Issue-7.Some people believe that government funding of the arts is necessary to ensure that the arts can flourish and be made available to all people. Others believe that government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts.

————————————————————————————————————————

满分范文赏析

Regarding the arts, one must consider whether or not government subsidy is a wise idea. One should consider whether or not a national endowment for the arts would threaten the integrity of the arts. As far as I am concerned, government funding jeopardizes to artistic integrity. Before jumping in to that discussion, however, we must define what integrity, as it relates to the arts, is. Let us consider a two-fold meaning: diversity and independence.

【此段结构】  

第一段，首先介绍了背景，告诉读者本文探讨的是政府资助与艺术的关系，以及政府资助对艺术纯粹性的影响，紧密覆盖了题目中的所有关键词。随后作者提出了自己的立场：政府资助会伤害艺术纯粹性，可见作者同意的是题中的后一种观点，而且暗含政府资助艺术并不necessary之意。作者在尾句解释了integrity纯粹性的两重含义，多样性及独立性，暗示读者下文的论述将从此两方面展开。  

【此段功能】  

首段围绕题中所述简单介绍了背景，并且提出了作者的立场，为下文论述开了头。  

Government support for the arts is inherently problematic. It breeds passivity in artists and undermines the independence of the creative spirit. It makes artists shift the focus from creativity towards pleasing funding bodies. The importance of individual passion and creativity are undercut by the funding regime. In the Netherlands, for example, the government guaranteed a market for the works of professional artists.  If an artist produced work that wouldn’t sell, the government bought the art. This practice was commonly referred to as the "Dutch Treat". The Dutch government wound up with a huge warehouse full of art that hadn’t sold. The program assured that artists could make a living but it also assured the creation of a lot of bad art.

【此段结构】  

第二段采用总分结构，论述了政府资助与艺术独立性的关系。作者提出政府资助会削弱艺术创作的独立性，使艺术家变得被动。支持此观点的理由选取了荷兰政府曾经购买没有销路的艺术作品却无果而终的例子，证明这种做法虽使艺术家可以维持生计，却催生了bad art。  

【此段功能】  

论点一，关注了艺术independence的问题，与文章开头提到的艺术纯粹性的独立性方面相呼应。  

Also, the process of official encouragement of some art is, in an indirect way, official discouragement of others kinds of art. The practice might influence the general artistic direction of a society and may cause the imbalance of the development of the arts. For example, vast investment in the Beijing opera would hurt other local operas. As a result, some kinds of small operas might become extinct.

【此段结构】  

第三段围绕艺术的多样性展开论述，因为篇幅较短，较难定义其为总分抑或是分总的结构，但还是可以清楚地看出，作者谈到政府资助对艺术多样性的消极影响。因为作者认为，支持某些艺术间接地不鼓励其他形式的艺术，从而影响到艺术家的创作方向，导致不平衡。支持事例选取了政府对京剧的推崇可能致使其他地方剧种灭绝。  

【此段功能】  

论点二，关注了艺术diversity的问题，与文章开头提到的艺术纯粹性的多样性方面相呼应。  

To further the discussion, official encouragement and indirect discouragement is almost a guarantee because there is always the question of limited resources. What this means is that decisions have to be made about which projects to fund. In cases like these, a standard criterion would have to be created to decide which projects to fund. There is no government panel qualified to evaluate art. In what way could the government ensure the diversity of the arts?  There is no easy answer.  

【此段结构】  

第四段承接上一段，进一步讨论了政府扶持对艺术的影响。作者认为因为资源有限，政府无法扶持所有艺术，于是有了官方的偏好。在此情况下，政府需要制定标准去决定支持哪些艺术，而政府是否具备这种专业能力很值得商榷。因此，艺术的多样性也会受到限制。我们可以将本段与上一段连在一起，这两段用分总的结构论述了政府扶持对艺术多样性的消极影响。  

【此段功能】  

仍是论点二，继第三段进一步关注艺术diversity的问题，与文章开头提到的艺术纯粹性的多样性方面相呼应。  

Private patronage of the arts is a far better option for the protection of diversity and independence of art than any governmental program could be. Without government direction and intervention, the arts could avoid being byproducts of government criterion and remain freely created what artists want to express. A private patronage system would operate free from any set standards and therefore all art would have an equal chance to be funded. Meanwhile, through free competition, excellent artists would have the freest space to display their creativity.

【此段结构】  

第五段，总分结构。首句提出本段主旨，即私人赞助，与政府扶持相比，是保护艺术多样性与独立性（题中说到的integrity纯粹性的两个方面）的更好选择。随后的两句分别说明艺术独立性和多样性可以因此受到保护，最后一句相当于总结本段，在政府不干预的情况下，艺术家们可以自由竞争，充分发挥创造力，暗示艺术可以发展得既独立又多样，保持纯粹性。  

【此段功能】  

论点三，指出能够保持艺术纯粹性的方式。前两个论点均解释了保持艺术纯粹性的手段不应靠政府扶持，而这个论点指出可以依靠的方式——私人赞助。  

In conclusion, despite opposing views, I believe that the arts are an important area in our society but should be allowed freedom from any form of official control.

【此段结构】  

第六段，非常简单，一句话总结作者的立场，即艺术作为社会生活重要的一环，它的繁荣应远离任何形式的官方控制。  

【此段功能】  

作为全文总结，重申了作者的观点。  

——————————————————————————————————————————

满分要素剖析

一、 语言表达

本文语言严谨而流畅，使用的语法也比较多样和准确，并且全文的说理给读者一种娓娓道来的从容不迫感。一些词汇短语的选择也很生动，为作者的表达增加亮点。

1、As far as I am concerned, government funding jeopardizes to artistic integrity. 本句中jeopardize一词的选择非常好，在GRE级别的写作中，优于类似意义的threaten或endanger。Concern一词的用法也很正确，as far as I am concerned的用法显得更加严谨。

2、Before jumping in to that discussion, however, we must define what integrity, as it relates to the arts, is. 值得关注的是这一句的语序，however没有用在句首给人一种更自然的感觉；as it relates to the arts作为插入成分，使作者的叙述更加清晰完整，因为它表明文章要说的是哪一种integrity，而且起到了一定的强调作用。

3、What this means is that decisions have to be made about which projects to fund. 这句话中既含有主语从句又含有宾语从句。显然，谓语动词is前面由what引导的从句是本句的主语，that引导的从句是本句的宾语。

4、Private patronage of the arts is a far better option for the protection of diversity and independence of art than any governmental program could be. 注意这句话中…is far better…的is与句尾could be的对应，than前后比较的两者应该是相同的形式，因为前面被比较的不是一个词而是一个有主有谓的句子，因此than后与之比较的成分也是主谓具备的；用了could be表示一种虚拟，因为这只是讨论一种政府作为扶持者的假设。

二、 逻辑结构

作者采用了总分总的结构来组织这篇文章，并且使用了四段三个论点来进行论述。题目提到了两种对立的观点，作者在首段简单叙述了背景，并且表明了自己的立场，即支持第二种观点。为了充分进行论述，作者还将第二种观点分析为二重含义，可见其对此理解比较全面，做到了扣题。接下来的段落，作者用第二段和第三四段各表达一个论点，分别解释了政府扶持对保持艺术独立性和多样性的消极影响。在否定了政府扶持作为保持艺术纯粹性的主体之后，作者又提出能够保持艺术纯粹性的是私人赞助，整个逻辑链条完整了。素材没有选取太多，但都比较能够支持所提论点，令人信服。