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.Write a response in which you

Arts have a broad meaning and also have a great role in the society and country’s culture which will require a firm support from governments in aspects of money and psychological supports but the fact is that the artist is someone who has a soul with different characteristic to ordinary people and should be able to release his/her mind and create an artistic masterpiece. So by fettering in hands and decides of the government, the artist will lose his/her creativity. Therefore, I agree that government funding will threaten the integrity of the arts due to the various reasons.

The first issue is about the creativity and the freedom of mind of the artist who in most cases is in the opposition of governmental norms and cannot be compatible with the norms of the current culture of the society, hence the artist will need to be free to show virtuosity and make artworks. The fact is that governments' funding will bring responsibilities for artists to limit freedom of their mind and work under the laws and norms of the government which will threaten the integrity of art. Someone may argue that there are some artists who work under government’s survey and are taking governments’ funding and by this way can introduce the art to all generations and all kinds of the people of the country, but the fact is that true art has savage soul which cannot bear fetters and doesn’t know any specific norm. In considering the progress of the art throughout the history we can understand that people are making artistic works regardless of taking money or governmental funds and the arts is promulgating just because it is related to the creativity and soul of human but not the governments.

Moreover, in some cases funding won’t guarantee that the art will be flourished and won’t result to the definitive higher number of artists or artworks in the country due to some reasons as follow; the first one is that there is a possibility that artists who are working under the governmental prohibitions and laws will spend a great amount of money to enhance their life luxuriousness and by having more volume of funds they will spend money for personal necessities rather than distributing art. The second reason is about continuity of funding which will make artists unlikely to work if their source of money stops injecting financial supports and as a result, the number of artists who has a responsibility to promulgate art throughout the country will decline considerably. Therefore, in both two cases artists will be in the need of governmental supports which will threaten the integrity of the art.

In addition to previous arguments, it should be considered that competition in the art world is a vital factor which can guarantee continuity and integrity of the artworks and without competition between artists to enhance their own style or a specific style, art will become limited in the people’s private spaces. By accepting governmental funding or if governments support art totally with money, the competition between artists will change its direction from producing masterpieces to taking funds from the government. In many countries, these is the politic of the governments to eliminate the differences between artistic styles and narrow it down to themselves’ favor that will result to the schism between artists and in a greater view will threaten the integrity of art.

In conclusion, in part it is alright that funding and financial supports of the governments are necessary to flourish arts, but in the expanded view it will threaten art’s integrity.