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.
Despite the industrialization of modern society, arts and other related activities plays a vital role in our society by providing entertainment and education. While it is agreed that government funding is necessary for the arts field to flourish, the concern that the government could compromise the integrity of the arts and the artists, is a valid one. In such case, a proposal of requiring the government to arrange an individual and independent committee which would handle the arts sponsorship funding, as an antidote to the threatening of the integrity of the arts.
As a threshold matter, the financial funding from any big corporation or government is mandatory for any art form to reach to the public. Unlike Hollywood movies, which are financially supported by big organization through various advertising, most of the local art works are deprived of the monetary sponsorship which would help them attract audience attention. In such case, the government should step in and provide the necessary support to the artists and provide them the well deserving opportunity to deliver their art works to the audience. In addition, art and creative artworks requires infrastructure such as art museum or art schools that can offer space and training programs to exhibit the work and cultivate artistic talents. Without the support from large corporations, it is the government’s duty to allocate funding and required infrastructure so that people can visit or send their children to get trained in artistic fields. With more members of public interested in such museums and art schools, the art, artistic works and activities can then flourish.
On the other hand, it is understandable to worry that the funding from government can threaten the integrity of the art and artists. It is well known these days that arts are socially constructed artifacts and do not exist in political vacuum. Any artwork can and must contain political meaning and messages that can challenge the ruling authority elites. Meanwhile, government always has the incentive to sponsor the arts that may help advance their own political agenda. For instance, in Mao’s China, all the songs and movies were related to the theme of revolutionary propaganda of the then communist party. For the Chinese artists those days, there was virtually no freedom or integrity of art. Hence, there must be freedom for the artists to express their own voices and opinions in front of public which in turn can raise their voice.
Given the tension between the government’s necessity to provide funding to the art on one hand and the threatening of the art and artist’s integrity on the other hand, it is wise to have an independent community which can distribute the government’s funding in a politically neutral way. Such committee should be run by group of artists selected by the peers and receive the government money on regular interval. But it must have a condition that the government must not involve in any kind of activity or have any influence over this committee’s running and regulation. There is in fact such committee called Hong Kong Arts Development Council in China which runs under this same model. Following this model, the Chinese artists enjoy their freedom and integrity is safe guarded in their art works.
In conclusion, given the profound impact of arts on the general public, the government must provide funding to the art and also must create an independent committee which would handle the sponsorship of government funding in a politically neutral way, without any influence of the government itself.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 483, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'arts'' or 'art's'?
Suggestion: arts'; art's
...endent committee which would handle the arts sponsorship funding, as an antidote to ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 57, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...iven the profound impact of arts on the general public, the government must provide funding to...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, if, may, so, then, well, while, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, in fact, kind of, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 12.4196629213 169% => OK
Conjunction : 30.0 14.8657303371 202% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.3162921348 141% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 33.0505617978 94% => OK
Preposition: 75.0 58.6224719101 128% => OK
Nominalization: 31.0 12.9106741573 240% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3041.0 2235.4752809 136% => OK
No of words: 584.0 442.535393258 132% => OK
Chars per words: 5.20719178082 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.91590194646 4.55969084622 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00146518843 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 269.0 215.323595506 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.460616438356 0.4932671777 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 938.7 704.065955056 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.3241652129 60.3974514979 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.227272727 118.986275619 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.5454545455 23.4991977007 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.18181818182 5.21951772744 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 18.0 10.2758426966 175% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => 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: 0.42600887712 0.243740707755 175% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.14404394233 0.0831039109588 173% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.102729697897 0.0758088955206 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.282991981148 0.150359130593 188% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0420042820932 0.0667264976115 63% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 14.1392134831 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 48.8420337079 92% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.1743820225 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 12.1639044944 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.82 8.38706741573 105% => OK
difficult_words: 144.0 100.480337079 143% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => 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.