Independence accompanies responsibility; and imagination has ceaseless boundaries, giving a performer liberty to express his creativity through different mediums without any restriction may spread hostile, so I am in a dissent to the declaration that the government should not restrict the artist to express their views.
Thoughts are expressed directly or indirectly through movies, paintings, writing and many more; and are also considered highly influential to the rest of the world. They have a strong impact on the onlookers, so how the notion is deciphered affects society. Apparently positive views are ameliorates the humanity, whereas, conflicting is baleful. Movies and actors immensely actuate common people, in the way they behave and carry themselves, affecting the populace. For instance, Indian cinema in early 90s delivered movies which did not showed obscene so people were less prone to such activity, nowadays in order to show reality, often lewd and crime scenes are presented, perhaps giving rise to criminal activities in the society.
Furthermore if the artists are given liberty to express their views at large, perhaps taints the fraternity of art. For instance, prominent painter MF Hussein is more controversial as he portrays Hindu gods inappropriately, eventually hurting community feelings. Similarly famous Khajuraho temple is masterpiece architecture, but reflects bareness, which is hindering children’s temperament. Hence freedom should be accompanied with responsibility.
Summing up, we have seen that, even though ideas positively articulated have an affirmative impact on society, whereas it could be subverted if misinterpreted. Hence it drew me to the conclusion that, government regulations are necessary, for maintaining societal sentiments.
Independence accompanies responsibility; and imagination has ceaseless boundaries, giving a performer liberty to express his creativity through
different
mediums without any restriction may spread hostile,
so
I am in a dissent to the declaration that the
government
should not restrict the artist to express their views.
Thoughts
are expressed
directly
or
indirectly
through movies, paintings, writing and
many
more; and are
also
considered
highly
influential to the rest of the world. They have a strong impact on the onlookers,
so
how the notion
is deciphered
affects society.
Apparently
positive
views are ameliorates the humanity, whereas, conflicting is baleful. Movies and actors
immensely
actuate common
people
, in the way they behave and carry themselves, affecting the populace.
For instance
, Indian cinema in early 90s delivered movies which did not
showed
obscene
so
people
were less prone to such activity, nowadays in order to
show
reality,
often
lewd and crime scenes
are presented
, perhaps giving rise to criminal activities in the society.
Furthermore
if the artists are
given
liberty to express their views at large, perhaps taints the fraternity of art.
For instance
, prominent painter MF Hussein is more controversial as he portrays Hindu gods
inappropriately
,
eventually
hurting community feelings.
Similarly
famous
Khajuraho
temple is masterpiece architecture,
but
reflects bareness, which is hindering children’s temperament.
Hence
freedom should be
accompanied with
responsibility.
Summing up, we have
seen
that,
even though
ideas
positively
articulated have an affirmative impact on society, whereas it could
be subverted
if misinterpreted.
Hence
it drew me to the conclusion that,
government
regulations are necessary, for maintaining societal sentiments.