Supporting Arts Unconditionally

"Clearly, government has a responsibility to support the arts. However, if that support is going to produce anything of value, government must place no restrictions on the art that is produced."

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the opinion expressed above? Develop your position by giving specific reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.

The Government is often held responsible for everything. Why should arts be any different, one may wonder? Arts represent the softer and creative side of human existence and the cultural wealth of a country. Surely, promoting arts is important. However, holding the Government solely responsible for its development may not be the best thing to do. I also differ on the point of giving an unconditional support to the cause as it may literally translate into perks without any accountability.

Government is responsible for the well-being and progress of its people. Its duties include defence, law and order, infrastructure, foreign policy, economics, culture etc. It is an organization with immense resources and influence. One may think that without its patronage arts may find it difficult to prosper. The renaissance period saw a number of guilds that were owned by master artists and not the Government. Their main patrons were wealthy individuals, kings and the Church. Today an artist is more likely to be hired by a Government organizing Olympics, a corporate making a new headquarter or some NGO commissioning a great work to commemorate 200 years of Darwin. So, clearly, even though the Government is a big player, it is certainly not the most dominant or the most critical. Hence, the responsibility to promote arts lies not only with the Government but with the entire society.

Another point is that there are no free-lunches in the world. If the government promotes arts, it may expect something in return. This may be something as basic as seeing some tangible progress, works of art or some awards. If government's investment is not yielding any dividends, the government may as well call it quits. Even though the government may respect an artists freedom of expression, it certainly has the right to expect some results in lieu of its support.

Concluding, I agree that the government has a responsibility to support the arts. Nevertheless, it is not just the government but the whole length and breadth of the society that bears responsibility to support art. In order to get the best results the government does need to give the artists freedom of expression. However, the government does have the right to put in restrictions in form of demanding concrete results and tangible success to justify the support.