The controversial issue of whether the arts have to be governmental funded for flourishing or not

Some people believe that government funding of the arts is necessary to ensure that the arts can flourish and be available to all people. Others believe that government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts.

My response:

funds for arts

This topic raises the controversial issue of whether the arts have to be governmental funded for flourishing or not to be threaten by those funds. Indisputably, arts may be oriented in some ways by governments. Nevertheless, without governmental funds to arts may disappear in many fields. Thus, I generally disagree with the opinion that governmental funding of the arts threatens the integrity of arts and would argue that they are very important to ensure the arts can flourish.

First of all, arts have to be supported not only by money but also by good programs to continue and to be available for all people. I would like to point out that this is a big responsibility of the government to supervise these programs. To illustrate let us look at the example of old traditions arts of specific country. Usually like these arts is mark land for some countries. In this circumstance, obviously, It may be disappeared if there is no governmental funding source. So, governmental funding of this arts warrantee the integrity of old and new arts. Consequently, it is pretty obvious that the arts governmental funding is helping to flourish arts.

Furthermore, many arts can be ignored without governmental funding. Specially, when there is no interest from a wide range of people. Some arts may flourish by other source of funding but may be oriented and available for specific people depending on the type of that funding. Personal experience has told me the funded arts are not provided to all people. Hence, all the above evidence demonstrates that governmental funding for arts will not threatens arts.

Admittedly, some specific arts are funded from other sources. This is true when it comes to specific profitable arts. However, the above argument doesn't constitute a sufficient support to claim that governmental funding threatens arts.

In conclusion, although governmental funding may not be enough in some arts but it will not threaten the integrity of arts. It helps the arts to flourish and be available for all people.

I think your essay is good, there are some ideas I like. But your essay contains some grammar mistakes. For example, " without governmental funds to arts may ...", this sentence doesn't have subjects. In second paragraph, ''It may be disappeared'', disappear shouldn't exist in passive form in your essay. ''It may disappear" is okay.

Elsayed, you can only get a 3 in terms of the final score for your GRE essay because of a number of reasons. For starters, your discussion development needs to be improved. There are a number of instances when your presentation is not clear and does not solidly connect with the discussion prompt. This is the result of a lack of grammar control on your part. Due to the problematic sentence developments, your essay presentation is flawed and does not accurately represent an understandable line of reasoning in your presentation. This creates vague references in the essay which makes it difficult for the reader to analyze your paragraphs. While your essay has a strong voice of conviction, you need to take your time when writing your essay so you can be sure that you do not deliver improper thoughts or under developed thoughts. You also need to make sure that each paragraph you present has a minimum of 3 sentences per paragraph in order to assure yourself that you have done your best when it comes to delivering a coherent and cohesive paragraph presentation. You have plenty of room for improvement in your essay. I am sure that these problems will be slowly addressed with your upcoming practice tests. I look forward to seeing your progress over the coming days.