Pick me up at 9.

00 Should government fund controversial art: Art is only seen for its real value and appreciation by the right observer, just because its seen in the eyes of incorrect observer labeling art as controversial is incorrect.it should just be labeled as art and the importance of art in a society is vital no matter what form it appears in. Art out of the mainstream and rare creates more interesting pieces and are more inspirational. Controversial art creates better/different ideas or provokes different thought to conventional. Art inall forms is a skill and one that should be developed for our society to be enriched with different ideas. Many societies such as greeks and the renaissance developed because of art and the influence it provided philosophers and scenctist. Art helps to bring people of different tasetes and classes togeather. Art is good for tourism growth and hence economic growth . Art represents equlity. Art provides different views and different ways of thinking to people. Art can be controversial because people believe it makes life harder or they dont see a point I it such as Richard Serras Tiled Arc
use a lot of hand guestures even if you have to make it up, use a lot of stats but make sure you say where you got them from (Official DAV rule book says that it doesnt have to be 100% true but dont tell anyone because most people dont know it) um what else throw in a little joke here and there or go full serious nothing in between start with a quote if you want to ALWAYS relate whatever you say back to the topic scores TONNES of points if you start going over time (they actully deduct points) just sum it up dont waste time dont get distracted from the topic at all a lot of eye contact make sure you refer to the model A LOT and always end strong. never with a quote these are just the tips ive learnt over the last 3 years OH and if you need the structure for 1st aff speaker tell me its the most important structure yeah sure
10:29pm

another tip that is actually important: use analogies they love that okay so the structure:

intro define the topic state and explain our model state what each speaker is talking about say what youre talking about then your arguments sign post and relate it back to the topic at the end of each one and the end summarize what youve said and why its relevant and restate our topic should be good

quotes and stats

I dont think it is the function of art to be pleasing, Serra commented at the time. Art is not democratic. It is not for the people. -financial benefits -art reflects a society and limiting art reflects badly on the country. - diversity in art is just as important as cultural diversity because it represents and supports many people in the community. -it brings people from different tastes togeather -controversial art has more complex topics and themes than conventional art hence making it more interesting Funding does not place harm to the public as it is not displayed in public and it is the discretion of the viewer to decide viewing it. Its not okay to discriminate a certain class or type of art Art supports society and to display themselves It is necessary to fund art Art doesnt have Sends a bad message of discrimination and non-diversity in art and implies the government does not support or appreciate artistic forms Not funding art what it will do- limit our expressiveness Why it is important-

Hand gestures, , eye contact , always sing post back to my argument, dont say points but arguments Intro-"Good evening I'm the first speaker of the affirmative team and we strongly believe that the government should fund controversial art" Define topicWe as the affirmative team define government as the Australian national government, Fund is a sum of money saved or made available for a particular purpose. Funding doesnt mean funding to create the piece of art but it can also mean to displaying the art or to buy it. Controversial art is usually not in the mainstream but does not have to be offensive; it also includes art which causes an issue or a hassle to many people. Explain model- The model we set out will be to fund more art in small groups and not in the main stream, these pieces are the hidden gems of art and will be a benefit for our society. What speakers will say- Tonight I will be talking about economic benefits of controversial art, the discrimination caused by not funding certain typed of art and how not displaying these pieces will keep the youth of today in the dark stopping progression of mindful thinking and artistic expression . Our second speaker will talk about the benefits of controversial art in the society, why it is not ok to stop funding it and what part controversial art plays in the society .Our third speaker will be summarizing our arguments. I will be talking aboutFirst of all to quote the great artist Richard Serra I dont think it is the function of art to be pleasing, 1. Diversity in our artistic environment is fundamental and not funding a certain type of art is direct discrimination to that certain field. -People also consider art to be a reflection of free speech in a society and not funding a certain type of art places an anti-expressionist view, this reflects badly upon our society. -All types of art must be funded to show that our society is a free heaven where all diplomatic ideas are accepted and not discriminated upon so we must fund controversial art. 2. -monetary profits to the government from funding art is sky high but controversial art encompasses elements which makes them more interesting and hence attracts more people, so usually controversial pieces of art worth much higher their counterpart. -A great example is Blue poles by Jackson Pollock, this piece was very controversial piece but bought by the Australian government for 1.3 million dollar in 1973, the decision was seen as an foolish option but now blue poles is worth 100 million dollars. This decision was a tremendous success and the controversial aspect of the pieces added the value to the piece. -Controversial art pieces gather attention and so attract more tourist which has even more advantages to the Australian Economy. Many museum and art facilities will see this as a huge advantage and so controversial art must be funded. 3. -Stopping funding to controversial art will make the youth of today blind to free expression and mindful thinking of a different sort. This is limiting the potential of our youth by a huge factor.

-Youth from different cultures, outer suburbs or troubled background are able to learn different ways of expressing themselves when they are exposed to numerous types of art, which opens up their career path and decisions about their future. -Funding these small groups also opens up the diversity in Australian art and makes understanding and communication between different cultures easier. -This would not only be a solution for racial issues but also to cases of bullying because it provides the bully with something else to do and a different way to express themselves, Another reason to fund controversial art. Summary of what I said- Funding controversial art will represent Australia to be a free country which doesnt discriminate artistic expression. -The profits to the governments from funding controversial art is exponential and the benefits to tourism and business makes it a game changer in the Australian economy. -Troubles in youth arise as their ways of expression are limited and so they must rely on narcotics, dangerous activates, damaging public property or abuse to attain that feeling of self-worth, but funding these small groups will change the future of our society.

-Government must consider the new forms of art such as graffiti which Is controversial but is still a genuine skill and fund such programs for the future of our society, community and country.