Creative artists should always be given the freedom to express their own ideas (in words, pictures, music or film) in whichever way they wish. There should be no government restrictions on what they do. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion? v.7

In the past few decades, creative artists were given the freedom to express their artistic ideas without interruption. Some people argue that creativity should also have some limitations and others believe that creativity should not have restrictions. In my view, I partially agree that there should be rules and restrictions to avoid further complications. Firstly, creativity is a gift and this skill is not acquired by many, yet the concept should be polite and pleasing to everyone; however, many sculptures and painters tried to communicate or pass on information from generations to generations through profession. For example, many creative artists like Leonardo Da Vinci encouraged many young artists to draw inspirations. Needless to say, craft can communicate many feelings and emotions, where words cannot express and the feelings are beyond comprehension. Secondly, there are some pitfalls that can overwhelm the potential benefits of an invention. Many films have certification boards to certify its content to check violence and nudity in film making. For instance, the Joker character in the Batman series inspired many to commit crime in real life. Similarly, graffiti is banned in Australia because some portrait work criticise racially and can lead to violence. Hence, creation should be in limits and governing bodies should enforce some rules. In conclusion, we can clearly understand that creativity should have restrictions and the content should be user friendly. However, freedom to express is not always beneficial to the society because social responsibility to not hurt others play a key role in innovations in creators. Hence, the role of creative restrictions is too dire to ignore.