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.
Arts can be defined as the application or expression of human creative skills, typically in visual forms, such as painting, dancing, sculpture, music, literature, etc. Art is essential not only for the cultural identity of a nation but also for the intellectual health of its citizens. Therefore, the government is obligated to ensure that the arts can flourish and be available to all people. While some may argue that public funding of arts for that purpose can be detrimental to the integrity of arts, proper funding targets and mechanism are enough to alleviate this apprehension.
Like any other aspect of the society such as Science, health care, education, etc., government funding is warranted to ensure the flourishing of the arts and its accessibility to general public, especially of late. Art projects and institutions need resources for survival. Musicians need instruments; artists require supplies; museums need maintenance; and so on. These expenses are mostly covered through earnings from sales and exhibitions, philanthropic donations, private investments and government funding. With the advent of modern recreational avenues and pastimes such as multiplexes, amusement parks, pubs, etc., interest in arts continues to abate significantly. Consequently, donors and investors are less interested in luxury donations or investments with no promise of returns in sight. Therefore, the only constant and reliable financial resource for these institutions to survive is government funding.
Moreover, without government funding, art institutions would be left with no alternative but to increase entry prices to meet their expenses. This would further repel an already disinterested crowd from arts institutions, thus forcing the arts into oblivion. Similarly, without a constant source of funding, the employment of many artists and artisans is threatened. They would start looking for other livelihood opportunities and abandon their expertise. Lack of government funding, therefore, could deprive the arts institutions from both the artists and the audience; and arts would eventually die instead of flourishing and proliferating.
People against the government sponsorship of arts may argue that the integrity of arts will be compromised. Artists and art projects conforming the government agenda and ideology would be favored whereas others would be disowned. For example, in North Korea, art projects cherishing the dictatorial heritage are being sponsored by the government. However, this seems to be a problem of autocracy rather than government funding. In such countries, even private sponsored arts would be censored if it is not fulfilling the government agenda. In a democratic country, the extent of manipulating arts is limited. Furthermore, the threat to the integrity of arts also lies with private sponsorship. For instance, a big MNC can fund and promote arts for their own publicity and creation of a positive image in the public. Ultimately, it all comes down to the moral integrity of the artists to not to compromise the spirits of arts under the influence of their sponsors. For example, Picasso constantly criticized Franco’s regime while other chose to be sycophantic. An iconoclastic artist in all likelihood will adhere to his moral responsibility to challenge common sense, contest government position and policies, etc.
Finally, there are many ways and methods of funding and supporting the arts without the scope of manipulation. Governments can always set up new museums, libraries, operas and international art exhibitions providing employment and opportunities to a multitude. Opening specialized arts colleges and providing scholarships would ensure that the nation is not deprived of the future Picassos. Low or medium grade artists can be employed for beautifying airports, government institutions, stadiums, etc. Furthermore, instead of directly funding specific projects or artists, government can always fund institutions or professional bodies while granting disbursement autonomy, thus leaving no scope for their interference.
In conclusion, both the arts and artists government has the responsibility to make provisions for flourishing arts and making it accessible cannot survive, let alone flourish and become accessible to public, without a reliable funding support which can only be provided by the government. While fear for the integrity of arts in not ill-founded, appropriate funding targets and methods can suffice to obviate it.
- All parents should be required to volunteer time to their children s schools 94
- Claim Researchers should not limit their investigations to only those areas in which they expect to discover something that has an immediate practical application Reason It is impossible to predict the outcome of a line of research with any certainty 83
- Governments should offer a free university education to any student who has been admitted to a university but who cannot afford the tuition. 83
- Society should identify those children who have special talents and provide training for them at an early age to develop their talents 92
- The best test of an argument is the argument s ability to convince someone with an opposing viewpoint 85
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 180, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...ng of the arts and its accessibility to general public, especially of late. Art projects and i...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 10, column 720, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...eaving no scope for their interference. In conclusion, both the arts and artists...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, finally, furthermore, however, if, look, may, moreover, similarly, so, therefore, thus, whereas, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.5258426966 133% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 26.0 12.4196629213 209% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 36.0 14.8657303371 242% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 33.0505617978 70% => OK
Preposition: 82.0 58.6224719101 140% => OK
Nominalization: 30.0 12.9106741573 232% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3845.0 2235.4752809 172% => OK
No of words: 673.0 442.535393258 152% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.7132243685 5.05705443957 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.09335287823 4.55969084622 112% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18342545596 2.79657885939 114% => OK
Unique words: 334.0 215.323595506 155% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.496285289747 0.4932671777 101% => OK
syllable_count: 1182.6 704.065955056 168% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 34.0 20.2370786517 168% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 46.0249668968 60.3974514979 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.088235294 118.986275619 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7941176471 23.4991977007 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.23529411765 5.21951772744 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 19.0 10.2758426966 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 5.13820224719 195% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.49894060771 0.243740707755 205% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.14190968883 0.0831039109588 171% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0971624441971 0.0758088955206 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.301639460448 0.150359130593 201% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0772760613257 0.0667264976115 116% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 14.1392134831 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.27 48.8420337079 72% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.1743820225 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.84 12.1639044944 130% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.58 8.38706741573 114% => OK
difficult_words: 213.0 100.480337079 212% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 180, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...ng of the arts and its accessibility to general public, especially of late. Art projects and i...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 10, column 720, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...eaving no scope for their interference. In conclusion, both the arts and artists...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, finally, furthermore, however, if, look, may, moreover, similarly, so, therefore, thus, whereas, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.5258426966 133% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 26.0 12.4196629213 209% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 36.0 14.8657303371 242% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 33.0505617978 70% => OK
Preposition: 82.0 58.6224719101 140% => OK
Nominalization: 30.0 12.9106741573 232% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3845.0 2235.4752809 172% => OK
No of words: 673.0 442.535393258 152% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.7132243685 5.05705443957 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.09335287823 4.55969084622 112% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18342545596 2.79657885939 114% => OK
Unique words: 334.0 215.323595506 155% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.496285289747 0.4932671777 101% => OK
syllable_count: 1182.6 704.065955056 168% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 34.0 20.2370786517 168% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 46.0249668968 60.3974514979 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.088235294 118.986275619 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7941176471 23.4991977007 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.23529411765 5.21951772744 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 19.0 10.2758426966 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 5.13820224719 195% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.49894060771 0.243740707755 205% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.14190968883 0.0831039109588 171% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0971624441971 0.0758088955206 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.301639460448 0.150359130593 201% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0772760613257 0.0667264976115 116% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 14.1392134831 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.27 48.8420337079 72% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.1743820225 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.84 12.1639044944 130% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.58 8.38706741573 114% => OK
difficult_words: 213.0 100.480337079 212% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.