Eraserhead fun fact/did not know that department - currently has better than a 90% rating from Rotten Tomatoes.
As has been noted above, there are some autobiographical elements (Lynch notoriously avoids explanations, he wants the film to stand on its own, and allow others to bring their own interpretation, so noting he had some anxiety about becoming a parent is about as far as he went). Trying to "figure it out" in terms of symbolism might be missing the point with a movie like Eraserhead, though (to me, it is more about atmosphere)*. He seems like a person that is in touch with, listens to and respects his sub-conscious. He probably doesn't know himself the source of some of the images.
One thing that is important to note, and imo a key to understanding why Eraserhead was reportedly one of Kubrick's favorite movies, is the sound design. Kubrick was a genius when it came to music and sound design. Especially given the low/no-budget nature of Eraserhead, the sophistication and impact of the sound design is borderline miraculous (in how it contributes to, and actively manipulates the viewer's sense of oppressive claustrophobia). Strictly on an artistic level, the photography and lighting are masterful. As to the sound and picture and how they contributed to the total, interconnected cinematic experience, Lynch's vision seemed to have emerged already fully formed in his first feature (though as noted, it was shot over five years due to budgetary constraints, so that did give him plenty of time to be a perfectionist).
It probably is just not a good recommendation for viewers that don't care for open-ended movies that resist and are refractory to neat, tidy interpretations (not criticism, just acknowledging fundamental matters of different personal style and resulting interests). Anybody that fits that description, there is a good chance Eraserhead isn't going to be their bag, so to speak. And that isn't to say those who are comfortable with and even enjoy open-ended movies may not also hate or be indifferent to Eraserhead. Just that a certain tolerance for a lack of resolution, would seem, at a minimum, to be almost a prerequisite to enjoyment of such a bizarre, non-traditional movie (though I could be off the mark on that).
Another thing about Lynch, if you are so inclined and open to it, his movies can transport you to a completely different world. You may not want to be in that world (

), which is really a separate issue, but it is a world that has a kind of internal consistency due to the depth and power of his imagery (in a way that is profoundly absent in, say, Michael Bay). The premises of Lost Highway, for instance, or many story and plot elements of Twin Peaks, are completely unbelievable. But I still found them interesting for the power of their nightmarish atmosphere (and the imagery they are cloaked in - like the scene with Robert Blake at the party, from Lost Highway) to disturb, and the uncanny ability to get under your skin like the best horror movies.
A review from the late Roger Ebert's site.
Excerpt - "My only worry when I settled in to watch it—with my entire family, for reasons lost in the mists of time and a decision that would quickly prove to be spectacularly ill-advised..."
http://www.rogerebert.com/demanders/defying-explanation-the-brilliance-of-david-lynchs-eraserhead
* Whereas with Mulholland Drive, I did agree with the reading that...
SPOILER BELOW ALERT!!!
Naomi Watts actually contracted the murder of her friend, went insane and killed herself - the beginning of the movie was a fantasy, leading up to her descent into madness.