Nowadays, there is noticeable a sharp shrank in the production and consumption of cultural items and skills. In this context, discussion about revitalising or abandoning this sector of the market has a gained prominence. Some people suggest that responsibility for supporting traditional crafts and mastery lays on the shoulders of government. However, others are convinced that this part of the market should develop organically. This essay will align with the latter viewpoint and provide an example for confirmation.
In recent decades, cultural differences become increasingly blurred. As a direct consequence of worldwide cultural and globalisation. Some people advocate for government assistance in preserving traditional skills and crafts to reborn their cultural identities. For instance, the Russian government keeps afloat the market of culture aspects such as clay artistry, historical music or dance and cartoons based on folk tales. However, such policy may feel imposed on the public? leading to reverse effect. Many people have become bored of these initiatives. Overall. I am convinced that this approach is ineffective.
On the other hand, there are those who believe that culture should develop independently and involuntarily without intervention of government. If a culture is relevant, its market will naturally thrive. For example, many Italians genuinely admire their history and culture. Consequently for that reason, their traditional skills and craft continue to be vibrant land flourishing.
In conclusion, while it is undoubtedly important to keep cultural traditions alive. this preservation must occur naturally. If traditional skills and crafts are still exist only due to government policy, it may be better to allow them to fade away