如题所述
Some people think that the government should provide assistance to all kinds of artists includes painters, musicians, poets, however, other people think that is a waste of money for providing this assistance. State your opinion.
To be of assistance or not, it indeed is debatable if artists deserve and require funding by the government. Firstly, I acknowledge that the benefits from artists and poets can enrich our everyday lives in so many different ways; otherwise our life would have been a lot drabber without them.
Any genuine artist most certainly deserves some form of aid and there can not be any doubt about that, however, whether they require government assistance is another issue altogether. Contrary to popular belief it seems to be that not all artists and literary personalities are wealthy, and most renowned personalities are deservedly rich and famous.
While the other large group of artists is neither rich nor famous, they do continue to produce the art works as for the passion and often the passion is what drives them. It would be ridiculous to think that any kind of financial incentives could power their creativity. However, not many of them are able to take up their passion on a full time basis because they cannot afford to. It is import to note that most creative artists are made, and were not born so. It is the vagaries of life & struggles that they have to face which fuels their creativity, in the process they need to mature into renowned to be an artist or a writer. When they do and when their work is recognized, there will not be any dearth of money or fame.
In my opinion, it would be criminal to take away this very drive and shun their creativity. Having said that, I do believe that they need to have some kind of incentives, it can be in the way of appreciation and opportunity to present their talent to the rest of the world. This could be done in various ways, for instance, giving tax incentives to amateur artists and writers or financial rebates in government owned auditoriums to stage their presentations.
In talking about artists in Australia, which has a concrete social security system in place to take care of all kinds of basic needs, any kind of added financial incentives are not only an added burden on the taxpayer. It would be an issue to find out worthy beneficiaries and there will be enough crooks who will misuse any well intended government assistance schemes. Every human being craves for recognition and money happens to be one of the means towards this end, however, as I mentioned in the beginning it is more important to acknowledge their work than provide financial assistance.
On the other hand, as a Chinese, my perception of the government’s assistance is more questionable. Firstly, we need to give artists a definition and how do you classify a person who is an artist. In essence, calligraphy, poetry, music and art they all can be extended to a person who writes well, paints well in his/her Blog. To extend this artist sense further, can we say a singer is an artist? Well, there are many pop song and folk music singers in China. In the same way, a dancer, a talk show’s talent, a movie star, the director, the photographer they can all be artists. And this number of artists would add up to whole population of Australia. How could the Chinese government provide any assistance without any discrimination to those artists in every classification? I personally do not believe our government has enough financial ability to accommodate this wide ganging number of artists.
As a Chinese I can see that in my country, there is still a big gap between the poor and the rich, I would rather government’s financial assistance be directed toward the poor, this does not mean that I would think to provide assistance to artists is a waste of money. My point is that while we can give a true definition of artists, government should use our taxes in a way to be more accountable for.
To be of assistance or not, it indeed is debatable if artists deserve and require funding by the government. Firstly, I acknowledge that the benefits from artists and poets can enrich our everyday lives in so many different ways; otherwise our life would have been a lot drabber without them.
Any genuine artist most certainly deserves some form of aid and there can not be any doubt about that, however, whether they require government assistance is another issue altogether. Contrary to popular belief it seems to be that not all artists and literary personalities are wealthy, and most renowned personalities are deservedly rich and famous.
While the other large group of artists is neither rich nor famous, they do continue to produce the art works as for the passion and often the passion is what drives them. It would be ridiculous to think that any kind of financial incentives could power their creativity. However, not many of them are able to take up their passion on a full time basis because they cannot afford to. It is import to note that most creative artists are made, and were not born so. It is the vagaries of life & struggles that they have to face which fuels their creativity, in the process they need to mature into renowned to be an artist or a writer. When they do and when their work is recognized, there will not be any dearth of money or fame.
In my opinion, it would be criminal to take away this very drive and shun their creativity. Having said that, I do believe that they need to have some kind of incentives, it can be in the way of appreciation and opportunity to present their talent to the rest of the world. This could be done in various ways, for instance, giving tax incentives to amateur artists and writers or financial rebates in government owned auditoriums to stage their presentations.
In talking about artists in Australia, which has a concrete social security system in place to take care of all kinds of basic needs, any kind of added financial incentives are not only an added burden on the taxpayer. It would be an issue to find out worthy beneficiaries and there will be enough crooks who will misuse any well intended government assistance schemes. Every human being craves for recognition and money happens to be one of the means towards this end, however, as I mentioned in the beginning it is more important to acknowledge their work than provide financial assistance.
On the other hand, as a Chinese, my perception of the government’s assistance is more questionable. Firstly, we need to give artists a definition and how do you classify a person who is an artist. In essence, calligraphy, poetry, music and art they all can be extended to a person who writes well, paints well in his/her Blog. To extend this artist sense further, can we say a singer is an artist? Well, there are many pop song and folk music singers in China. In the same way, a dancer, a talk show’s talent, a movie star, the director, the photographer they can all be artists. And this number of artists would add up to whole population of Australia. How could the Chinese government provide any assistance without any discrimination to those artists in every classification? I personally do not believe our government has enough financial ability to accommodate this wide ganging number of artists.
As a Chinese I can see that in my country, there is still a big gap between the poor and the rich, I would rather government’s financial assistance be directed toward the poor, this does not mean that I would think to provide assistance to artists is a waste of money. My point is that while we can give a true definition of artists, government should use our taxes in a way to be more accountable for.
温馨提示：答案为网友推荐，仅供参考
第1个回答 2013-08-14
With the prosperity of our culture, art graduallybecome an important part of in our daily life However, the toughest problem artists face is financial problem,which contributes to the sluggish art development in recent years.It is not surprised to come across a debate about whether the government should support artists. As a supporter of the development of the art, I definitely approve the suggestion that the government should subsidize the artists rather than make them support themselves.
In the first place, as we know, it is impossible to construct a famous city without the help of artists. A place where many artists gather would become a center of art. Paris, for instance, is the center of the fashion nowadays, and the world-class fashion shows all choose Paris as their location, not only because of its fashion culture, also because of its tremendous influence on the global fashion field. You could not imagine that Paris was an extremely common city in Europe one hundred years ago, let alone in the world.At that time， the government considered it was much more important to invest money in the appearance of the city than the development of art.However, the government is totally wrong; they lost numerous talented artists moved to the countries nearby such as Italy, a country whose government encouraged the development of art and was generous to artists,which led to the prosperity of the culture in Italy at that time Eager to achieve development just like Italy did , the government of France began to imitate its practice. Just after the World War I, the renowned artists in the fashion field, from all the countries of Europe,were attracted to Paris, and they helped to bring about the fashion center coming to being.Within years they made the name “fashion center” for Paris come into being.Thus, subsidizing artists is extremely necessary.
In addition, the artists could not focus on their composition without the support from the government. Take painters as an example. Before they become eminent, the sales of their work could not make up their everyday cost for meals, renting and painting facilities. When I visited Mexico where the government never supported the artists, I witnessed countless painters,who worked as waiters, typists, etc.turned to take jobs which were not related to painting.The reason they told me is very simple: without a decent income, they may die from poverty. They had to earn their living even if they did not have passions for these jobs. I could imagine the vicious circle; without supports, artists have to do unrelated jobs before they become splendid, which results in their less time and energy on composition, and less chance to become famous.The only way to break this vicious circle is to provide these artists with the financial support from the government.
Above all, the necessity of government's help could not be denied. Only does the government take actions to subsidize these artists could they concentrate on their composition and do some contributions to our culture.
In the first place, as we know, it is impossible to construct a famous city without the help of artists. A place where many artists gather would become a center of art. Paris, for instance, is the center of the fashion nowadays, and the world-class fashion shows all choose Paris as their location, not only because of its fashion culture, also because of its tremendous influence on the global fashion field. You could not imagine that Paris was an extremely common city in Europe one hundred years ago, let alone in the world.At that time， the government considered it was much more important to invest money in the appearance of the city than the development of art.However, the government is totally wrong; they lost numerous talented artists moved to the countries nearby such as Italy, a country whose government encouraged the development of art and was generous to artists,which led to the prosperity of the culture in Italy at that time Eager to achieve development just like Italy did , the government of France began to imitate its practice. Just after the World War I, the renowned artists in the fashion field, from all the countries of Europe,were attracted to Paris, and they helped to bring about the fashion center coming to being.Within years they made the name “fashion center” for Paris come into being.Thus, subsidizing artists is extremely necessary.
In addition, the artists could not focus on their composition without the support from the government. Take painters as an example. Before they become eminent, the sales of their work could not make up their everyday cost for meals, renting and painting facilities. When I visited Mexico where the government never supported the artists, I witnessed countless painters,who worked as waiters, typists, etc.turned to take jobs which were not related to painting.The reason they told me is very simple: without a decent income, they may die from poverty. They had to earn their living even if they did not have passions for these jobs. I could imagine the vicious circle; without supports, artists have to do unrelated jobs before they become splendid, which results in their less time and energy on composition, and less chance to become famous.The only way to break this vicious circle is to provide these artists with the financial support from the government.
Above all, the necessity of government's help could not be denied. Only does the government take actions to subsidize these artists could they concentrate on their composition and do some contributions to our culture.
第2个回答 2013-08-06
石校长不同意你的观点。。。
