Kindly evaluate my Argument essay.

[prabhu_1989_2001]

Some people believe that government funding of the arts is necessary to ensure that the arts can flourish and be available to all people. Others believe that government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts.

Arts in general classified into many categories mainly related to paintings, architechtures, life sculptures, etc. Each has its own individuality and creativity to stand tall in the history of arts. Artists who were coming from the background where financial support is less and are trying to prove their talents in the chosen field with the minimal support of funds with real talents could be highly motivated to improve their horizon and to contribute for the society only by providing a proper financial supporting from the third person, which is ultimately done by Government to enrich their zest for arts and flourishing in a longer run.

We could consider a example from the history of Tamilnadu,State in India, where archeology department has found out numerous scripts substantiating the funding provided by the kings, over a period long way back from 500 BC, to support the works of artists to excel in their field of expertise. In particular King Raja Raja Cholan of 12th century, who ruled the realm of south India, erected a monumental Tanjore Temple under his supervision, thus one of the world largest standing monument in the present architecture marvels. This has been a proven paradigm for the millions of sculptors who worked day and night to complete the temple over 20 years and it is impossible for them, unless the King had funded the project and supported the talents to make it happen.

Secondly, in my own experience a friend whom I had shared my schooling came from economically backward family, being a prodigy in paintings and pencil sketching, has now took a career path in arts, after getting a financial scholarship worth INR 200,000 from one of the renowned Government Arts university from the capital of India for completing his degree, making his dream come true after all the struggle he has undergone. He might not have seen the light if he failed to get the scholarship that was needed.

Considering the antagonist who thinks the financial support provided by the government would threatens and questions the integrity of the arts can be satisfied if the government taken proper measures and possibly a committee could be set up to rationalize the funding to appropriate candidate. Healthy competitions and exhibitions can also be held to choose the perfect person who is having the talent and seeking financial help.Providing them with no financial help could blatantly make them rot and the talent would be wasted as a whole.

In conclusion the government funding of the arts could be made necessary to make sure the arts flourish irrespective of their individual family financial status. Being people's money, severe measures and rationing can be done to make the process to be fruitful and available to all people who could be benefitted as a result.

Thanks. I am aiming for scores between 3-4 range as I am not too good in AWA. Also kindly let me know how to improve it.

[tommywallach]

Hey Prabhu,

Great start here. Your two examples are both pretty solid. I do, however, have some serious notes:

1) Make your thesis VERY clear in the first paragraph. You say it, but it's a bit muddy.

2) Your third body paragraph is problematic. You don't seem to understand the point of the passage. The idea is that government funding of the arts forces people to only say things that are pro-government, which means the art can't be free/have integrity. I don't see how your example relates here to that.

3) As you know, your English is problematic. It only occasionally obscures your meaning, so you should be able to get a score in the 3-4 range, but you'll struggle to get any higher without improving your vocabulary and grammar.

Small notes using this sentence:

Artists who were coming from the background where financial support is less and are trying to prove their talents in the chosen field with the minimal support of funds with real talents could be highly motivated to improve their horizon and to contribute for the society only by providing a proper financial supporting from the third person, which is ultimately done by Government to enrich their zest for arts and flourishing in a longer run.

Were coming -- "come" -- don't use the participle when you can help it, and you should be in the present tense, not the past.

where financial support is less -- something can't BE less, you meant "where they receive less financial support".

the chosen field -- THEIR chosen field

minimal support of funds -- redundant -- "without much financial support"

horizon -- you can't improve a horizon

Contribute for -- should be contribute to

There are another half-dozen errors like this, enough to hurt your score.

Hope that helps!

-t