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.
The argument above has two facets: (1) government funding is mandatory for the arts to ensure that the arts can flourish and (2) government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts. Sometimes it is true that the patronization from the government in arts threatens the integrity of the arts, but, in most of the cases, government funding is beneficial for the thriving of arts. Thus, I mostly agree with the first statement. Further, in the next three paragraph, I will discuss the two sides of the coin with evidence.
First of all, there are few cases where government funding hinders the burgeoning of arts rather than galvanizing it. For instance, when government, with no knowledge on arts, interferes in a matter about how arts' integrity can be achieved, then it rather defiles arts' integrity. Moreover, if someone asks Donald Trump, the president of United States, to make funding on patronizing Monalisa, an art, then It would rather diminish the value of that art. Further, If government makes funding on arts, then government's political leaders will intervene in the matter of arts, which further dampen the integrity of arts.
However, there are a lot of cases where government funding of the arts help flourish rather than ruining the integrity of arts. For example, in 6th century, there was an uncertainty among people in patronizing the arts of Roman Coliseum. In those time, there was no private company or agent who could take care of it. Then, the government intervened in the matter and started funding on the arts. After several months, the arts began flourishing and gaining its integrity which it was about to lose. In this situation, if government was not there, It would lose it's integrity.
Moreover, there are a lot of museums, which are run and funded by government, help flourish the arts by taking care of it. For instance, there are a lot of arts in the national museum of Bangladesh, which would not be extant, if government funding was not there. Indeed, government funding not only helps flourish the existent arts, but also it helps create new arts. In fact, there are a lot of institutions, where people study arts, are funded by government.
In conclusion, everything has certain set backs as in this situation government funding on the arts has. But the benefits of government funding on the arts in helping flourish the arts far out weigh the set backs. Therefore, I, based on the evidences above, aver that government funding is necessary to help flourish the arts.
- In the next mayoral election residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green who is a member of the Good Earth Coalition rather than for Frank Braun a member of the Clearview town council because the current members are not protecting our environment For 60
- 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 d 50
- Of the two leading real estate firms in our town Adams Realty and Fitch Realty Adams is clearly superior Adams has 40 real estate agents In contrast Fitch has 25 many of whom work only part time Moreover Adams revenue last year was twice as high as that o 60
- Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In developing and supporting your position be su 50
- The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner Over the past two years the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically Many Central Pl 66
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, moreover, so, then, therefore, thus, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in fact, first of all, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 33.0505617978 61% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 58.6224719101 107% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 12.9106741573 194% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2101.0 2235.4752809 94% => OK
No of words: 426.0 442.535393258 96% => OK
Chars per words: 4.93192488263 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54310108192 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6942150158 2.79657885939 96% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 215.323595506 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.441314553991 0.4932671777 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 637.2 704.065955056 91% => 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: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.3151983131 60.3974514979 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.047619048 118.986275619 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2857142857 23.4991977007 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.80952380952 5.21951772744 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.48800843164 0.243740707755 200% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.177844911064 0.0831039109588 214% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.12563549404 0.0758088955206 166% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.332293191559 0.150359130593 221% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0520995073107 0.0667264976115 78% => OK
automated_readability_index: 11.9 14.1392134831 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.8420337079 122% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 12.1639044944 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.52 8.38706741573 90% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 100.480337079 78% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
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.