Since the 19th century, the idea that “art is imitation” has not only been contested but has also fallen out of favor in at least certain artistic disciplines. The idea that art is expression eventually took its place. Art is believed to reflect the artist’s inner state rather than the conditions of the outside world. At the very least, this appears to be implied in the fundamental definition of expression: the externalization of an internal condition.
Artistic Expression and it’s surrounding controversy
Since the inception of artistic expression, reality has been a vital tool for creation. One of the main subjects of art is the representation of what the eyes see and what people feel and believe. However, artistic creation has never been solely a reflection of reality; even during the Realism movement, it served to show viewers the brutality or beauty of everyday life. Art has also never been merely a reflection of the artist’s innermost thoughts and feelings, disconnected from the outside world. When put into an artificial environment, its weakness is exposed due to the confusion around its interpretation within the web of contextual meanings.
As of today, there’s still a question that needs answering.
If and why should this to be monitored by law?
The protests by communal groups in response to cultural activities have largely fuelled the debate about artistic freedom in India. In situations like these, it is undoubtedly desirable to have strict laws protecting the interests of the actors and filmmakers.
In the best interests of the kids, artistic expression must be censored. When adolescents are exposed to art that explicitly uses coarse language, violence, sex, and anything that is offensive to women, they suffer greatly.
All in all, art though a form of expression in its purest, should most definitely be monitored by the law at at-least some primary level.