Some people think that governments should give financial support to creative artists such as painters and musicians. Others believe that artists should be funded by alternative sources. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Many believe that

artists

are entitled to federal financial assistance, while others feel that they should seek different sources of revenue. In my opinion, in certain

cases

Add a comma

,cases

show examples

government aid is justified but for the majority, supplying their own income is a catalyst to create quality artwork. Proponents of

this

policy argue that it can free

artists

to be more creative. If an artist is concerned about paying their rent and buying groceries, they will have less time and energy to dedicate to their artwork. Even more importantly, financial considerations will influence their work. Many painters, writers, and musicians are more likely to produce commercially viable artworks rather than artistically honest ones. There have been numerous examples in the past,

such

as during the Renaissance when painters, sculptors and architects received patronage from the government or wealthy citizens and artistic expression flourished.

However

, these instances are distant exceptions and most

artists

now operate in commercial fields. In conclusion, despite notable instances of the success of government assistance,

artists

benefit from self-reliance.

This

will of course require them to carefully balance artistic and commercial considerations.