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?

Many people think that

artists

require

freedom

to show creativeness, and

therefore

they should not have any limit to express their ideas. I strongly disagree with

this

viewpoint and believe that there have to be some restrictions on the

artists

to stop creating violence and negativity in

society

. The primary reason why the

artists

should not give complete

freedom

because it may increase violence. Certainly, if art is related to a particular religion providing some wrong information, it could hurt people's feelings who belong to that religion.

This

may lead to riots and disturbance in

society

, eventually affecting innocent lives and national properties. The Paris attack is the best example that shows that what happens when the artist expresses his thoughts without any restriction.

However

, if there are some rules for expressing views through art, the violence could be avoided at the

first

step only. Another reason is that

such

freedom

of expression may create negativity among young people. Indeed, without any rules, the

artists

may present

such

content, that can be inappropriate for children, which can impact their thinking and views towards

society

.

For example

, M.F. Hussain's paintings showed nude images of women, which creates a lot of disruption. Because of

such

creations, children and youngsters might think of women as lustful objects and disrespect them.

Hence

, there should be some regulation to restrict

such

images from publishing. In conclusion, to develop and to show creativity,

artists

should get some

freedom

.

However

, if there is no restriction on their views, it would create unnecessary disturbance in

society

.

Therefore

, in my opinion,

artists

should not get total

freedom

to express their thoughts and ideas