Views often differ on whether or not the arts involving musical and theatrical entertainments should be the ones which advisably and worthily take advantage of funds available from the government coffers instead of community services such as education and health care. Personally, I absolutely concur with the conception of investing in artistic projects for some rational reasons.
Arts, hitherto, become symbolic and specific characteristics of particular nations which mesmerize and attract foreigners’ first glances and impression on those nations. Governmental expenditures, therefore, should be allocated to arts to aggrandize and glorify the uniquely ostensive splendours of divergent countries. It can be exemplified by Mona Lisa, an one-off masterpiece of Italian artists, have become a representative image and symbol of Italy. Undeniably, a country’s artistic work is considered as an imprint on foreign people about it, which is a way to enhance and promote the tourism development.
Furthermore, some kinds of art could maintain and gratify people’s satisfaction and happiness. Music, for instance, is prevalently opted for recreational delight. It is scientifically substantiated that during the process of absorbing sounds of a composition, human’s brain releases dopamine, a chemical creates motivational pleasure and addiction, supporting the process of convalescing of people who suffer from stress and depression. Hence, the government should provide fundings for reinforcing and fortifying the art work rather than other social services because the art may constitute a therapeutic remedy in some situations.
To sum up, notwithstanding arguments for and against investment in the arts, I believe that spending money from government coffers is beneficial and imperative in the contemporary day for countries’ symbol and the artistic exertion to therapies.
Views
often
differ on
whether or not
the
arts
involving musical and theatrical entertainments should be the ones which
advisably
and
worthily
take advantage of funds available from the
government
coffers
instead
of community services such as education and health care.
Personally
, I
absolutely
concur with the conception of investing in artistic projects for
some
rational reasons.
Arts, hitherto, become symbolic and specific characteristics of particular nations which mesmerize and attract foreigners’
first
glances and impression on those nations. Governmental expenditures,
therefore
, should
be allocated
to
arts
to aggrandize and glorify the
uniquely
ostensive
splendours
of divergent countries. It can
be exemplified
by Mona Lisa,
an
one-off masterpiece of Italian artists, have become a representative image and symbol of Italy.
Undeniably
, a country’s artistic work
is considered
as an imprint on foreign
people
about it, which is a way to enhance and promote the tourism development.
Furthermore
,
some
kinds of
art
could maintain and gratify
people
’s satisfaction and happiness. Music,
for instance
, is
prevalently
opted for recreational delight. It is
scientifically
substantiated that during the process of absorbing sounds of a composition, human’s brain releases dopamine, a chemical creates motivational pleasure and addiction, supporting the process of convalescing of
people
who suffer from
stress
and depression.
Hence
, the
government
should provide
fundings
for reinforcing and fortifying the
art
work
rather
than other social services
because
the
art
may constitute a therapeutic remedy in
some
situations.
To sum up, notwithstanding arguments for and against investment in the
arts
, I believe that spending money from
government
coffers is beneficial and imperative in the contemporary day for countries’ symbol and the artistic exertion to therapies.