args

Money wasted on art works is absurd

"In my own philanthropy and business endeavors, I have seen the critical role that the arts play in stimulating creativity and in developing vital communities.The arts have a crucial impact on our economy and are an important catalyst for learning, discovery, and achievement in our country ""Paul G. Allen, Co-Founder, Microsoft I will be arguing against the resolution that money wasted on art works is absurd. Value: Importance of value. Value, as defined by Merriam-Webster dictionary, means relative worth, utility, or importance. Everything has value. So in order to obtain anything, you have to realize the importance of value in anything, especially art. If you want to obtain art, it is going to take something of equal value. I will now give two contentions that support my case. Contention 1: Importance. Importance, as defined by Merriam-Webster dictionary, means value or significance. Art is a very valuable thing because many artists have suffered for their art. It took Michelangelo 26 years just to make the statue of David. Do you think he would want to sell David for just a couple of bucks because it's "absurd art"? Of course not. So when we are paying for something like art, we exchange it for equal value. If the artist spent as much or more time on their art as Michelangelo, then I believe they should get a very high price for their art. Contention 2: History. Art is literally a definition of a culture. Our art will be a time traveling device for people of future times. It will show our history, culture, and families. Because of this, art is very valuable. If it is destroyed, our cultures and histories are destroyed. So that's why it is sold for so much money. You can't just give art to anyone off the street. But if someone is willing to respect it's value by giving up equal value then you know that person can be trusted to protect our histories and cultures. Thank you.