Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
The relationship between art and the law is a complex one, and there are different opinions on whether it is ever acceptable to break the law or be socially irresponsible as a trade-off for genuine art.
Some argue that art should be free from censorship and that artists should be allowed to express themselves freely, even if it means breaking the law or being socially irresponsible. They argue that art can be a powerful tool for raising awareness, sparking conversation, and challenging societal norms, which can lead to positive change. Examples of this can be found in the work of some street artists, activists or even political dissidents who use their art to speak out against injustice and oppression.
On the other hand, others argue that artists have a responsibility to society and should not use their art as an excuse to break the law or be socially irresponsible. They argue that art can also be used to incite violence, spread hate speech, and incite the public to commit unlawful acts.
Ultimately, whether or not it is acceptable to break the law or be socially irresponsible as a trade-off for genuine art is a matter of personal opinion. However, it is important to consider the potential impact of the art on society and the individual and to weigh the value of the message against the potential harm it may cause.
It's worth noting that it's not only the artist responsibility but also the society's responsibility to create a platform where the art could be expressed and discussed without causing harm to others.