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 the externalization of the skills of an artist.

Therefore

, there are

people

who are in favour of imparting full liberty to

artists

;

however

, others oppose

this

opinion freely. In my opinion, freedom is necessary up to a greater extent but there should be proper surveillance on their work to avoid any unpleasant situation.

To begin

with, there are many reasons why some

people

are in favour of giving full freedom to

artists

. First of all, if they are free from any suppression that helps them to unveil all the social issues of the

society

without any fear. They expose the cancerous spot and request that

society

uproot that. Any type of confinement will not let them express their thoughts.

Secondly

, these creative

artists

are the nerve of every nation because of their extraordinary skills; if they work freely they, undoubtedly, have the potential to make a masterpiece that brings recognition to every country on the map of the world.

However

, I feel that full autonomy may have an adverse effect on the individual and on

society

because many times

artists

are seen painting an objectionable picture, adding any anti-social dialogue in the films that results in communal riots and hurts the sentiments of the

people

. These types of acts cost the lives of the

people

.

For example

, once in the popular film, some Hindu gods are shown begging.

This

film has not only brought criticism by the Hindu

society

but

also

sparked communal riots that have ended up in the demise of some

people

.

Therefore

, they should not be given full freedom.

To sum up

,

although

artists

are required to be given full liberty to explore their creativity yet government should ensure that that very act may not hurt others' feelings.