Arts is increasingly becoming an indispensable part in our current lives. While some people advocate the idea of free expression of artists, some regulations are allegedly taken into account to control the artistic creators. From my own perspectives, I do believe that they should be given rights to disclose their own messages under state legislations.
On the one hand, regardless of democratic regime the artists are living in, potentially detrimental consequences might be derived from reckless art works. Firstly, emotionally vulnerable teenagers are likely to be susceptible to brutal and pornographic contents on the Internet websites they surf. Although the images might be judged to be valuable creative works, they are not controlled to keep distance from children, who probably imitate the sensitive things. Secondly, when it comes to religious aspect, sarcastic pictures about revered religious leaders could result in bloody revenges of followers. For example, an act of head-cut was carried out by Iraq terrorists as a violent reaction to USA's raids in the country. As a result, the art works should be sternly controlled by a cultural governmental institution so as to reduce the potential risks.
Furthermore, either art works or artists themselves should be placed into legislative rules. Artists are well-known influencing persons, whose behaviors, attitudes and manners always draw public attention. It is taken for granted that the moral actions of celebrities have positive impact on their fans and vice versa. Take Justine Bieber for example, his insulting words to others as well as his addiction to drug did not only ruin his singer career but also make a negative mimic to his avid fans generally and adolescence particularly.
In conclusion, how extraordinarily creative the artists are, their messages to public should be still thoroughly controlled by the parliament's regulations. Government plays a key role in successful debuts of talented creators as well as quality management of launched artistic products.
Arts
is
increasingly
becoming an indispensable part in our
current
lives
. While
some
people
advocate the
idea
of free expression of
artists
,
some
regulations are allegedly taken into account to control the artistic creators. From my
own
perspectives, I do believe that they should be
given
rights to disclose their
own
messages under state
legislations
.
On the one hand, regardless of democratic regime the
artists
are living in,
potentially
detrimental consequences might
be derived
from reckless
art
works.
Firstly
,
emotionally
vulnerable
teenagers
are likely to be susceptible to brutal and pornographic contents on the Internet websites they surf. Although the images might
be judged
to be valuable creative works, they are not controlled to
keep
distance from children, who
probably
imitate the sensitive things.
Secondly
, when it
comes
to religious aspect, sarcastic pictures about revered religious leaders could result in bloody revenges of followers.
For example
, an act of head-
cut
was carried
out by Iraq terrorists as a violent reaction to USA's raids in the country.
As a result
, the
art
works should be
sternly
controlled by a cultural governmental institution
so as to
reduce
the potential
risks
.
Furthermore
, either
art
works or
artists
themselves should
be placed
into legislative
rules
.
Artists
are well-known influencing persons, whose behaviors, attitudes and manners always draw public attention. It
is taken
for granted that the moral actions of celebrities have
positive
impact on their fans and vice versa. Take Justine Bieber
for example
, his insulting words to others
as well
as his addiction to drug did not
only
ruin his singer career
but
also
make
a
negative
mimic to his avid fans
generally
and adolescence
particularly
.
In conclusion
, how
extraordinarily
creative the
artists
are, their messages to public should be
still
thoroughly
controlled by the parliament's regulations.
Government
plays a key role in successful debuts of talented creators
as well
as quality management of launched artistic products.