Performing arts are as ever present today as the past, be it dance, music, opera, theatre or circus. For performing arts to be presented to audiences, there needs to be buildings (stages, auditoriums, theatre halls or stadiums) specially built for such activities. Money, human and environmental resources are allocated for such activities namely remuneration for the construction and maintenance of such buildings, the labour force used to construct and areas specified for such land use respectively. Further, it is this allocation of resources that creates opportunity costs. This opportunity costs, in turn, may cause people to perceive that money, human and environmental resources are wasted. No doubt, the biggest issue against performing arts is that they take away precious resources that may be allocated to other uses like medical facilities and education. In my opinion, I beg to differ that performing arts, instead of being a waste of resources, contributes positively to society locally in Singapore.
"Art is to carry forward the life , death place where no art " （Romain Rolland 1866-1944）
So aptly quoted by Romain Rolland, in the following article, I shall further elaborate my position that performing art “forwards life” concerning mainly the economic, social and cultural context.
Performing arts, with their iconic buildings, create a branding for the city, allowing it to be recognizable internationally. When one see photos of Sydney Opera House, one is reminded of Australia and closer to home, when one sees the Esplanade, one is reminded of Singapore. With such buildings, indigenous people not only can easily identify where to go for performing arts, but also attract tourists. When tourists spend, it produces a multiplier effect that benefits other industries like the food, hotel and transport. No doubt, money, human and environmental resources are used for constructing such buildings for the performing arts, however,...