Creative artist should always be given freedom to express their own ideas in whichever way they wish.There should be no public or government restrictions on what they do. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

Some people believe that artists must be given absolute liberty to reveal their notions, whereas others think opposite to it. In my opinion, the creators need some freedom to create masterpieces of art.

However

, too much privilege can hurt people who have an immense trust on religions and customs. On the one hand, it is considered as necessary to provide access to originators because their brain can function appropriately, and they can design some extraordinary samples of artwork, which can manifest their ideas as well.

For instance

, some countries who do not confine their artists have proved themselves in the field of artistry.

Thus

, an artist with no restriction will enable the himself as information of sculptures, which can express their ideas as well as they are alluring.

Furthermore

, it can ameliorate the economic condition of a country. The state whoever has pretty fine artists can earn the name and fame and

also

money.

For instance

, in India artists like A.R Rehman not only contributes to the economic growth of the nation, but

also

make it imminent throughout the world.

On the other hand

, giving complete freedom can lead to conflict as art pieces often deal with the subject of religion and culture. The people who are more concerned about their traditions can criticize the art of the artists.

For instance

, a few years ago, the portrayal of a Hindu goddess with fewer clothes by a famous Indian painter provoked widespread outrage in the country.

Hence

, artists should not be given total privilege to express their thoughts and feelings. To conclude,

although

certain privilege is required by artists in order to depict the creativity, full freedom sometimes lead to demolition of certain customs which can lead to disputes.