Should artists be given total freedom?

Creative artists should be given freedom to express their ideas through words, pictures, music or films. Some people nevertheless think that the government should restrict artist's freedom of expression. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

"Give me Liberty or give me Death" , says, Pattrick Henry, the world-renowed artist in the American history. The matter of whether artists should be given total freedom to voice their own opinions through their works of art and meanwhile devote more great masterpices to human life is always in dispute. My view is that the government should draw the line at the freedom of expression for them.

First of all, unarguably, each citizen in society have the right to express their own opinions, known as the freedom of speech. This right is properly protected by law. Nonetheless, it should be acknowledged that not any statements or messages could be conveyed to viewers, regardless of content, particularly in the realm of politics or racial attitudes. Also artists are parts of the society and thus can not be an exception. Moreover, as a rule, artists are considered as trend-makers whose behaviors and lifestyles often draw public's attention. Considering such profound influences their ways of life exert on normal people, the government should impose constraints on what can be made available to the public and what not.

Secondly, it is thought that freedom is a source of inspiration in creating arts. Artists, if so obsessed by censorship or prosecution, would become unable to compose any great masterworks as being inhibited. Our lives would go hand in hand with monotony and humans might fail to establish their distinct cultural identity through artworks. This may sound true to a certain extent; however, the truth is that in an effort to yield enormous profits for themselves there are, nowadays, a number of artists who are likely to abuse their sole prerogative to cross the line, producing sex-arousing imagines, bias-provoking novels or obsence movies in disguise of the artworks. What is so-called true arts, as a result, might be put on the verge of extinction. The aesthetic taste of humanity, likewise, would be misleaded, easpecially that of the younger generation. In such cases, restraints definitely prove to be pivotal.

As analysed above, one can come to conclusion that the artists should be given restrict freedom on composing arts. Hopefully in the future, there is no need for censorship by dint of artists' self-consciousness, but in the meantime, this prescription probably remains essential so as to preserve the true aesthetic beauty of arts.

sophie789
"Give me Liberty or give me Death" , says, --> said
it is thought that freedom is a source of inspiration in creating arts -->it has been well-known that...
would become unable to compose any great masterworks as being inhibited --> would be masterworks... (overusing of great)...
obsence movies??
too many long sentences which can lead confusion for readers... misusing of commas and semicolon...
The arguments paragraph 2 are not very clear

Hi,
The positive points of the essay were the use of strong words and complex sentences. Grammar was also good. I have some suggestions that u can find them below:

world-renowned artist


You should briefly mention why you think like that.

each citizenindividuals/citizens in a society have the right to express their own opinions

statements or messages could be conveyed to viewersothers

Also artists are a parts of the society and, thus, they cannotnot be an exception

The idea in the second paragraph is good, but you should add some examples to make your idea more clear. For example, you can talk about the effects of artists and their works on the social behavior of people, especially young people. For another example, you can state that how movies can influence the social values and cultural norms of a society.


The topic is about the art works not the life styles of artists.


This sentence is too long. Break it down to several parts.

In the third paragraph u also mentioned good ideas with good examples. However, I think you should delete the first two lines, because you just want to state that the freedom of artists through their works should be controlled. Thus, the last lines of the paragraph are enough to support this opinion.

In the type of "agree or disagree" you should support your opinion under three paragraphs. Of course, two paragraphs in the body is fine, but it is not perfect. Try to add the third paragraph in the body:)

Hope the comments help

Regards
Ahmad

Hi Ahmad,
I really appreciate your support. The only thing I should add is that " the world-renowned artist" is ok. I found it in the oxford dictionary. It is my spelling mistake when typing it.

Your comments on my essays posted are always helpful. Thanks so much!