| . |
Should governments spend money on art, when they
have so many other important issues and concerns?
Spending on Art
Art is a basic human need. Governments have a responsibility to spend
money on art for their citizens. (Shorter version: 260
words)
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 their 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.
All in all, 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.
251 words
What do you want to do now?
|
|
