我的第一篇AI-22，请大家指点//求求大家了，给点意见啊！我作文底子太差了，只能寄希望于模版来凑字数了，谢谢大家指点啊！！

In the first place, the important reason that can be presented to develop my position is that the value of arts must serve to our people and our society. A good example may be found that in the West Country, the value of arts should be carefully censored for the religious consideration. For example, there is a commercial successful movie-"Code of Davaqi", which has violated the religious value system to some extents, so that this movie was restricted by the government in the most of the world. Under this circumstance, therefore, it is obvious that the value of the art must be carefully censored to serve to our society best.

In addition, there is another reason for me to insist my view. The reason is not far to seek: fewer restrictions on the art, less productivity the art made by the artists themselves. To illustrate, let us consider that the funds that support the arts must be effectively used to get the best rewards. For example, if there are no restrictions on the art that the funds support, many works of the arts will be useless and bizarre for common citizen to appreciate. Hence, another equally important aspect is that the government must regulate the production of the arts to get high quality works for our society to sense.

Admittedly, it may be true that some restrictions on the art will hurt the creativeness of the artists when they produce the art works, in some conditions. However, this case alone does not constitute a sufficient support to claim that no restrictions are needed. It is more realistic to get some guidance to create useful and high value works. Actually, these cases are rare and therefore are too specific and too weak to support the claim. When the advantages and disadvantages of useful guidance and no restrictions are carefully compared, the most striking conclusion is that the production of the arts needs some specific guidance and some restrictions.

To sum up, due to the above mentioned reasons, which sometimes correlate with each other to generate an integral whole and thus become more convincing than any single one of them, we may safely arrive at the conclusion that government would and should place some restrictions on the arts to achieve the purposed targets which serve to our society.

第一次写，还准备写2篇，就上考场了；25分钟写完字数就到了511，不知道我这样拼凑的文章（模版就有300个字），能否拿到4.5分。请大家指点指点

Recently, there is a debate over the issue of whether government must place no restrictions on the art that is produced if the government support is going to produce anything of value. Different people hold different views because of their respective angles. Some people assert that government must place some restrictions on the art no matter what art values is and other people believe that this restriction will destroy the value of the arts. As a matter of fact, this issue is a complex and controversial one. However, I agree that government would and should place some restrictions on it to achieve the purposed targets and don't agree that no restrictions are needed for valuable arts. My view will be substantiated by the following discussions.

In the first place, the important reason that can be presented to develop my position is that the value of arts must serve to our people and our society. A good example may be found that in the West Country, the value of arts should be carefully censored for the religious consideration. For example, there is a commercial successful movie-"Code of Davaqi", which has violated the religious value system to some extents, so that this movie was restricted by the government in the most of the world. Under this circumstance, therefore, it is obvious that the value of the art must be carefully censored to serve to our society best.

In addition, there is another reason for me to insist my view. The reason is not far to seek: fewer restrictions on the art, less productivity the art made by the artists themselves. To illustrate, let us consider that the funds that support the arts must be effectively used to get the best rewards. For example, if there are no restrictions on the art that the funds support, many works of the arts will be useless and bizarre for common citizen to appreciate. Hence, another equally important aspect is that the government must regulate the production of the arts to get high quality works for our society to sense.

Admittedly, it may be true that some restrictions on the art will hurt the creativeness of the artists when they produce the art works, in some conditions. However, this case alone does not constitute a sufficient support to claim that no restrictions are needed. It is more realistic to get some guidance to create useful and high value works. Actually, these cases are rare and therefore are too specific and too weak to support the claim. When the advantages and disadvantages of useful guidance and no restrictions are carefully compared, the most striking conclusion is that the production of the arts needs some specific guidance and some restrictions.

To sum up, due to the above mentioned reasons, which sometimes correlate with each other to generate an integral whole and thus become more convincing than any single one of them, we may safely arrive at the conclusion that government would and should place some restrictions on the arts to achieve the purposed targets which serve to our society.