argument 61~第一次写，求轻拍

blue_dragon

61.The following appeared in an article in the Grandview Beacon.
    "For many years the city of Grandview has provided annual funding for the Grandview Symphony. Last year, however, private contributions to the symphony increased by 200 percent and attendance at the symphony's concerts-in-the-park series doubled. The symphony has also announced an increase in ticket prices for next year. Given such developments, some city commissioners argue that the symphony can now be fully self-supporting, and they recommend that funding for the symphony be eliminated from next year's budget."
     Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.

In the article in the Grandview Beacon, the author asserts that the Grandview’s government does not need to fund the Grandview Symphony, because it already can be fully self-supporting. Then he gives some evidences, including the increased private contribution and attendance. And the ticket price will also be increased for the next year. However, before he reaches that conclusion, there may be some questions for his evidences. Only answering these questions, can the conclusion be persuasive.



First and foremost, the author uses the 200 percent increased personal contribution and doubled increase of the attendance to prove that the Grandview Symphony can be fully self-supporting. It is plausible at the first glance. However, I still doubt that data due to the lack of detailed number of people, concrete ticket price and how money actually the symphony needs every year. It is possible that the private contribution before is so little that even if the money has increased for 200 percent, its financial problem still can not be solved. For the attendance, it is the same. Perhaps there are little people who watched the performance. Though the number of audience increases, the total number is still little insufficient.

Furthermore, the writer mentions that ticket price will be increased in next year, which used as an evidence for the symphony’s fully self-supporting. This statement also does not hold the water. The reason is that we can not hastily infer the situation of next year, considering the more complicated economic environment nowadays. Whether people will give up buying the tickets, when people see the more expansive ticket price next year? Whether there will be a stock crisis next year forcing people to cut down their budget? Without answering these questions, the officers of Grandview’s government should not take the action rashly.

Lastly, even though Grandview Symphony has the ability to self-support, should the government not fund it? As we know, culture, as a soft power, gets the concentration of the government consistently. If one’s culture influences more area, it enables the country to get not only innumerable money, but also the recognition and understanding. So as a symbol of attention, the government should fund the symphony. And this action may bring more benefits than people’s imagination.

In conclusion, this argument actually has several flaws as discussed above, to make this argument more convincing, the author would have to give more concrete statistics, more consideration in the future’s situation and the potential of culture.

大家看看怎么样？还有啥么地方可以改滴～跪谢！

Cinderella灰

感谢分享！               

CD用户999560

感谢分享！