People have different views on whether money should be spent on art or whether it should be guided toward other domains. Both of these schools of thought could be true in their own right, but I agree with the latter opinion.
On the one hand, it could be beneficial for counties’ state if government focus on art and music. That is to say, artists and musicians can contribute to becoming their nations popular worldwide by performing traditional plays. If participants in these domains are provided with sufficient funds by authorities, they may exhibit their traditional art through the internet or television to other countries and assist in making their countries popular. Taking Uzbekistan into account, almost every year, this country holds a traditional event by the contributions of authorities in order to present their national art to the world; for this reason, numerous foreign countries aware of this nation. That suggests that focusing on art could help make the countries popular.
On the other hand, if these funds are guided toward other fields, it will definitely bring more benefit for countries. In simpler terms, through supporting the sport governments may take more advantage that supporting art. In light of this fact, sport is more popular and prioritized domain than other trends. Provided that authorities pay more attention and donate in them in order to provide modernized sport facilities, societies may be definitely engaged in training with these facilities. In the United states, for instance, as the government focused on sport more than other fields, its community is considered one of the strongest countries. That illustrates that via supporting this filed, nations are likely to take more advantages than art.
In conclusion, some think that art should be prioritized than other domains while other have different thought. I believe that art in not as popular as art; therefore, it might be beneficial for nations if they pay more attention to sport.