The development of arts presents more artworks to citizens, and the government plays important role for art. Some people believe that, the assistance from government will surely accelerate the process of flourish of art, and thus make art accessible to all individuals. While others claim that the funding from government poses a threat on the integrity of art. Personally speaking, I agree with the former perspective. The factors and reasons which support my position are as follow.
First of all, considering the merits from assistance by the government, the government funding serves as a catalyst for the development of art. With the funding, those virtuoso will be able to access to better working condition, which is capable of providing them with a more suitable space, and encourage them to come up with more inspirations, thus create more masterpieces. This will greatly improve the development of art. On the other hand, those artists who have not yet received sufficient public awareness, it might be impossible for them to support themselves by their works. The government funding could solve the living problem for them, and reserve them from giving up their arts. If government or companies or some individuals could provide more places to exhibit the artworks, with more people devote themselves to arts, the art will become more accessible for all people. When art earns its popularity, the flourish of art will become real.
Secondly, without government funding, the development of art may have to face some unfavorable obstructions. For example, if the government cut the funding to art, those not well-known artists, as we mentioned before, who can not support themselves to continue their creation, may resort to other job for better income. Without adequate artists, how can the art become prosperous? This kind of loss will undermine the development of art and less artwork will be presented to people, and the opportunity for citizens to access to art will become fewer. The fewer audiences, the less income an artist will earn, and this will probably result in a self-feeding process of collapse of art.
Besides the necessities of government funding, admittedly, the government assistance has its potential to threat the integrity of art. Generally, the government may have its proclivity to support arts with certain themes. In that sense, artists may compromise the principle on their creation in order to be funded. And some people without any art skills will join in the art industry for government funding as well, this poses a potential threat on the integrity and standard of art. However, under most circumstances, government will respect artists and their work, and more people devote themselves in art means more possibilities for art to realize its prosperity.
In conclusion, taking all the merits and drawbacks into consideration, though sometimes poses potential threat on the integrity of art, the government funding serves a important role in supporting art development.