In the contemporary world, an ongoing debate centres on whether governments should prioritise art subsidising over other alternatives in order to improve the quality of people’s lives. This essay aims to explore both perspectives and argue against subsidising art at an expense of other alternatives both for developing and developed countries.
Many argue that subsidising art is almost indispensable for ensuring population’s cultural fulfilment. This cultural fulfilment cultivates spiritual development, not only unfolding an individual’s values but also bringing people together on the ground of the idea, which art depicts. While art is often viewed as a vivid way of self-expression, facilitating human’s creativity and flowering quality of life, governments are often chasing other incentives for justification of its place in the budget. In particular, the government can manipulate the population’s mindset through the tilted lens of perpetuated art, conveying advantageous senses for those in power. Art has proved itself to be one of the most effective weapons on the battlefield of propaganda.
Conversely, advocates for alternative approach towards prioritisation of government spendings claim that art appears to be less cost-efficient in developing countries. This lack of cost-efficiency in the art industry is attributed to its high place in the Maslow’s pyramid of incentives. If people are suffering from hunger, they will never pay much appreciation for art regardless of investment a government is making in this field. This, in turn, means that a government of a developing country should put more down-to-earth problems, such as eradication of global poverty, and the cultivation of a qualifiable educational and medical system, in the first place.
In conclusion, my viewpoint aligns with a belief that while art remains an essential component of a well-rounded and developed society, governments tend to prevent its pure nature in order to sustain political power, which may be seen in the case of developed countries. On the other hand, developing countries cannot embrace art support due to lack of resources to cover populations’ basic needs.