Issue7/80/88拍拍拍！！！

theopenwindow

题目：Some people believe that government funding of the arts is necessary to ensure that the arts can flourish and be available to all people. Other believe that government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts.
大纲：首先，承认政府资助有史以来都是促进艺术发展得一大要素

         其次，指出不足：信息不对称会造成资源分配不合理；艺术家会受到政治压力，影响艺术的完整性。
         最后，以美国国家艺术基金会为例，建议合理化艺术资助体系

It’s insightful to content that fund from government is essential for the art course’s prosperity and availability to citizens, but it is not a statement of the full truth. That is, we never doubt its possibility, but we are suspicious whether it is practical. And we distrust, further, whether it may backfires.


Admittedly, governments have been a significant role in the development of arts from of old. In details, it is totally indisputable that a large sum of outstanding art works could not have come into the world without the support from the aristocracy. For example, the Forbidden Palace funded by Qing Government, Topkapi
Palace funded by Istanbul Government, and Taj Mahal funded by Agra Government, all of them come from government’s financial aid.

As a matter of fact, more often than not, it is the other way around. That is to say, it may cause resource allocation problem and even break the integrity of the arts.


On one hand, resource may be allocated unreasonably because of information asymmetry. It is absolutely conceivable that governments are not perfect, through information asymmetry, a kind of rigid situation that good better, bad worse is difficult to be avoided. Isn’t that just the opposite to what the governments wish?
On the other hand, overly dependent on governments’ fund will result arts lost integrity. The nature of arts rests on the pursuit of the truth, the good and the beautiful. Whereas, under the shadow of government, it’s possible that more and more artists abandon art principle in order to please their donors and get more stable fund. That can be found in the case that during Nazi occupation, Berta Helene Amalie, great German artist created many films with the spirit of fascism. In this case, you can see it, that the original pursuit of arts was broken and embodied intensive political flavour.


However, that is not to deny the advantage and possibility of government aid to arts. We should find proper method to make it practical. A good example in point is NEA, the National Endowment for the Arts. It is an independent agency of the United States federal government that provides support and funding for arts institutions. On the one hand, the government grants NEA an annul funding according to its financial situation. On the other hand, enterprises are encouraged to fund it by government through remitting taxes. Thus, you will see that it’s a good example how the government can boost art prosperity in the direct and indirect two ways.



Now we know what the matter is: it is not how much the government offers –but the right fund process—that is crucial, for a practical system can not promote the arts’ development, but guarantee its budget works well. And we know what can be done: taking advantage of economic strength in every way to fund the arts will be a wise choice for governments.

theopenwindow

唔······路过的怎么都不拍啊·······

竹林中人

overly dependent，应为ｉｎｄｅｐｅｎｄｅｎｃｅ
?result ?arts lost integrity，ｒｅｓｕｌｔ为不及物动词，应用ｒｅｓｕｌｔ　ｉｎ

竹林中人

思路提纲很不错，我的思路如下：
艺术接受政府资助，一方面需要各种艺术得到公平对待，而不因政府的好恶或者艺术之外的原因比如喜欢的人少等因素而受到不公正待遇，另一方面是政府对艺术的资助是无条件的，对资助对象的评价和选取，应当是第三方有能力评价的组织来评定，尽量避免政府意识形态等的干扰。再就是政府资助的项目或者领域也应当是有限的，比如一些那些社会不重视或者没有能力去做到的就需要，而那些可以结合社会资金，不仅能带来商业利益，同时也能的促进自身发展的就可以少资助或不资助。

theopenwindow

OKAY~多谢啦