Some people think that creative artists should be supported financially by the government of their country, while others believe that they should find financial support from other sources instead. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

There are disparate views of who should bear the responsibility to fund the work of artists. Some argue that governments should be the one who support such endeavours while others think artists should seek different sources of funding. This essay discusses both views. The work of an artist - in the form of painting, sculpture, or musical scores, is an expression of life. In this sense, an artist helps to promote quality of life through her creations. For this reason, it is justifiable for government to provide financial assistance to the artists, especially those talented ones who somehow lack the ability to attract funding from private sectors. Government is often in a better position to disseminate monetary assistance since it has access to wider resources through taxpayers’ money. For instance, government could provide free-of-charge exhibition spaces for local budding artists to showcase their works for public views. On the other hand, some people oppose the idea of government funding the artists’ work, arguing that those precious resources could have been diverted away from improving public amenities such as building roads to ease traffic congestions. Thus, artists should seek multiple sources of funding such as through private companies, not-for-profit organisations or high net-worth individuals. Seeking multiple sources of funding in this way can help to alleviate the pressure off of the government. In my conclusion, we should not view funding of artists’ works as exclusively supported by government since both private and public sectors could play a part in helping to fund artists’ work.