In this era of modernization, artwork has undergone lots of dramatic changes over the past few decades. Presently, government is tended to endorse artists to glorify their country' s name in art sector. However, some people does not welcome this tendency of government and consider it wastage of finance. Here, I would like to discuss both views with my notion.
Ample points are there to shore up former view. Firstly, Artwork portrays the heritage and cultural picture of a particular country. Fascinating performances by artists in art sector glorify a country' s name and earn fame for a country. However, spending on artwork is completely justifying. What is more, it takes special skills and patience to be a mesmerizing artist. Thus it is worth to spend on skillful artists in order to justify their talent. On contrary, others have conflicting views.
They claim that, artwork being created by artists is of no use, hence, money ought to be utilized in other needful causes. To be specific, Indian government wasted gigantic 2 millions on R. S. Javed for an art exhibition which could have been utilized as an aid for tsunami affected in 2007. Furthermore, artwork is not that necessary for the better lifestyle, money can be spent on creating opportunities for jobless youngster instead
In my notion, both sides have their own significance. undeniably, some brilliant artists need to be awarded for sake of country' s name and fame. however, paying them big amounts without taking local mass' s needs in consideration is completely unjustifiable
To recapitulate, government is just like a family leader who has to look after every single member equally, just like that government should manage their funds in the manner that no one remain with the empty palms
In this era of modernization,
artwork
has undergone lots of dramatic
changes
over the past few decades.
Presently
,
government
is tended
to endorse
artists
to glorify their
country&
#039; s name in art sector.
However
,
some
people
does
not welcome this tendency of
government
and consider it wastage of finance. Here, I would like to discuss both views with my notion.
Ample points are there to shore up former view.
Firstly
,
Artwork
portrays the heritage and cultural picture of a particular
country
. Fascinating performances by
artists
in art sector glorify a
country&
#039; s name and earn fame for a
country
.
However
, spending on
artwork
is completely justifying.
What is more
, it takes special
skills
and patience to be a mesmerizing
artist
.
Thus
it is worth to spend on skillful
artists
in order to justify their talent. On contrary, others have conflicting views.
They claim that,
artwork
being created
by
artists
is of no
use
,
hence
, money ought to
be utilized
in other needful causes. To be specific, Indian
government
wasted gigantic 2 millions on R. S.
Javed
for an art exhibition which could have
been utilized
as an aid for tsunami
affected
in 2007.
Furthermore
,
artwork
is not that necessary for the better lifestyle, money can
be spent
on creating opportunities for jobless youngster
instead
In my notion, both sides have their
own
significance.
undeniably
,
some
brilliant
artists
need to
be awarded
for sake of
country&
#039; s name and fame.
however
, paying them
big
amounts without taking local
mass&
#039; s needs in consideration is completely unjustifiable
To recapitulate,
government
is
just
like a family leader who
has to
look after every single member
equally
,
just
like that
government
should manage their funds in the manner that no one remain with the empty palms