As a sci-fi, horror, and adventure fan, I'm not drawn to existential efforts such as this one . . . usually. I saw BLOOD OF A POET (as it's known here in the States) almost by accident one night about fifteen years ago (I believe it was on the A&E network), and I've never really shaken its imagery since. I tend to agree with the earlier poster who offered the opinion that the film doesn't have a distinct purpose or meaning, but the vision with which it is imbued certainly is powerful and resistant to the changes of time and fashion.
BLOOD was created at a time of great upheaval and experimentation, as films moved fully into synchronized sound, and that period remains virtually unique as the birth of a new artform. Of course, films had been around for almost forty years by then, but their first "genesis" doesn't compare to the coming of sound, due to the slow spread and acceptance of the initial motion pictures (for years following the Lumieres and Edison, many critics in the world of the arts remained convinced that "the movies" were a fad that would dissolve with a bit more time) and the general difficulty in penetrating the vast majority of the world which was unprepared to present the product. By the late Twenties, films were perhaps the most popular artform (possibly surpassing literature by that point), especially among the less-advantaged groups. So revolutionizing them by the inclusion of sound was a fantastic achievement that Cocteau and his painting/sculpting/poetry writing contemporaries seized eagerly in effort to extend their own artistic exploration into new dimensions.
Even with all of its obtuse imagery, homo-eroticism, and deliberate "artiness," BLOOD remains a highly successful attempt to portray the interior of another sort of human mind in visual (and audible) terms. I don't watch it often, but I try to run my copy at least once a year just to take a respite from my own linear and self-involved life and peek into an existence that almost seems to belong to an entirely different species of being. It is a legitimate classic of the art of filmmaking. Steve.
I agree with mvance-1, Blood of the Poet is like a moveable art-gallery. It's really one of the first films that appeared a visual art-form as an untouchable existence. It's funny, this film also served me very well throughout years as a Muse or inspirational magnet of some kind for its potency waking up so many creative ideas in my head, well, as a matter of fact only Cocteau's works had this effect on me.