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.
Sponsoring artists and disseminating their work in museums is something that has been done for a long time. Museums in Latin America, Europe and North America are examples of successful government funding allocated to the development and the popularization or arts. Furthermore, many artists receive financial support by either the government or wealthy patrons to work. While many people argue that such practice is welcomed, others believe that this type of help threatens the creativity and, therefore, the whole integrity of arts. Although opinions diverge, no one can argue that the financial support that artists receive allows them to be completely dedicated to art, contributing, therefore, to the creation of original and maginificent pieces.
As mentioned, artistic sponsors exist for a long time and although they may have a particular interest in the work of a specific artist, they play an important role in providing conditions so that the artist can be only concetrated in the development of his or her work. In an opposite scenario, the artist would have to pursue another way of living, consequently, jeopardizing the time that should be dedicated to the development of his or her art. Therefore, patronizing an artist is something of a unique importance, specially for a prfessional artist that struggle in selling his or her work.
Furthermore, the construction of Museums and art schools are another ways in which governments used to invest. For instance, the São Paulo Art Museum and the Oscar Niemeyer Museu were created through public funding and are considered some of the most important cultural attractions for tourism in Latin America. Also in Brazil, there are art schools there were created with the purpose of exerting a social role by taking children out of the streets and teaching arts to them. Because of social projects like this, Brazilian rates of criminality were reduced and also several young Brazilian artists are working on their performances all over the world.
In conclusion, the examples discussed show how important is for the development of arts to receive financial support. Although many people, including artists, claim that such a type of motivation put at risk the integrity of artistic creations, it is a fact that through funding many artists are able to survive by their work. Also, I believe that if more people give importance by to arts and, perhaps support financial aid to arts, more museum could be created and more people could be educated to become professional artists on the future.
- 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. 66
- 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. 66
- In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past achievements within that field.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement 74
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 560, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... specially for a prfessional artist that struggle in selling his or her work. ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, furthermore, if, may, so, therefore, while, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.5258426966 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 14.8657303371 121% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 33.0505617978 85% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 58.6224719101 96% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2147.0 2235.4752809 96% => OK
No of words: 412.0 442.535393258 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.21116504854 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50530610838 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88927842614 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 211.0 215.323595506 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.51213592233 0.4932671777 104% => OK
syllable_count: 677.7 704.065955056 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.2370786517 74% => 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: 46.2916359136 60.3974514979 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.133333333 118.986275619 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.4666666667 23.4991977007 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.4 5.21951772744 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 5.13820224719 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.249284881229 0.243740707755 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0853442059967 0.0831039109588 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0546049411109 0.0758088955206 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.159108844189 0.150359130593 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0644794526452 0.0667264976115 97% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 14.1392134831 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.8420337079 90% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 12.1639044944 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.11 8.38706741573 109% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 100.480337079 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
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.