Some people believe that government funding of the arts is necessary to ensure that the arts can flourish and be available to all people. Others believe that government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts.
Today’s government is responsible for collecting taxes and using that money to support areas that are struggling financially. The purpose of doing so is to be able to perpetuate fields that may need monetary assistance in order to stand the test of time. As a result,
government funding is mandatory to ensure that art is accessible to all people and flourishes for generations to come.
Many opponents to government funding of the arts argue that financial assistance will threaten its integrity. Although the monetary support can assist in providing widespread appreciation for art, the consequences of this funding may include censorship of the art itself. Because the government will be the body that erects museums, displays paintings and sculptures, and employs the curators, it will have complete control over what elements are allowed within the building. The selection of these arts will ultimately result in some art pieces being prominently displayed, while others, the more controversial pieces, being removed. Since the motivation behind art itself may include themes that oppose the government itself, to censor these pieces is to remove the integrity of the arts.
Although the issue of selection may seem insurmountable, one possible solution is to engender a panel of judges who are trained in the arts to decide which art pieces are displayed. This panel must not have any financial incentives from the government; therefore, these individuals will be unbiased towards the art that they choose. The disinterested judges will then be able to make a fair and evenhanded decision as to which pieces to include.
With the selection problem aside, I believe that it essential for governments to provide financial funding to support the arts. Unlike large, money-making corporations, many artists are poor individuals without the means to distribute their art or to perform any sort of global marketing. Their penury is not a reflection of their talent; rather, due to simple economics, art is not as easily profitable as other products such as consumer goods. In order to promote fantastic pieces of artwork, the government is obligated to use its power to provide access to everyone by constructing museums and inundating them with meaningful art pieces. Because the government has access to resources that an individual does not, such as land all across the country, it has a duty to propagate and help art burgeon everywhere. Without the financial help of the government in building museums, citizens would have to travel very far to simply view a couple of an artist’s masterpieces. Therefore, the average person would not be able to have ready access to a variety of art from all parts of the country.
Since the government has the financial ability to support art that would not otherwise be available to the general public, it has an obligation to ensure that art flourishes and is readily accessible to all. By forming a committee of veteran judges to decide which pieces of art will be displayed in the museums controlled by the government, there will be an unbiased selection with a wide breadth of masterpieces available for all to see.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 10, column 108, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...would not otherwise be available to the general public, it has an obligation to ensure that ar...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 10, column 441, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... masterpieces available for all to see.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, may, so, then, therefore, while, as to, sort of, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.5258426966 128% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.4196629213 145% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.3162921348 141% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 33.0505617978 97% => OK
Preposition: 78.0 58.6224719101 133% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 12.9106741573 170% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2676.0 2235.4752809 120% => OK
No of words: 515.0 442.535393258 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.19611650485 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.763781212 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94594912875 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 249.0 215.323595506 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.483495145631 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 843.3 704.065955056 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.740449438202 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 3.10617977528 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.6395465655 60.3974514979 54% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 133.8 118.986275619 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.75 23.4991977007 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.7 5.21951772744 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.434964210748 0.243740707755 178% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.136990020233 0.0831039109588 165% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0918066551386 0.0758088955206 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.237835270026 0.150359130593 158% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.114782053336 0.0667264976115 172% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 14.1392134831 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.8420337079 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.1743820225 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.18 12.1639044944 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.2 8.38706741573 110% => OK
difficult_words: 141.0 100.480337079 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.