Some believe that the government should support artists like musicians, painters, and poets, while others argue that this is a misuse of funds.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion
Why? These people do not have resources to support them
They represent the culture and tradition and help perpetuate these further: this has been historically proven
Their work reflects the condition of society
These people have a pivotal in bringing around revolutions
They are also responsible for helping society become visible
This is wastage of money
Funds could be used to alleviate problems like poverty
Funds could be used to carry out research and improve technology
The idea of the state affording financial support to those performing various kinds of arts, invites mixed views, with some supporting this, others rejecting it.
The advocates of such funding propose that individuals engaged in realms of music, painting, and poetry, to name a few, enjoy a special position in society; they are the sole medium of perpetuating the knowledge and wisdom, accumulated by ancestors over the eons, about history, culture, rituals, and traditions, down the generations. In absence of these societies would lose its identity, due to being disconnected from its past, and fade away soon. However, these exponents lack money to survive and carry out this critical duty, making it imperative for society to bolster them, and policy makers being the true representatives for the country must take ownership in this endeavor.
Similarly, these art practitioners don other important roles of entertaining and informing the inhabitants of the nation about the conditions of their surroundings, and challenges facing them. To corroborate, poems and songs, especially the traditional genre, have not only amused their audiences but also helped them to enlighten themselves about social evils/stigma, and persuade them to abandon such practices.
Nevertheless, those critical of such initiatives tend to present the same old argument that these monetary resources instead of being squandered in such useless undertakings, would have been used to alleviate illiteracy and poverty, and render better healthcare and amenities to the marginalized, but their different objections fall flat as preserving all manifestations of art is as crucial as progressing.
In hindsight, the critics will be critics, and bound to doubt every noble move, nonetheless extending all possible assistance to musicians, poets, and so on, should continue, for this is the only way to sustain continuity of social and cultural values.
Introduction 1
The public discourse of contemporary times is aligned with the issue that should the state afford financial support to those performing various kinds of art. While some are in favor of this, others profess that the monetary resources could be used in other more critical areas.
Introduction 2
There is a fierce debate between different schools of thought when it comes to the issue of the state affording financial support to those performing various kinds of art, since some are in favor of this, others consider it as a useless exercise, and recommend better use of resources.
Introduction 3
