Some people think music plays an important role in society.

Others think it is it is simply a form of entertainment. Discuss both

sides of this argument and give your own opinion.
Music is a unique language which is understood by everyone on this planet. It is the soul of the
universe. There are different views as to the importance of music. Some say it is purely for
entertainment. Others opine that it has many other functions. In the following paragraphs, I shall
put forth both sides of the argument.
There is no doubt that music is a good source of entertainment. Music helps to cheer everyone up.
When people come home after a hectic days work and they need some entertainment, they play
music and it calms them and they feel relaxed. Music is also played in parties and ceremonies to
entertain everyone. Young people dance to the beat of music and release their pent up energy.
Music also links us to our culture and tradition. The folk songs sung by our great artists like Gurdas
Mann are on everyones lips. His lyrics contain many things of our culture which are alive today
because of these folk songs. Otherwise, under the influence of western culture people are forgetting
their roots. Moreover, music is a lucrative profession these days. Our famous singers and musicians
like Lata Mangeshkar and A.R.Rehman have earned millions from music and are famous in the
whole world because of their musical talent.
Another role that music plays is of connecting people. When people go to a musical concert, they
are with those people who share their musical tastes. Together, they feel the emotions that the
music evokes. Music has always been a part of ceremonies because it has the ability to make
people feel connected. To add to it, music improves concentration. Students can concentrate better
if light music is played in the background because it kills the other disturbing noises.
To sum up, music is not just for entertainment. It has many roles in society such as connecting
people to each other and to their culture, making them rich and famous and also relaxing them.
Music is all around us. Right from the first lullaby that the mother sings to the cradle, to the dirge
of the funeral pyre, music accompanies everything of life.
Plan followed:
Intro: I shall put forth both sides of the argument
Para 1: How music entertains us
Para 2: Music also links us to our culture and tradition
Para 3: Another role that music plays is of connecting people. music improves concentration.
Students can concentrate better if light music is played in the background because it kills the other
disturbing noises.

Conclusion: music is not just for entertainment. It has many roles in society such as connecting
people to each other and to their culture, making them rich and famous and also relaxing them.
Music is all around us. Right from the first lullaby that the mother sings to the cradle, to the dirge
of the funeral pyre, music accompanies everything of life.

Some people claim that public museums and art galleries will not be needed because people can
see historical objects and works of art by using a computer. Do you agree or disagree with this
opinion?
It is irrefutable that nowadays, because of technology, arm-chair tourism through which we can see
historical objects and works of art on a computer, has gained popularity. However, I disagree, that
public museums and art galleries will no longer be needed. In fact, I believe that their popularity
will grow even further.

First of all, computers can never replace real public museums and art galleries. No matter how real
and vivid computer images are, they are only images and can never be likened to the historical
objects and works of art that we see in real or even might be allowed to touch with our fingertips.
The difference can be compared to seeing the picture of a mango rather than actually eating it.
Secondly, visiting real museums and art galleries is a rewarding experience in many respects. For
one thing, it is a good exercise. While we are making the trip to a museum or art gallery and then
strolling about on site, we get some exercise which does a lot of good to our health. We generally
go with family and friends and enjoy a lot. We also learn about the culture and tradition of the
place. All this broadens our horizons which can never be done by the passive activity of seeing
something on the computer screen.
Finally, I believe that after seeing these objects and museums, our craving to actually see these
increases even more and so we make efforts to go and see these places. This can be proved by the
overwhelming number of tourists to these places that has been increasing year after year. At certain
times, especially when it is temporarily impossible for us to visit museums and art galleries in
person, we can get a rough picture of what are on display on site. However, what we see from a
computer screen is, after all, not exactly the same as what we see and feel with our own eyes on
site.
In conclusion, arm-chair tourism is there today but museums and art galleries will still be needed
Plan followed:
Intro: I disagree, that public museums and art galleries will no longer be needed. In fact, I believe
that their popularity will grow even further.

Para 1: computers can never replace real public museums and art galleries - The difference can be
compared to seeing the picture of a mango rather than actually eating it
Para 2: Why visiting real museums and art galleries is a rewarding experience in many respects.
Para 3: I believe that after seeing these objects and museums, our craving to actually see these
increases even more
Conclusion: arm-chair tourism is there today but museums and art galleries will still be needed

Some people think museums should be enjoyable places to attract and entertain young people,
while others think the purpose of museums should be to educate, not entertain. Discuss both sides
and give your own opinion.
Museums are places where important objects of cultural, historical and scientific value are
preserved and shown to the public. This function makes them play an extremely important role in
disseminating human civilization. It is a topic of debate whether the main purpose of museums is
to only educate or do both educate as well as entertain.

Museums such as the British Museum, the Louver, and the National Palace Museum are regarded
as a vital educational resource because they highlight the achievements that have been
accomplished by all mankind throughout history. Visiting them is an eye-opening experience. One
will definitely be shocked by what is on display and learn something that they did not know
previously. Actually, the majority of those who visit museums expect to know more about museum
pieces of art and antiquities or those reflecting the development of science and technology.
Therefore, museums should focus on providing more authentic information to meet their
expectations.
On the other hand, it is certainly right for museums to improve their management, service and
environment to attract young people who obviously need to be encouraged to learn more about
human cultural history. If museums focus only on education and do not make things interesting,
then they will not be visited much and even their function of education will not be fulfilled.
Todays interactive museums are always crowded. This is because, people enjoy and learn at the
same time. In the planetarium, one feels one is actually in space. This arouses curiosity to know
more about the planets and satellites. However, museums should not overdo the entertainment and
go astrayby which I mean museums should make it clear that they are not purely a source of
entertainment, like a disco bar, cinema or amusement park.
To sum up, museums should try their best to educate people and this can be better done if they
make learning fun especially for todays youth.

Plan followed:
Intro: It is a topic of debate whether the main purpose of museums is to only educate or do both
educate as well as entertain
Para 1: why museums should educate
Para 2: Why museums to improve their management, service and environment to attract young
people
Para 3: Todays interactive museums are always crowded - However, museums should not overdo
the entertainment and go astrayby which I mean museums should make it clear that they are not
purely a source of entertainment, like a disco bar, cinema or amusement park.
Conclusion: museums should try their best to educate people and this can be better done if they
make learning fun especially for todays youth

Some people think that the government should provide assistance to all kinds of artists including
painters, musicians and poets, etc. However, other people think that is a waste of money. Discuss
both views and give your opinion.
Many people's lives are richer because of art - music, paintings, calligraphy, pictures, sculpture,
poems and dance. There are some who claim that it is important to support the artists, and others
who are opposed to government funding. In the following paragraphs, I shall discuss both sides of
the argument and finally give my opinion.

There are many reasons why government should fund artists. The contributions of artists to the
society are very essential. Art can bring out peoples creativity, views and personalities. For
example, we learn about our history, traditions and culture through movies, songs and paintings
made by artists. Artists are the media of diffusing tradition. All kinds of tradition are the basis of a
country without which the country cant be civilised. So artists are the ambassadors of culture and
play a vital role in elevating the level of civilization of the country. It is a major form of cultural
abundance.
Another important aspect of this is that art is an ancient means of communication. Our language is
a result of people's need to communicate. Art is what differentiates us from animals. Art is our soul
and it is a source of courage. Artists also entertain us. Finally, government should fund artists
because earning a livelihood from art is difficult especially in the budding stages.
Opponents of government funding on artists say that money spent on the arts could have been used
for considerably more vital purposes. They have strong reasons as a nation's health and wellbeing

should be paramount. The idea that elderly people are forced to wait for essential operations whilst
the money required to increase available medical provision is spent on opera and ballet is plainly
immoral. There are also more deserving social causes for the money that should be considered
before the arts. Homelessness, unemployment, illiteracy - all of these deserve to be addressed
before money is spent on what is essentially little more than entertainment.
To summarise, I would like to say that as both sides have strong arguments, it depends on the
condition of the country. In developed countries where even the poorest of the poor have all the
basic amenities of life, government should spend on art and artists but in countries where people
are dying of starvation and diseases, other matters should be given priority.
Plan followed:
Intro: I shall discuss both sides of the argument and finally give my opinion
Para 1: why government should fund artists
-

Art can bring out peoples creativity, views and personalities

Artists are the media of diffusing tradition

artists are the ambassadors of culture

Para 2: More contribution of artists

-

art is an ancient means of communication

Art is what differentiates us from animals.

government should fund artists because earning a livelihood from art is difficult especially in
the budding stages
Para 3: Opponents views
Conclusion: In developed countries where even the poorest of the poor have all the basic amenities
of life, government should spend on art and artists but in countries where people are dying of
starvation and diseases, other matters should be given priority.

Many countries spend a lot of money in art. Some people think investment in art is necessary, but
others say money is better spent on improving health and education. Discuss both these views and
give your own opinion.
There are some who claim that it is important to maintain the arts, and an equal number of people
who are opposed to continued government funding. I will argue in favour of this latter point for a
number of reasons.

The strongest point is that money spent on the arts could have been used for considerably more
vital purposes. While I admit that the arts are important to a country's identity, it must also be given
that a nation's health and wellbeing should be paramount. The idea that elderly people are forced to
wait for essential operations whilst the money required to increase available medical provision is
spent on opera and ballet is plainly immoral.
In addition to health concerns, there are also more deserving social causes for the money that
should be considered before the arts. Homelessness, unemployment, single mothers, the crime rate
- all of these deserve to be addressed before money is spent on what is essentially little more than
entertainment.
A third factor is that some people have no interest in preserving or funding the art, feeling that they
have little practical value. If the arts are so much in need of sponsorship, then perhaps this is a
reflection of their lack of popularity, in which case they should not be supported. The money
should go to more popular events instead.
For each of these reasons, it can be concluded that there is little reason to continue funding the arts.
Yet perhaps a compromise could be reached by which those keen to maintain the arts could raise a
percentage of their own funds and the government could reduce its level of sponsorship
Plan followed:
Intro: I will argue in favour of this latter point for a number of reasons.
Para 1: why government should spend on healthcare instead of art
Para 2: there are also more deserving social causes for the money that should be considered before
the arts
Para 3: If the arts are so much in need of sponsorship, then perhaps this is a reflection of their lack
of popularity, in which case they should not be supported.
Conclusion: it can be concluded that there is little reason to continue funding the arts. Yet perhaps a
compromise could be reached by which those keen to maintain the arts could raise a percentage of
their own funds and the government could reduce its level of sponsorship

Some people still value artists (musicians, painters, writers) even in todays world of science and
despite improvements in science and technology. Why is this so? Should arts be given the same
importance as science and technology?
21st Jan AC essay as seen in India

It is irrefutable that today we belong to an era of science and technology. Yet, artists such as
musicians, painters and writers are highly appreciated. In the following paragraphs, I shall outline
some reasons for this. I firmly believe that the role of art as well as science is different yet
inextricably linked and both are valuable, priceless and irreplaceable for every society.

It is easy to see why artists are valued even today. This is because the contributions of artists to the
society are very essential. Art can bring out peoples creativity, views and personalities. For
example, we learn about our history, traditions and culture through movies, songs and paintings
made by artists. Art also entertains us. Another important aspect of this is that art is an ancient
means of communication. Our language is a result of people's need to communicate. Appreciation
of art is what differentiates us from animals.
On the other hand, the contribution of scientists cannot be exaggerated. All humankind is indebted
to the scientists because of their work and achievements. Scientists make our life easier. We have
cars and aeroplanes to move fast from one place to another. We have microwaves and ready-to-eat
foods to make cooking much easier. We have different devices that simplify all we do. Finally,
scientists are making great achievements in medicines that make our life longer and happier.
Nowadays people have a great opportunity to do many things faster by use of computers.
Artists and scientists, both should be given equal importance because, science and technology give
us better life but arts tell us how to live that life. In Science truths are proved and phenomena are
explained. In art they are interpreted. We enjoy what science brings to us. But we cannot be
satisfied only with the material things. What we want most is the emotion from their deep hearts,
which can only be obtained from art. Art cannot be valued as certain amount of money, not like the
productions of science. Take Van Goghs painting for instance. It cannot be rated by the value of
dyes and canvas. The sensation in mankinds heart is priceless. Thats why art is as important as
science. Art makes people enjoy life, gives people the pleasure of living from the mental level.
Thats why the contribution of artists and scientists is equally important.
To summarise, artists nourish our souls when scientists and technology feed our minds. So, we
cannot eliminate or underestimate any one of them.
Plan followed:
Intro: I shall outline some reasons for this. I firmly believe that the role of art as well as science is
different yet inextricably linked and both are valuable, priceless and irreplaceable for every society.
Para 1: why artists are valued even today
Para 2: Contribution of scientists

Para 3: Why artists and scientists should be given equal importance - comparisons ( a beautiful
paragraph)
Conclusion: artists nourish our souls when scientists and technology feed our minds. So, we cannot
eliminate or underestimate one of them.

Today, the advanced science and technology have made great changes to people's life, but artists
such as musicians, painters and writers are still highly valued. What can arts tell us about life that
science and technology cannot?
It is irrefutable that artists as well as scientists bring many benefits to society. The role of art as
well as science is different yet inextricably linked. In the following paragraphs I intend to delve
into the role of both in our lives. What is certain is that both types are valuable, priceless and
irreplaceable for every society.

The contributions of artists to the society are very essential. Art can bring out peoples creativity,
views and personalities. For example, we learn about our history, traditions and culture through
movies, songs and paintings made by artists. Art also entertains us. Another important aspect of
this is that art is an ancient means of communication. Our language is a result of people's need to
communicate. Appreciation of art is what differentiates us from animals.
From the other side, the contribution of scientists cannot be exaggerated. All humankind is
indebted to the scientists because of their work and achievements. Scientists make our life easier.
We have cars and aeroplanes to move fast from one place to another. We have microwaves and
ready-to-eat foods to make cooking much easier. We have different devices that simplify all we do.
Finally, scientists are making great achievements in medicines that make our life longer and
happier. Nowadays people have a great opportunity to do many things faster by use of computers.
Science and technology give us better life but arts tell us how to live that life. In Science truths are
proved and phenomena are explained. In art they are interpreted. We enjoy what science brings to
us. But we cannot be satisfied with the material things. What we want most is the emotion from
their deep hearts, which can only be obtained from art. Art cannot be valued as certain amount of
money, not like the productions of science. Take Van Goghs painting for instance. It cannot be
rated by the value of dyes and canvas. The sensation in mankinds heart is priceless. Thats why art
isn't equal to science. Art makes people enjoy life, gives people the pleasure of living from the
mental level. Thats where art differs from science.
To conclude, artists nourish our souls when scientists and technology feed our minds. So, we
cannot eliminate or underestimate one of them.

Plan followed:
Intro: In the following paragraphs I intend to delve into the role of both in our lives.
Para 1: Contribution of artists
Para 2: Contribution of scientists
Para 3: comparisons ( a beautiful paragraph)
Conclusion: artists nourish our souls when scientists and technology feed our minds. So, we cannot
eliminate or underestimate one of them.