I had to read Paul's comment before I realised what thais has to do with a guitar! It's a switch on an electric guitar, isn't it?
From the thumbnail, I thought it was a weightlifter's weight... So I rather like the 'what is it?' element in the composition, and the limited depth of field adds to that.
So this sort of works artistically, but on a technical level, it's far less of a treat. For most macro pictures, you'd want more sharpness, more even lighting: if you were intending to achieve these, you failed. If you meant the shot to look exactly as it does, you did well in breaking a load of rules.
But your comment suggests that you had a go, and didn't particularly intend any special outcome, in which case, I'd suggest having a look at a few really good examples of macro work, and noting the common features.
Depth of field is tiny close up, so it's normal to stop down to f/11 or smaller, and to light pretty brightly to facilitate this. I often say it's fun to work right at the margins, technically, artistically, even socially. But in order to break the rules with assurance, you need to understand what they are, and how to follow them.
To sum up, then - this works - but I'd be interested to know whether you think it does, and whether you planned that it would look this way.