规则：每天更新一个话题，但前面讨论过的话题还可以继续。更新帖子的时候，我会把前面话题的链子附上，方便查看和讨论！ 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.
首段说明要有选择性 第二段：政府的资助是必要的，因为政府可以提供充足的资源以及人才来保证艺术的传承，由于时代变迁等原因，艺术品inevitably suffered from the cvicissitude of history and the impairment alongside it.如果不加以保护，艺术品很容易失去它原有的价值，从而fall into oblivation. 第三段：however， 我们仍然要有选择性和技术性的对艺术品进行保护。对于material 采取技术手段的保护，而精神文化等要遵从其essence and intrinsic value.比如。。。 最后做个总结。。
可能还有很多不足，特别是英语部分是即兴发挥，不知道能不能写到作文里面，还请高手指点！作者: Junedony 时间: 2012-12-31 10:17
观点：偏中。 对于第一个论点：1. Government funding 保证museum, library 等正常运行，所以有利于art flourish and available to all people. 2. 但是，光靠Government funding并不能推断出flourish and available to all people. 还要靠教育，文化推广等因素。更进一步说，资金来源也可以是民间募捐（money from upper classic people or donation) 对于第二个论点：1. 有一定的正确性（partially right),因为government can restrict some art out of its political proposal. For example, the first empire in China's history, burning books and work of art to cover some truth. 2. 但是太过于绝对，因为integrity of the arts should have the support of capital. Government funding is a good source. 结论：These two arguments have valid evidence and sound reasons in some aspects. But they both are too obvious.