The gargantuan premise of the proposed issue must be dissected properly before deciding any stance on behalf or against it. There are some words which must be explored vastly- for example, what kind of arts the author is suggesting, who are the audience of the arts, and what purpose will this purported fund by government will serve. If the pecuniary assistance is made solely for the improvement of artistic endeavor then it is tenable. The objective of gaining popularity, on the contrary with this means is completely despicable.
The word art has quite a broad meaning: from painting to caricature, from classical music to parody, from literature to biography that blandishes a certain politician all fall into this broad criteria. Sometimes painting or classical music can be, because of its high standard of sophistication, quite inscrutable for mass people. The connoisseurs of this kind of intricate arts, however, are not the people to be deprived. Notwithstanding their lack of popularity these arts must be corroborated to ensure the nourishment of other kind of art forms as the practitioners of the popular arts start their artistic learning throw these refiner types of arts. As paragon of all kinds of other art form, therefore, the apparently less popular art forms in the side of popular art forms must be supported economically. Furthermore, Funding in artistic regime should not only focus to make it popular but also to increase its artistic value.
Additionally, the tendentious investments in arts may also cause substantial harm. Let us consider an author who intentionally wants to attract the attention of the ruling authority and writes a poem or discourse to accolade him/her, or a singer who also does the same using a musical piece. Is there any confirmation that the government fund allotted for the betterment of the art will not be misused to pay off these types of cajoles? In this way, evidently, the integrity of the monetary assistance will be tarnished.
The foregoing luculent evidences bestows the fact that the proposed averment has an extensive promise. So, myriads of rumination is of great gravity before we bolster or gainsay the government funding on art altogether.
Sentence: The foregoing luculent evidences bestows the fact that the proposed averment has an extensive promise.
Error: luculent Suggestion: No alternate word
Error: averment Suggestion: No alternate word
flaws:
You forget: government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts
suggested:
the government funding can also threaten the integrity of the arts. The integrity of arts depends on it's being free from interference. Because of the support ,the artists sometimes becomes complaisant to government. Some artists will then create art only to cater to the governments needs. They may do so by suppressing their inner self ; this can have far reaching implications. Perhaps if he had followed his true passion then he could have engendered a masterpiece. Such cases show that the government can seriously jeopardize the artists integrity.
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 361 350
No. of Characters: 1813 1500
No. of Different Words: 204 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.359 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.022 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.886 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 125 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 108 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 80 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 55 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.562 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.817 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.625 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.29 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.506 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.083 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5