People Think Governments should Fund Art IELTS Writing Task 2

People think Government Should Fund Art IELTS Writing Task 2 consists of three sample answers provided below. The task requires the candidates to provide a tentative and argumentative answer for the question. The sample answers comprises two parts: Introduction and body. The introduction is a brief description about the topic. The body contains argumentative statements and tentative answers to support the test-taker's perspective.

IELTS writing task 2 evaluates candidates based on the knowledge and views they have expressed. The areas that candidates are assessed on are grammar, vocabulary, and style. IELTS writing score is marked based on band scores. The band scores range from 0 to 9. Since the topics are very diverse, candidates must go through IELTS Writing practice papers to become familiar with a lot of topics.

Check: Get 10 Free IELTS Sample Papers
Check: Register for IELTS Coaching - Join for Free Trial Class Now

Topic: Many people think governments should fund art, while others believe that artists should be responsible for funding their work. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Model Answer 1

The business of artists is to create. As rightly mentioned by the seminal figure of visual art in the Romantic Age, William Blake, an artist must create a system or be enslaved by others. The only business that they must know is to create. The artist not only has the responsibility of creating but also ensuring that the creation reaches the masses so that it can have a positive impact on society. In my opinion, artists must be responsible for funding their artwork.

When an artist creates a piece of art, they know the worth of what they have created. To seek funding, it thus becomes important how much value is associated with that artwork. If someone else is setting up the price for artwork, they might not view the worth of the art in the manner that an artist can, thereby offering or bringing low value for the art. If the state is involved in funding the artwork, chances are high that due to corruption, the deserving artists will be pushed to the periphery and might lead a life in neglect and poverty. The number of artists might increase but the quality of art would decrease if the funding is offered by the government bodies.

Art was earlier associated with luxury. Many artists who rose to fame in the old times were generally from influential families. They didn’t even need patrons as they were self-sufficient. Art was a means of self-expression which was purely passion-driven. The artists who know the real worth of art promote other potential artists without any self-interest. An example can be Swami Haridas, Tansen’s Guru, who managed to create a phenomenal singer like Tansen without any involvement of government while Tansen on the contrary could not create another Tansen even while being under the umbrella of Akbar.

In conclusion, if real art has to flourish, it must be away from government involvement. In modern times, there are so many ways to market art. Influential artists can easily spread their artwork through social media and even word of mouth due to their power of position while the lesser influential ones can also take advantage of the diverse reach of the internet.

Read More IELTS Writing Related Articles

Check: IELTS Actual Test ebooks Combo

Model Answer 2

The life of artists has never been easy. Many of the artists have succumbed to the life of drudgery only because their art couldn’t reach a larger audience. This problem can only be addressed only when the government is involved in funding the art.

History has seen many artists who were passionate about creating works of beauty whether it be painting or poetry or music. But their flame of passion was put out due to lack of recognition and decent earning. In the earlier times when kings used to be the patrons of court artists, they had a flourishing life but their life would soon fall into pieces when their patronage was put on pause.

The involvement of the government can motivate artists to create more art thus flaming their passion. One does not become an artist rather is born. The current status of art is declining thereby killing the natural talent of many people within whom resides an artist. Every family supports their children to pursue a career in a field that pays well rather than the one that is passion-driven and the result of this is the premature death of artwork by budding artists. If they are funded by the government, not only will they reach a larger audience and gain recognition, they will also have a luxurious life.

In conclusion, the government must ensure that every artist who creates meaningful art does not stop themselves just because they do not see financial security in that field. Their art must be backed by the government so that not only are they encouraged to produce good artwork but the younger generation will too think of becoming artists.

Model Answer 3

Art influences society by instilling values, changing opinions and transferring experiences from one nation to another. It can cross boundaries most healthily. So many people despite their gender, age, sex, nationality, ethnicity connect due to art. In this essay, I am going to throw light on if the artists should be funded by the government or should be self-funded and give my opinion.

Art when commissioned by the government has its advantages as many artists who do not come from influential families would go unrecognised. An artist is born to create artwork. They should not be indulged in the business of making money as that might impact their quality of creation. When the government takes care of that, they are free from the burden of creating under the stress of financial drudgery. When the government funds an artist, his creation has a higher chance of reaching a larger audience than the case where it is not. For example, when an artist displays his artwork in an exhibition, it comes in the eyes of many people, even those who otherwise are not art enthusiasts.

The other belief is that artists should not seek help from the government , rather they should fund their work themselves. The prime reason for this belief is that government funding sometimes forces the artist to become biassed thus eventually taking the form of propaganda. The rate of corruption is increasing day by day and is highest in the field of politics. Many artists re thereby succumb to the demands of those in power and thus art gets adulterated. While it is supposed to free the minds, it actually ends up enslaving them. In my opinion, this is true and I abide by this idea that artists should not get the government involved in their artwork.

In conclusion, art should not be commissioned by the government as that would limit the art and it will become just a puppet in the hands of powerful people who will use it to suppress other ideologies and enforce their own.