Artist on trial for attaching rooster to his unmentionables in Paris

Some art is mysterious. Think of the Mona Lisa: why is she smiling? Or Hieronymus Bosch's "Garden of Earthly Delights" -- it's loaded with symbolism, but what do the symbols mean? Or C.M. Coolidge's haunting depictions of dogs playing poker: are they meant to entertain us, or warn us about an apocalyptic future?

It's all a matter of interpretation. Which can be especially problematic when an artist runs into legal problems. For example, if a guy wearing a corset, platform shoes, and a mask straps gigantic feathers to his head, and puts a rooster on a makeshift leash made from a ribbon and then ties that ribbon to his junk, which is wrapped in bandages, is -- would that -- can he --
You can see the problem facing a French court.

Right now, a South African artist named Steven Cohen is on trial in Paris for a piece of performance art he did last year in front of the Eiffel Tower.

Steven Cohen and his rooster (Photograph courtesy of Quentin Evrard)

The art consisted of him strolling around in the get-up I just mentioned with the bird I just mentioned attached to a part of him I don't need to mention. The question before the court is: did he impose the performance on viewers -- or did they watch it voluntarily?

At stake is a fine of a thousand euros, which Mr. Cohen does not want to pay. And in order to avoid a fine, he's arguing it was an artistic expression of his identity. He has also insisted that it troubled no one. As he told the court, "No one complained, not even the group of nuns who walked by."

There will be no verdict until May. And even then, it will be a matter of interpretation. After all, your response to art is subjective. Sometimes it tugs your heartstrings, and sometimes it tugs -- something else.