Public Art Research Paper

In Montana, the number of artists compared to the number of their civilian labor force is quite comparable. In 2010, a study showed that there were 8,780 artists, 7,450 citizens employed in the information industry, and 6,862 citizens employed in the mining, quarrying, oil industries, and gas industries. As you can see artists make up the majority of their population, even with the economic hardships that many of us face. Because there is high percentage of the Montana labor force that consist of artists, the Montana Arts Council designed a study to see how much artists help and improve their economy. In this study they estimated a total economic impact of over $233 million and 4,273 jobs. Not only do the artists of Montana generate jobs in their own state, but they also generate jobs in other countries. The impact that the arts have had on Montana is significant. The presence of artwork and the quality of life it has brought have increased their economic growth and it continues to improve every day (Montana Department of Labor & Industry). Due to the support of the NEA and its ability to keep funding going to states like Montana, the industry is starting to grow. More and more, art is changing and improving communities and states all over. Without the revenue from the NEA our government would

The National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities Act of 1965 states that it is up to the Federal Government to assist the local, state, regional and private agencies and artist in developing arts in the communities in several different ways. It also states that the Federal Government is to encourage freedom of thought, imagination, and inquiry but also the material conditions facilitating the release of this creative talent. Lastly, the Act states that it is to fulfill an educational mission and make widely available the greatest achievements of art “National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities Act of 1965”).

This is a universal truth that majority of artist are not earning substantial income, and consequently to carry out their creativity ought to gain endowment from government. I agree to the statement, that government is expected to support the artists beside the fact to give them quality of life and save culture, as well to encourage them to provide a stable neighbourhood.

Arts, as a luxury, are considered as a periphery element in the process of community development, which play a vital role in community development. Besides, arts are a catalyst to increase cultural awareness, an important element of this awareness to community coherence.

what does the history of mural making in public spaces tell us?where can we trace

In the article, Public Art and Street Art, by Patrick Frank, the author, talks about the idea and meaning behind public art.

As stated before, the NEA maintains partnerships with every state arts agency and regional arts agency in all 435 congressional districts. This speaks to not only the successful diplomacy and lobbying for arts by the NEA but also the nature of collaboration within art that we artists cherish. Ethically speaking, removed from economics, the message sent by federal government and artists who support the move to abolish the NEA—in many ways—disrespects and devalues that collaborative spirit and success. Placed back into economic context, this collaboration also ensures that an abolition of the NEA would be felt by each and every congressional district in the United States ending decades of successful

Even though some people work very hard to make a living that they deserve to get and are willing to have, they are very wrong about where they think their taxes should go. Art programs, in my opinion, are wonderful for the youth, they can even keep students out of trouble. Someone may object and say that art is not something that helps with education or keeping teens out of trouble, my argument goes along with my own experience. In high school, I began to hang out with a party crowd, so much fun at least I thought it was, but one night there was a party, I had a very big art project due that same week, so I was unable to go to the party. I was so into my art project, it was a good thing to that because if I had gone to this party I would have

Throughout history there have been many public funding’s that contributed to the world of art. Whether anyone realizes it or not, artists have a lot of responsibilities to try and please the public when they are working for the public. Also, there are numerous regional issues that greatly influence decisions about publicly funded art. Art is very important when forming a sense of nation character, therefore, we should support the public funding of art in America. Art is an important part of society and it can also be a very valuable part of our everyday lives. However, there are many positive and negative effects when it comes to the public funding of art in America. Supporters claim that subsidizing the arts pays for itself. These supporters suggest that the arts are what drive the economy of businesses within a community.

Public art is the art that has been planned to of being staged in public and its usually outdoor, it can be carved sculpture, cast or built or painted. What’s special about public art is the way how it is made, the place where it is and what meaning it has behind it. Public art can express community value or describe a cultural related point, and its placed in public for everyone to see. Public art is a reflection of how the artist sees the world and response to his time and space. In this essay, I want to review about how the public art reflects the traditional culture.

People like to receive help no matter what the cause may be especially with money. The NEA does exactly this to help artists. They help promote and fund as well. The NEA is the best government funding system for artists. Not only painters but also art museums are always looking for the NEA’s assistance. As it has been observed for years, the NEA funding has made a significant impact on the art we see today. The Government funding of the Arts is beneficial because they show care for what they display to the public, they are responsible for donating well amounts of money in grants, and they allow artists freedom of expression.

For example, a few may believe that art can “transform dull or rundown public spaces and inspire the people who live and work there” (Create For All). Well, we are a small community with a plethora of situations in mind that I do not think people would even recognize the sculpture. Our city is genuinely unique that we do not need a sculpture to brighten our community. On the other hand, others argue that art “represents an individual point of view that is critical, imaginative, and eye-opening” (Finance and Culture Magazine). Though it may be true, the public art may be altered to the desires of the city council. The art would not be at its fullest potential if the art is only what the council itself wants. There are many other ways we can express ourselves, but by not funding public art.

The integration of public art in urban cities has long been a beneficial tool in modifying the way urban life is lived. Art has the power to provoke thought and change, spark controversy, and even prevent crime. Philadelphia has exemplified the dominance of art in an urban city through murals, statues, and various other forms of art. The matter in which these works of art are placed throughout the city contributes greatly to the reception by the public. The presence of artwork in various places gives a neighborhood a welcoming appearance of upkeep and order. A notable example is the works of Isaiah Zagar, who created the Philadelphia Magic Gardens and various murals that plaster South Street and surrounding neighborhoods. The presence of intricate murals makes the neighborhood an inviting place to be, and it doubles as a device for warding off the occurrence of crime. The bond between urban art and its success is highly dependent on location, which ultimately determines the functionality and interpretation that the public has on the artwork.

In recent years, people are more and more interested in the topic about if the funds are supposed to support Art, and they are still straggling in this issue or even have some drastic online debate. Public funds are the governmental foundations that gather money from the taxpayer to help run the communal facilities. Due to read through a lot of research, which made by other specialist, art is a good use of taxpayer’s money if it offers the society job opportunity or economic advantage. This is a direct quote said by Lauren, Minneapolis in the report which written by Ringham (2009),“Art is a good use of taxpayers’ money when it creates a cultural environment that brings businesses and jobs to the area.” This essay will examine and argue that public funds should be used to support artistic project on events for two main reasons, education and economy.

The influence of art has had a positive impact on the communities they flourish in. States such as New York and California, are as well known for their impact on social change as their encouragement of the arts. Artistic expression paints the path of social change by sharing an individual person or group’s experience with anyone who experiences their art. Sure, listing off any facts about a negative situation would allow people to know what was going on, but, as penned by Olafur Eliasson, “Giving people