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

Essay topics:

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 which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented.

Throughout the history the accessibility to the arts has been associated to the upper class of society. Mainly because the funding of the arts was also provided by these upper classes. Becoming— certainly— challenging to be available to all people. I consider that in a modern world like ours the government should play a major role in the development of the arts. This is, if more governmental funding is allocated for the arts then they have the resources to flourish and consequently be more available to all society. Nonetheless, one could argue that this ”commercialization” on a major scale contradicts the integrity of the arts due to losing the freedom and beauty that characterize them. I consider that there is no disassociation between the integrity of the arts and the funding they receive from the government— on the contrary— these two views could coexist.
To begin with, governmental funding is beneficial in several ways. It can facilitate the required resources to artist coming from poor families. An artist in this situation surely find useful to have the funds to pursuit a career, this will not constrain the freedom nor the integrity of the resulting piece of art. The other way around, the artist will be motivated to showcase the created art to the wider public. Say, for instance, the scholarships granted by the government to young talented musicians from precarious rural areas. This situation is positive in various ways. First, the upcoming artist counts on with a steady source of foundation. Second, his music might be exposed to a larger audience. Third, the motivation to create new music is encouraged — the musician has the freedom to explore different styles of music. Fourth, the rest of society benefits by having more musicians contributing to enhance the cultural identity of the country. Moreover, the previous argument can be generalized to any young artist facing precarious economy situation, if government supports them then his or her work is enhanced and showcased to all people.

However, as aforementioned above some people could believe that governmental funding of arts might end up with a major scale ”commercialization”. I strongly reject this thesis because it categorizes the arts into something exclusive to a particular group of people, leaving aside the rest of society not belonging to these elite groups. For instance, some of state-of-the-art films have been developed due the contribution of government. One remarkable example can be found in the filmography of Sergei Eisenstein which was entirely funded by the Soviet government. The low-prices of the entrances to the most prestigious museums of Europe are due to the government funding of the arts, it makes affordable to access these places to the majority of society.

To conclude, on the one hand the statement claims that the government should fund the arts in order for them to flourish and be available to all people. On the other hand, it is established that governmental funding might threatens the integrity of the arts. The first point of view has tremendous advantages for the artist and the people consuming the art, and I presented elements precluding a lack of integrity that arts might experience. As result of this, I consider that the governmental funding of arts is a vital feature that enhances many aspects of the arts.

Votes
Average: 6 (2 votes)
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 560, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
.... Nonetheless, one could argue that this apos;commercialization apos; on a major ...
^^
Line 4, column 125, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... of arts might end up with a major scale apos;commercialization apos;. I strongl...
^^
Line 4, column 371, Rule ID: STATE_OF_THE_ART[1]
Message: Did you mean 'state-of-the-art'?
Suggestion: state-of-the-art
...ese elite groups. For instance, some of state of the art films have been developed due the contr...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, however, if, moreover, nonetheless, second, so, then, third, for instance, on the contrary, to begin with, on the other hand

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 33.0505617978 118% => OK
Preposition: 86.0 58.6224719101 147% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 12.9106741573 186% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2841.0 2235.4752809 127% => OK
No of words: 555.0 442.535393258 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11891891892 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.85370353223 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05538305878 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 268.0 215.323595506 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.482882882883 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 889.2 704.065955056 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 6.24550561798 176% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.740449438202 0% => OK
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 20.2370786517 133% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.4027246694 60.3974514979 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.222222222 118.986275619 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5555555556 23.4991977007 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.77777777778 5.21951772744 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 10.2758426966 156% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.426981118956 0.243740707755 175% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.107728766688 0.0831039109588 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0753116677348 0.0758088955206 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.286799487956 0.150359130593 191% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.085899402148 0.0667264976115 129% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 14.1392134831 92% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.8420337079 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.1743820225 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.1639044944 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.53 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 137.0 100.480337079 136% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK

---------------------

Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.