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 discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
There is no doubt that the government funding of arts do ensue the arts can flourish and available to all the people. And to preserve the integrity of the arts government should not interfere in them.
As we know, art is one way to express the culture of a nation. We found that many pieces of artists represent temporary culture of a country in history. These successes always need not only the talent, perspiration of the artist, but also owe to the supporting of the money. So in many circurmstances money plays important role in art success. In medieval, for the circumstance of the combination of politics and church, arts of religion flourished by the supporting of government. New churches stood up and frescoes painted. Later the fashion of Renaissance prevailing all of the Europe. Government supporting made this happened. As we said, government funding is very important to make arts flourish.
Without the supporting of government many artists can not show their talent, or even after finished a master piece it can not be known by people just because lack of money. Unforturnatly some famous artists like Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart died in a very young age because of the poor living condition. Such gifted artist can not compose more master pieces for the people of all over the world. Given that they don't have these financial issue they may present more arts to us today. Moreover the funding of government can also improve public cultural accomplishment by holding free arts exhibitions.
In most time government have very good influence on arts but to a certain degree it also should take responsible for the inhibit the developing of arts by excessive intervention. Archbishop abuse their power made artists suffering mental and physical pain that artists can not focus on the composing. On the other hand, some modern Chinese arts exhibition always have few audience because of the expensive ticket. The same circumstance also appear to Chinese opera, citizens can not afford the ticktet as a consequence they have no accessible to this kind of art anymore. Some government treat the art as a tool to propagandize the politics just like the China cultural revolution, it will inhibited the development of art.
So the government funding of art is necessary to ensure the development and preserve of the art. In the meantime government also have responsibility to keep the integrity of the art. Only in this way, can the art of a nation flourish and available to everyone.
do ensue the arts can flourish 这个表述有问题，要么用ｅｎｓｕｒｅ ｔｈａｔ 要么不要ｃａｎ found that这里为何用过去式呢 the supporting ?of the money听起来感觉是ｍｏｎｅｙ支持而不是人支持。 plays important role 需要加 ａｎ the inhibit 这个词是动词 这篇文章把政府对艺术的支持写为对艺术家的支持，这不太好吧，对艺术的支持，更多的在于对这个领域的支持，让艺术为更多人知道和享受，并因此而获得经济上的效益，对艺术家自己的支持只是一方面。还有就是政府如何保持艺术的完整性，这个你要站在比较高的角度，因为如果是政府自己选择支持的标准，必然带有片面性，所以ＬＺ这篇文章最好能再改下
do ensue the arts can flourish 这个表述有问题，要么用ｅｎｓｕｒｅ ｔｈａｔ 要么不要ｃａｎ found that这里为何用过去式呢 the supporting ?of the money听起来感觉是ｍｏｎｅｙ支持而不是人支持。 plays important role 需要加 ａｎ the inhibit 这个词是动词 这篇文章把政府对艺术的支持写为对艺术家的支持，这不太好吧，对艺术的支持，更多的在于对这个领域的支持，让艺术为更多人知道和享受，并因此而获得经济上的效益，对艺术家自己的支持只是一方面。还有就是政府如何保持艺术的完整性，这个你要站在比较高的角度，因为如果是政府自己选择支持的标准，必然带有片面性，所以ＬＺ这篇文章最好能再改下
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-10-28 09:50:01
收藏
收藏
楼主
