There is no shortage of opinions regarding if governenment may or may not funding the art development, what makes this issue a contentious one. While both sides has its strenghts and weaknesses, I strongly believe that public funding of arts harms their integruty and espontanity, mainly because the government can bias the art creativity and make only those artists aligned with the government flourish. Furthermore, the use on public funding always comes with a risk of corruption, what would represents really damage to the public interest.
First of all, one of the most important caractheristics of the arts and related artists are their freedon to challenge the common sense and show differing perspectives of the society. As trully iconoclasts, the artists should have room to also contest government positions and proposed public policies. In this regard, artists who depends on public funding to make their work would be intimidated and not contend with the government polictical views. For example, in countries longly ruled by a parties with left political views, artists with rights beliefs could not receive funding, hindering them to flourish as much as those in the left.
The second the reason to support my view on this issue is the risk of corruption in the process of granting the public funds to support the art. The criteria of selecting the artists that would be granted, as well as the valuation of the amont of funding needed by each art project could be seriously affected by the assimetry of information between tht artists and the government. In such enviroment, the process of granting public funding could be easely intentionaly driven to favour some groups of artists in exchange for bribes.
On the other hand, some may argue that without public funding the art could not flourish, given that most of population does not give much value on art as it use to give on edonnic goods. Nevertheless, many countries around the world have seen their national art flourish just through charity and private awards created by passioned wealthy citizens.
To sum up, public funding of arts could lead to limitate and bias the art production in a country and also is always exposed to the risk of corruption and misuse of public resources. For there reasons, I definitely hold the opinion that arts should not be funded by the government.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 496, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'would' requires the base form of the verb: 'represent'
Suggestion: represent
...s with a risk of corruption, what would represents really damage to the public interest. ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 494, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a parti', 'a party' or simply 'parties'?
Suggestion: a parti; a party; parties
...r example, in countries longly ruled by a parties with left political views, artists with...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 7, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rtists in exchange for bribes. On the other hand, some may argue that without ...
^^
Line 7, column 160, Rule ID: USE_TO_VERB[1]
Message: Did you mean 'used'?
Suggestion: used
...n does not give much value on art as it use to give on edonnic goods. Nevertheless,...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, if, may, nevertheless, really, regarding, second, so, well, while, for example, as well as, first of all, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 19.5258426966 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 33.0505617978 61% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 58.6224719101 102% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1980.0 2235.4752809 89% => OK
No of words: 391.0 442.535393258 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.06393861893 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44676510885 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7228664565 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 215.323595506 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.516624040921 0.4932671777 105% => OK
syllable_count: 592.2 704.065955056 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 6.24550561798 32% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.9606229405 60.3974514979 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.428571429 118.986275619 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.9285714286 23.4991977007 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.0714285714 5.21951772744 193% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.337782542223 0.243740707755 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.124797383289 0.0831039109588 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0759969711064 0.0758088955206 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.204541099969 0.150359130593 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0503757203114 0.0667264976115 75% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 14.1392134831 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 48.8420337079 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 12.1743820225 103% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.1639044944 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.81 8.38706741573 105% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 100.480337079 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.