22. “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.
“很明显，政府对支持艺术富有责任。但是，如果需要这个支持产生任何价值，政府必须对产生的艺术不加限制。”
1. 政府对艺术富有责任这一论断是毫无根据的。事实上政府应该把更多的精力投入到公共产品以及具有外部性的产品的生产与建设上。因为由经济学的理论我们知道这些产品是非竞争非排他的，因此无法由私人部门提供。这也正是需要政府存在的理由。而艺术显然是可以在私人部门解决的。私人收藏和私人装饰都为艺术品提供了广阔的市场，艺术品显然不是公共产品。但是由于艺术品可能具有的外部性，如个人收藏可以让拥有者以外的人赏心悦目，所以政府对艺术进行适当的扶植是应当的。但说政府对艺术负有责任，这显然是言过其实。
2. 对于需要政府加以扶植的艺术例如公益性质的艺术展览等，政府是需要对其加以限制的。政府的只能就是使社会的总收益最大。如果加以限制可以使其扶持的艺术行为为社会带来更大的收益限制就是必要的。有人可能会反驳说这会对艺术的自由创作带来负面的影响，但事实上绝对的自由是不存在的，适当的限制是对自由的保障。例如有些裸体行为艺术，就应由政府出面限制观看的人群年龄，实际上这并不会影响艺术创作。
unwarranted baseless groudless bottomless foundationless gratuitous groundless 私人产品private goods 公共产品public goods 外部性externality 非竞争non-rivalry 非排他non-excludability 竞争rivalry 排他excludability 理论 私人部门private sector 公共部门public sector收藏collection
扶植prop up 扶持support uphold 言过其实paint the devil blacker than he is 为公益的commonweal-oriented 限制constrain confine 负面影响negative impact 正面影响positive impact 绝对的absolute
保障guarantee safeguard 裸体naked
1， 艺术的巨大作用毋庸置疑：强调the perpetua永久的l virtue, such as bravery, affection, responsibility, honesty and so forth. The Lord of the rings; 同时，remind people of the intrinsic demerits stemmed from the dark side of humanity, such as aggression and greed. Shakespeare’s Macbeth instruct people that the insatiable贪得无厌 ambition is pernicious. 艺术应该受到支持，以便蓬勃发展。
2， 但是不能说政府应该扮演这个角色。首先，艺术需要自由的表达，而政府的资助一定在某种程度上限制这种自由。比如The government of Soviet Union, forced all the arts it subsidized to follow the “party line” and squashed those artists who resisted such control. 即使在democratic countries, such control is hidden and indirect, but still exist.
3， 其次，政府有更多的职责，需要有限的资源去处理。比如很多社会问题非常严重，environment, criminality, education, starvation… it is not a wise decision for the government to allocate the limited resources on arts while ignoring the more urgent demand cited above.
4， 鉴于以上两点，应该把艺术的扶持工作交给大众。事实上，现在的很多公益机构charitarian are doing an excellent job in supporting the prosperity of arts.
Optional words:
Government/ the authorities
Art/artist
Support/finance/ patronize/ loan/ sustain/ pledge
Thesis sentence:
The inevitable representation of human civilization, art must be count in the responsibilities that government carries. But support without restrictions will probably lead to fruitless.
View1: government should support art
Evidence: because arts have very important functions in our civilization. for example:
Paintings arouse imagination
Music heal broken heart and purify dirty minds
View2: unselected supporting of arts will probably lead to fruitless
Evidence: Some radical forms of arts go beyond the acceptance of the masses and contradict our social moral. for example: posters features blood and violence
The speaker here argues that government must support the arts but at the same time impose no control over what art is produced. The implicit rationale for government intervention in the arts is that, without it, cultural decline and erosion of our social fabric will result. However, I find no empirical evidence to support this argument, which in any event is unconvincing in light of more persuasive arguments that government should play no part in either supporting or restricting the arts.
First, subsidizing the arts is neither a proper nor a necessary job for government. Although public health is generally viewed as critical to a society’s very survival and therefore an appropriate concern of government, this concern should not extend tenuously to our cultural “health” or well being. A lack of private funding might justify an exception; in my observation, however, philanthropy is alive and well today, especially among the new technology and media moguls.
Second, government cannot possibly play an evenhanded role as arts patron. Inadequate resources call for restrictions, priorities, and choices. It is unconscionable (无节制的；过度的) to relegate normative (conforming to or based on norms *normative behavior* *normative judgments*) decisions as to which art has “value” to a few legislators and jurists (法学家；法理学家: one having a thorough knowledge of law; especially: JUDGE), who may be unenlightened in their notions about art. Also, legislators are all too likely to make choices in favor of the cultural agendas of those lobbyists with the most money and influence.
Third, restricting artistic expression may in some cases encroach upon the constitutional right of free expression. In any case, governmental restriction may chill creativity, thereby defeating the very purpose of subsidizing the arts.
In the final analysis, government cannot philosophically or economically justify its involvement in the arts, either by subsidy or sanction. Responsibility lies with individuals to determine what art has value and to support that art.
上一页 [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] 下一页
责任编辑：wangpeng6151
