Some people argue that arts, such as paintings and music are a waste of money and the government should spend this money on other services. To what extent to do you agree or disagree with this statement?
In recent years, whether the government should allocate their budget on arts business or not is one of the heated discussions to the public as well as the government. Some people argue that it is a waste of the money and the government should spend these money to other services while some people say it is necessary. I think it is necessary that spending to spend money on artistic department. In this essay, the reasons of the arguments will be elaborated.
First of all, developing the art industry in terms of the government can raise rise the quality of life of citizens. It is quite difficult to people to enjoy if the business of art is operated by individuals. This is because the enterprise only think their profits, while and if the art business is conducted with the government, the governments’ first goal is improving the quality of life and aimed to social work. For example, people can enjoy their leisure time at the art galleries or watching plays which are performed by the government in a lower price. As a result, if the government allocates some amount of the money in art industry, many people can enjoy the high quality of arts in low price. (바로 앞에서 똑같은 말을 하셨습니다.)
Secondly, the government should give same importance as well. The antique artworks and music should be protected properly by the government so that they should give the same attention and these artworks are precious properties of the country in many purposes. For instance, in Korea, the government developed the art business and gathered many artworks for the educational purposes. As a result, allocating the money on art is not a waste of the time and it has many educational benefits to the next generation. (여기의 경우도 윗 문장과 다를 바가 없습니다. 실제 어떠한 교육의 목적이 있는지를 적어주세요~)
To sum up, the government has many things to do with their money, but focusing on other department is not fair as the art area is important as well. In terms of the government, Investment in arts and music can raise it can rise the quality of life of people and it has many beneficial purposes on education. I believe that it has to be the same importance between art and the other services should be given equal importance.
첨삭 부탁드립니다.
ㅇ문제에서 말하는 painting 이나 music 에 대한 해석을 Antique로 이해해도 상관이 없을까요??
-> 1. painting/music=antique라고 동일시 할 수는 없습니다. 둘은 전혀 다른 단어들이에요.
2. 본론 두 번째 문단들처럼 antique painting/music 이라고 하는 경우는 괜찮습니다.
총평: (6/6/6/6) 6.0
이번 글도 평소보다는 조금 아쉬웠네요. 기본적으로 본론은 점점 후반부로 갈수록 구체적으로 들어갈 수 있어야 하는데, 지금 두 본론 모두 그저 앞에서 했던 말에 겉돌고 있기 때문에 좋지 않습니다. 이와 관련해서 수정해주세요!
수고하셨습니다 :)