Some people think that governments should give financial

support to creative artists such as painters and musicians.

Others believe that creative artists should be funded by
alternative sources.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

People have different views over state financial aid programs for painters
and musicians. While there remains some valid arguments for the
contrary, personally I agree with these govermental strategies.

On the one hand, opponents of these schemes contend that artist do not
deserve this priority. Firstly, funding of the arts from the state acts as
catalyst for the likelihood that money will go to only favoured art-form
(often traditional figurative paintings and sculptures) rather than others
(more conceptual art-forms). To avoid such a pernicious impact on
artistic expression and development, state funding of the arts should be
abolished. Meanwhile, there are a vast amount of issues waiting for
monetary support from national budgets. Instead of luxuries like arts,
public spending should be chanelled to necessities such as books and
educating equipment for schools or new drugs and technology for
hospitals. Besides, it is essential to note that arts are indirectly supported
by unemployment payments to young musicians and painters. As a
result, sponsoring for artists means unfair treatment for other essential
jobs, namely doctors and teachers.

On the other hand, I would argue that, such creative jobs should be
encouraged by financial support from the government. It is common
knowledge that salary is a key consideration in preferring a career path.
However, it is becoming harder and harder for artists to find firm
standing in this materialistic society. Lacking funding from national
authorities creates a situation where the amateur gifted ones are
demotivated or forced to work under private agencies’ supervision rather
than a environment that fosters individual expression. Hence, national
government can take advantage of this to promote artworks representing
culture, heritage and history. As well as educating people about the city,
these art projects act as landmarks or talking points for tourists and
visitors. Another point to consider is that, artistic values are just as vital
as materialistic values. Civilized societies call for moral education and
mental healing as much as they require educational and medical
equipments. A society without arts would be soul-destroying.

In conclusion, even though anti-art-fundings have their own reasons to

disapprove these schemes, I insist on government providing monetary
sponsor due to aformentioned rationales.