Arts, as an expression of lives and aesthetics, represent the freedom of humanities, emotions and thoughts. Therefore, some people claims that there should be no surveilliance and restrictions on the creations of the artists, that they need to be allowed to express any kind of ideas. From my perspective, I do agree with this stance for several reasons.
To begin with, I think arts are imitations and reflections of our real lives. No matter they are literatures or paintings, music or films, they all represent the progress of history and the special moments happened. There were uncountable masterpieces created freely in the history, from Botticelli’s tempera to Mozart’s sonata, the spirit of humanity were recorded in these works. There should not be rules of arts, because art itself indicates the freedom and hope.
On the other hand, without rigid control, arts will be more conducive to a prosperous culture and will be beneficial for people to ruminate and contemplate simultaneously. Histories have shown us different consequences in terms of opposite attitudes to arts. For examples, in the 19th century, the French government did not care about the contents of arts, so we have fantastic romanticism painting to illustrate the importance of revolution and freedom. On the contrary, during the Chinese cultural revolution period in the 1970s, strict restrictions were made only to jeopardise the art and the culture of the mass.
In conclusion, I strongly believe that creative artists should not be restricted of the contents or of the forms when they try to express themselves. Arts are like mirrors, recording the history lucidly. In my opinion, there will be more imagination and creativity in society if artists can create anything they want.