hell that implies in something visceral like music!