People have different views about funding for creative artists. While some argue that governments should not financially support them, I agree with the idea that money for art projects should come from both governments and other sources.
On the one hand, it is understandable for people to disagree with the idea of governmental funding for artists. The main reason is that governments have more pressing concerns. For example, a state budget needs to be spent on a wide variety of areas ranging from education, healthcare to security, transportation that will be beneficial for all members of society. Whereas, a creative artists' work is still considered a luxury or a leisure experience rather than creating social values. Another reason is that such artists have already earned their own money by selling their artworks, and other sources of support seem unnecessary. In Vietnam, a number of musicians have become wealthy because of getting a copyright for their music and collecting royalties from thousands of users across the world.
On the other hand, some art projects require help from the state. Some artworks representing a nation's historical and cultural heritage need to be introduced to the rest of the world. Additionally, they serve to educate people about a city or as hallmarks attracting visitors. For example, the Vietnam Museum of Ethnology, which features significant artworks, such as paintings, sculptures created by 54 Vietnam's ethnic groups, conserves cultural values and allows young generations to discover their roots. Moreover, such a place as a tourist destination plays a vital role in promoting the local tourism industry. Thus, governments and other local organizations should pay for creative artists to produce those kinds of art because, without their artwork, our cities would not be unique and captivating.
In conclusion, the works produced by creative artists can positively influence our society, so both governments and other institutions should financially support them.
People
have
different
views about funding for
creative
artists
. While
some
argue that
governments
should not
financially
support them, I
agree
with the
idea
that money for art projects should
come
from both
governments
and
other
sources.
On the one hand, it is understandable for
people
to disagree with the
idea
of governmental funding for
artists
. The main reason is that
governments
have more pressing concerns.
For example
, a state budget needs to
be spent
on a wide variety of areas ranging from education, healthcare to security, transportation that will be beneficial for all members of society. Whereas, a
creative
artists' work is
still
considered a luxury or a leisure experience
rather
than creating social values. Another reason is that such
artists
have already earned their
own
money by selling their
artworks
, and
other
sources of support seem unnecessary. In Vietnam, a number of musicians have become wealthy
because
of getting a copyright for their music and collecting royalties from thousands of users across the world.
On the
other
hand,
some
art projects require
help
from the state.
Some
artworks
representing a nation's historical and cultural heritage need to
be introduced
to the rest of the world.
Additionally
, they serve to educate
people
about a city or as hallmarks attracting visitors.
For example
, the Vietnam Museum of Ethnology, which features significant
artworks
, such as paintings, sculptures created by 54
Vietnam's
ethnic groups, conserves cultural values and
allows
young generations to discover their roots.
Moreover
, such a place as a tourist destination plays a vital role in promoting the local tourism industry.
Thus
,
governments
and
other
local organizations should pay for
creative
artists
to produce those kinds of art
because
, without their
artwork
, our cities would not be unique and captivating.
In conclusion
, the works produced by
creative
artists
can
positively
influence our society,
so
both
governments
and
other
institutions should
financially
support them.