Some people believe that government funding of the arts is necessary to ensure that the arts can flourish and be available to all people Others believe that government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts

It is a very controversial issue whether government funding of the arts is necessary to ensure that the arts can be available to all people or threats the integrity of the arts. There are many arguments supporting both views, those for and those against government funding. The arts have diversity and many people from all over the world have its own definition about the term of art. In particular, the art means that special industry to provoke people expressing with different kind of languages and nationalities. One of the most important duties of every government is keep this feeling alive and develop the awareness of people about the arts.

On the one hand, government funding of the arts is necessary to transform them from last generations to present and next generations. People should increase their knowledge about the wide variety of arts and try to learn them which would never happen if their government did not intend to invest on the arts. Availability of arts for public makes contribution to keeping people up to date about different kinds of tools and instruments that are used to create a certain art. Moreover, the young generation can be attracted by some special arts and make an efforts to learn them professionally. For example, learning to use different kinds of old instruments at music art is one of attractive majors that some people intend to educate them in a professional way.

When the most proportion of people at a society has certain information about different kinds of arts like music, painting and poet would be able to estimate the high value of the arts and keep them safe by encourage their children and family members to learn them. Furthermore, government funding of the arts is a mutual deal for both artists and people to pay utmost attention to the situation of arts in their daily routines and flourish them. People will perceive the most important level of the artists and arts and the artists will express their fleeing better than they did in the past because they have security and know that their value of work is considered by people.

On the other hand, some people believe that government funding of the arts lead to decreasing the integrity of the arts because the people who have intelligence to learn special arts like telling poet get lost among the most proportion of people who like to tell poet without any talent. They think that y implementing this strategy, the merit of arts is declined and expert people will be forgotten because their priceless paintings, books, songs and poets will be not realized and their value will be ignored. For instance, the distinguishing between the painting of Picasso and the fake painting of someone who emulate the Picasso’s painting will be get difficult for people due to availability of this priceless painting to all people. Abusing of this strategy may make an irreversible damage for artists and their arts so they do not have tendency about implementation of this strategy.

In conclusion, the advantages of using this strategy outweigh the disadvantages because people can reap the benefit of getting information about different kinds of arts and take advantage of knowing artists who create special arts. People can increase their knowledge about the valuable of developing arts and realize the importance of arts in their lives. While if government does not devote any budget to implementation this strategy, many books are written by eminent writers without any expert readers to understand them, many painting are painted by famous painters without any keen observers to consider them and many songs are created by professional musicians without any smart listeners to perceive them.