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.
Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented.
funding can very crucial aspects in the proliferation of the any activities in the any field. it buys the credit which can be spent in the growth of the subject. Nowadays, it has a great role in supporting and maintaining the stability in the field. funding on the subject can incur loosening of the originality of the subject as if the change demanded by the donor. however, the government fund has not such motive as does in the private donor and does not have to be so skeptical on the integrity of the art.
To begin, on the manifestation of the government fund on the field of the art, the artist gets opportunity to go abroad for the exhibition of the art and the art become widespread. The opportunity received can be very effective for the artist show their art skills in the abroad which brings more solidarity in the field of the art. The artist of the Nepal in the past had received the opportunity to show his art on pagoda style, get well conceived appraisal in the past and ramification of its shows great livability of the art in the present. Of the view of the funding can halter the integrity of the art is well absurd in these kind of scenario.
Similarly, the artist might motivated by the funding based policy that brings the inexorability in artist’s interest in the art that brings the constant exploration in the element of the arts. As success in any field required high investment todays, the investment gives the plus point to the artist to explore the art explicitly. On the other hand the artist may not suffered from the insecurity on the erosion of the art due to limited resource. In instance the great art of the Leonardo da Vinci “monalisa” has received the great praise that the successor of the art has not dilemma on future of the art in the recent days. The artist feel free to explore their interest buttressing the integrity of the art as well. If funding has not provided in that extent, the integration of these art might got vanished on passing time. The claim of negative effect of the art has been futile in these context.
In conclusion, the fund can effectively stimulate wellbeing of the art by flourishing its subtle contents which certainly assist in preserving the integration of the art than placing on the verge of the extinction. There is might be assumption that the fund has negative impact on the integrity of the art due to demand of the donor however, as the fund from the government, it has nothing impact on the composition of the art or its integrity.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Funding
funding can very crucial aspects in the prolife...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 9, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'cans'.
Suggestion: cans
funding can very crucial aspects in the proliferati...
^^^
Line 1, column 95, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
...of the any activities in the any field. it buys the credit which can be spent in t...
^^
Line 1, column 251, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Funding
...maintaining the stability in the field. funding on the subject can incur loosening of t...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 369, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: However
...s if the change demanded by the donor. however, the government fund has not such motiv...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 629, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this kind' or 'these kinds'?
Suggestion: this kind; these kinds
... integrity of the art is well absurd in these kind of scenario. Similarly, the artist mig...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 778, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...funding has not provided in that extent, the integration of these art might got v...
^^
Line 3, column 904, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this context' or 'these contexts'?
Suggestion: this context; these contexts
...ve effect of the art has been futile in these context. In conclusion, the fund can effective...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 445, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...omposition of the art or its integrity.
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, similarly, so, well, in conclusion, kind of, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 19.5258426966 36% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 14.8657303371 34% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 33.0505617978 51% => OK
Preposition: 81.0 58.6224719101 138% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2087.0 2235.4752809 93% => OK
No of words: 450.0 442.535393258 102% => OK
Chars per words: 4.63777777778 5.05705443957 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.6057793516 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79640421671 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 215.323595506 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.406666666667 0.4932671777 82% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 660.6 704.065955056 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.77947967 60.3974514979 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.944444444 118.986275619 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.0 23.4991977007 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.72222222222 5.21951772744 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 7.80617977528 115% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.39699828545 0.243740707755 163% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.142333246604 0.0831039109588 171% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0739943362694 0.0758088955206 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.26672385038 0.150359130593 177% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0409924053987 0.0667264976115 61% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 14.1392134831 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.8420337079 112% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.93 12.1639044944 82% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 100.480337079 100% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.