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 wildly considered as the language of hearts. Since each artwork explains the feelings and beliefs of its creature artist it is known that artists should not be entirely restricted so that they can express their art and creativity. This essay argues why it is important for artists to have freedom in developing their art. Throughout the history, there has always been arguments whether the freedom of speech for artists might endanger the society. One reason is that artists potentially influence their audience to start or join social or political movements which of some might be against the accepted morals of the society. Also, if the artworks are not observed by some authorities, they can cause significant harm to the younger demographics since these children might be exposed to images of pornography or violence. In this case, the necessity of having a certain amount of observation on artists is beyond the doubt. Art, however, is undeniably depending on the creativity and it is absolutely clear that without freedom creativity loses its wings to fly through the horizons. Restricting artists and heavy censorship leads to low valued mechanical pieces of arts which fail to impress the audience. Artists, if they lose their freedom, will turn to some tools in the hands of politicians who commands the artists what to create. This means the arts will become artificial and spiritually poor to touch hearts of people. Art cannot breathe where the boots command. This essay, in conclusion, states that although we need to maintain some controlling programs on artists, yet a certain extent of freedom is essential in order to create the original artworks.