Artists need a certain amount of freedom to develop their creativity. Some people think that artists should have total freedom to express any thoughts and ideas. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Art is a great form of communication and has become is an essential part of human civilization. It is argued by some that the artists need complete

freedom

of

expression

to develop innovative ideas, whereas, others believed that the artists'

freedom

should be restricted. I partially agree with

this

statement, artists should be given enough

freedom

of

expression

, but total

freedom

is not required. Artists should have

freedom

to express their ideas without thinking of consequences. If artist have

freedom

of

expression

, more and more people attract towards arts that will enrich our culture and civilization.

Moreover

, some artists highlight social issues and increase social awareness among the masses. Many of them stand for social justice.

For Instance

, after the rape case of 8-year-old girl in India, many people expressed their anger through songs, these songs became viral on social media.

Thus

, its aroused feelings many people and the authorities were forced to take immediate action against criminals.

On the other hand

, artwork should not have any destructive impact on society. There are many incidents where artwork

such

as painting created tension and violence.

For instance

, M F Hussain's painting of nude Goddesses created chaos among Hindu people.

In addition

, objectifying women in various art works may have a negative influence on children and teenagers. They may see women to mere objects of lust and did not respect them.

In other words

, creating negative emotions through the arts can increase crime, violence and can lead to many problems. To conclude

,

Accept space

,

the artist should have

freedom

of

expression

of creativity, but their work should be censored. So, the artwork does not have any negative effect on society.