-
Monetary decisions are quite important in a country and the power to decide upon them often vests in its government. That being said, some people think that the government is wasting money on the arts and this money could be better spent elsewhere.
In a representative democracy, the people are the foremost subject matter of the country. In every diverse country, opinions are bound to contrast. In my opinion, I disagree with the fact that investing in art is considered to be wasting money. Art history and culture help natives of a country to better comprehend the history and heritage of their own country and establish a link to their roots. For example, every year, about 2 million people visit the Louvre to see the Mona Lisa, which costs $10 million. Hence, tourism can also be promoted heavily with the help of art. Not only does art help in connecting people with their legacies and traditions, but also investing in art could further prove to be beneficial to the economy.
On the other hand, however, there lies a grave problem. Many practical people might think of art as a waste of time and money. Some could also conclude that art does not promote or increase monetary profit in any form, thus, is useless. For instance, in a BBC interview, Dan Rodriguez, a very successful businessman and economist had said that he believed that art is not important to society and has got nothing to give back.
To conclude, it can be inevitably said that the value of art can only be understood by the ones who have an eye for aesthetics. Art can either be valued or it could be perceived as a waste. Thus, such an issue still remains debatable.
