Should governments spend money on art, when they have so many other important issues and concerns?
Throughout the ages, man has tried to create beauty through painting, music, sculpture and other artistic expression. It seems to be a basic need of humans to surround themselves with art. However some people feel that government money spent on art is wasted, particularly when there are so many other demands on it. This essay will examine the conflict between those who say art is important and those who feel it is a waste of money.
It can be wrong for governments to spend large sums of money on art. Too often, governments spend unwisely. They spend money on art not because a picture is good or a museum is needed, but for political reasons. Cities end up with huge statues or empty expensive buildings that are used only by a few people or the elite. Another point is that the artworks are often chosen to represent social or political rather than artistic ideas. The city gets yet another statue of the leader or an ugly monument to national aspirations. A third point is that governments often respond to fashions, and tastes in art can change very rapidly. Without careful advice an expensive collection of worthless paintings or tasteless productions can be the result.
However, it would be wrong to say that governments should not spend any money at all on art. Painters, musicians, and composers cannot survive without financial support. Rich people or large companies do finance art, but then it is often inaccessible to ordinary people. Governments have a duty to make this art available to everyone. However, the most important reason why governments should support the arts is because an appreciation of art is one of the things that makes life worthwhile. Humans do not need just shelter and food. Creative people have always tried to look at things in a new way and to make the world a better place through painting, music, poetry, calligraphy, sculpture, dance, and numerous other forms of expression. While art may not make us immortal, it does make the world a richer place for future generations.
In conclusion, although people do need to be provided with the necessities of life, such as housing and medical care, governments also have a duty to provide their citizens with something more. They should make sure that they pass on beauty, ideas and expression to the next generation and make art available to all instead of being the possession of only the few. I firmly believe that spending money on art is a vital part of a government's responsibility, and I am confident that my country will be able to contribute its share to the richness of the world's art and creativity.
Version 2
Many people's lives are richer because of art - music, paintings, calligraphy, pictures, sculpture, poems and dance. However, some people feel that governments should be spending money on housing, medical care, or defence, instead of on art. This essay will discuss whether governments should or should not spend money on the arts.
There are several reasons why governments should not finance artists. First of all, artists should have to follow the same rules as the rest of the market. If there is a demand for their music or sculpture, then they will be rich. Secondly, politicians generally do not have good taste. They will waste public money on popular art or on their own preferences. But the main reason why governments should minimize spending on the art world is that there are more important areas like housing, roads, hospitals, and factories which need the money first.
However, it would be wrong to say that governments should not spend any money at all on art. Everybody needs some beauty in his or her life, but not everyone can afford a Picasso or a piece of music. Governments should provide money for museums or concert halls for everyone. Another point is that art allows people to express themselves and this is good for society, culture, and thought. Thirdly, artists can be good for the economy by producing music, films, and attracting tourists.
Overall, governments should prioritize their spending carefully, but they should also allocate some of their budget for art. It is part of their duty to society and to future generations.
2. What are the purposes of places such as museums and how should they be funded?
Museums illuminate the culture, history and arts of the world. Every country and government spare no effort or money to enrich the collection of museums to cater for different tastes or needs of people, for the benefit of the present and future generations.
There are bounteous museums all over the world.The British Museum, which is maybe the largest one in the world, provides visitors with all-round knowledge about the world culture and arts. The visitors to the museum are all overwhelmed by the magnificence of the culture and history of mankind. If one wants to know about the development of human science and industry, he can have a tour to The Museum of Science and Industry located in Chicago, the United States, where a detailed scientific progress is presented vividly. You cannot miss every achievement human beings have made in history and you are sure to be shocked by the civilization our forefathers created. If one wants to have a browse of the important events in the past, American Museum of Photography is the best choice. It abounds in precious historical pictures and gives visitors unforgettable memory. Apart from the state-owned museums, there are also innumerable private museums whose purpose is to exhibit their cherished collection and popularize knowledge.With a view to giving people updated information and rendering them a more detailed overview, many countries invest a great deal of money in the foundation of museums, because museums disseminate human knowledge and culture, which are more significant for the development of the young generation. Besides, entrepreneurs and individuals should also lay a fund for the improvement and rebuild of museums. The prosperity of human culture is not only the responsibility of the government, but also the responsibility of every individual and organization. (295 words)
3. Some people claim that public museums and art galleries will not be needed because people can see historical objects and works of art by using a computer. Do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
It is simply absurd to assert that with historical objects and works of art being able to be seen through a computer, public museums and art galleries will no longer be needed.
First of all, computers can never replace real public museums and art galleries. No matter how real and vivid computer images are, they are only images, not the historical objects and works of art that we see in real or even might be allowed to touch with our fingertips. For those who claim museums and galleries are no longer needed because they can see all they want to on a computer screen, I’d like to suggest that they marry a wife or husband in the computer rather than in real life!
In the second place, visiting real museums and art galleries is a rewarding experience in many respects. For one thing, it is a good exercise. While we are making the trip to a museum or art gallery and then strolling about on site, we get some exercise which does a lot of good to our health. For another thing, we can feast our eyes on all kinds of things there and experience the wonder, beauty and exquisite workmanship with our own eyes in an active way instead of in a passive manner by looking at what are being displayed to us by others on the screen. For yet another thing, we protect our eyesight by moving away from the computer screen and see the real objects on site.
It is true that computers have brought great conveniences to our life. At certain times, especially when it is temporarily impossible for us to visit museums and art galleries in person, we can get a rough picture of what are on display on site. However, what we see from a computer screen is, after all, not exactly the same as what we see and feel with our own eyes on site.
In conclusion, computers will never be able to replace real public museums and art galleries. Therefore, it is ridiculous to say that one does not need to go to museums and art galleries as historical objects and works of art can be appreciated on a computer screen.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét