There is no shortage of opinions regarding if government may or may not funding the art development, what makes this issue a contentious one. While each side has its strengths and weaknesses, I strongly believe that public funding of arts harms their integrity and spontaneity, mainly because the government can bias the art creativity and make only those artists aligned with the government flourish. Furthermore, the use on public funding always comes with a risk of corruption, what would represents really damage to the public interest.
First of all, one of the most important characteristics of the arts and related artists are their freedom to challenge the common sense and show differing perspectives of the society. As truly iconoclasts, the artists should have room to also contest government positions and proposed public policies. In this regard, artists who depends on public funding to make their work would be intimidated and not contend with the government political views. For example, in countries long ruled by parties with left political views, artists with rights beliefs could not receive funding, hindering them to flourish as much as those in the left.
The second reason to support my view on this issue is the risk of corruption in the process of granting the public funds to support the art. The criteria of selecting the artists that would be granted, as well as the valuation of the amount of funding needed by each art project could be seriously affected by the asymmetry of information between artists and government. In such environment, the process of granting public funding could be easily and intentionally driven to favor some groups of artists in exchange of bribes.
On the other hand, some may argue that without public funding the art could not flourish, given that most of population does not give much value on art as it uses to give on hedonic goods. Nevertheless, many countries around the world have seen their national art flourish just through charity and private awards created by passionate wealthy citizens.
To sum up, public funding of arts could lead to limitate and bias the art production in a country and also is always exposed to the risk of corruption and misuse of public resources. For these reasons, I definitely hold the opinion that arts should not be funded by the government.
- Technology, while apparently aimed to simplify our lives, only makes our lives more complicated. 50
- Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain.Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position 66
- GRE Issue:Claim: The surest indicator of a great nation must be the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists.Reason: Great achievements by a nation's rulers, artists, or scientists will ensure a good life for the majority of that nation's people 66
- Formal education tends to restrain our minds and spirits rather than set them free.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and s 66
- Laws should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances, times, and places.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developi 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 493, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'would' requires the base form of the verb: 'represent'
Suggestion: represent
...s with a risk of corruption, what would represents really damage to the public interest. ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, if, may, nevertheless, really, regarding, second, so, well, while, for example, as well as, first of all, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 19.5258426966 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 33.0505617978 64% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 58.6224719101 104% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1969.0 2235.4752809 88% => OK
No of words: 388.0 442.535393258 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.07474226804 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43821085614 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72478512552 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 215.323595506 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.515463917526 0.4932671777 104% => OK
syllable_count: 588.6 704.065955056 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 6.24550561798 32% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.1329973305 60.3974514979 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.642857143 118.986275619 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.7142857143 23.4991977007 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.4285714286 5.21951772744 219% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.83258426966 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.345888746022 0.243740707755 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.127881312065 0.0831039109588 154% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0791099488605 0.0758088955206 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.207433482424 0.150359130593 138% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0596959350709 0.0667264976115 89% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 14.1392134831 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 48.8420337079 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 12.1743820225 103% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.1639044944 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 100.480337079 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.