More and more artists are naturally born since the dawn of time. As a result, it has been the subject of discussion on whether the state or a non-government institution should support them financially. These points of view will be discussed in this order.
It is believed by some that the country's administration should finance the creative artists. For instance, under President Ferdinand E. Marcos regime, all of our skilfully created arts by the Filipino artists were provided by all the helps they needed. Like Fernando Amorsolo, one of the most famous painters in the Philippines was funded by the late President Marcos and even his first exhibition held in the National Museum in the country. Thus, he was known by visitors who came and saw his creations internationally, and this led him to exhibit his paintings in different countries. He made our country known around the world and he is indeed a Filipino pride.
On the other hand, many argue that NGOs (Non-government Organisations) should be the one financing them. An idea that may support this is that the government has a lot of funding already and they cannot afford to finance these creators of the arts, so it is better to ask for a help to a private institution. For example, the Pro-mil Milk Company has funded the concert of Sarah Geronimo in Araneta Coliseum. She is the most popular singer because she sings magnificently and can touch our deepest emotions. In fact, this private company can make a lot of profit in her concert.
In conclusion, for reasons related to the pride and private institution making of profit when financing arts creators are supported and refuted by many. However, after analysing these two points of view, it is clear that the government should finance them. Thus, the argument that the state should financially support creative artists can be supported and expected to be realised.
More and more
artists
are
naturally
born since the dawn of time.
As a result
, it has been the subject of discussion on whether the state or a non-
government
institution should support them
financially
. These points of view will
be discussed
in this order.
It
is believed
by
some
that the country's administration should finance the creative
artists
.
For instance
, under President Ferdinand E. Marcos regime, all of our
skilfully
created arts by the Filipino
artists
were provided
by all the
helps
they needed. Like Fernando
Amorsolo
, one of the most
famous
painters in the Philippines
was funded
by the late President Marcos and even his
first
exhibition held in the National Museum in the country.
Thus
, he
was known
by visitors who came and
saw
his creations
internationally
, and this led him to exhibit his paintings in
different
countries. He made our country known around the
world and
he is
indeed
a Filipino pride.
On the other hand
,
many
argue that NGOs (Non-
government
Organisations
) should be the one financing them. An
idea
that may support this is that the
government
has
a lot of
funding
already and
they cannot afford to finance these creators of the arts,
so
it is better to
ask for
a
help
to a private institution.
For example
, the Pro-mil Milk
Company
has funded the concert of Sarah Geronimo in
Araneta
Coliseum. She is the most popular singer
because
she sings
magnificently
and can touch our deepest emotions. In fact, this private
company
can
make
a lot of
profit in her concert.
In conclusion
, for reasons related to the pride and private institution making of profit when financing arts creators
are supported
and refuted by
many
.
However
, after
analysing
these two points of view, it is
clear
that the
government
should finance them.
Thus
, the argument that the state should
financially
support creative
artists
can
be supported
and
expected
to be
realised
.