# AI-generated art: agree or disagree: IELTS Writing Task 2 samples

Writing Task 2 - Technology

Some people believe that pictures and music created by artificial intelligence cannot be considered art. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

Write at least 250 words.

Source: Sample answers and examiner notes are written by Testmigo.

## Band 6 sample

Nowadays artificial intelligence can make pictures and music in only few seconds. Some people say that these works cannot be called art. I partly agree with this opinion, because it depend on how much a human is involved in the work.

Firstly, I agree that many AI pictures are not real art. Art is about the feelings and experiences of the artist. When a computer make a picture, it does not have any feelings, it only copies the style of millions of pictures from the internet. For example, my friend typed "a cat on the moon" into an app and he got a nice picture in one minute, but he did not do anything creative. In my opinion this is not art, it is only a product of a machine. Also, many artists are worried because AI is using their works without permission.

Secondly, however, sometimes AI can be a tool for artists, like a camera or a computer software. In the past, some people said that photography is not art because the camera do all the work, but now photos are shown in museums. A musician can use AI to create a melody and then change it many times and add his own lyrics and instruments. In this case the human is making the important decisions, so I think the result can be called art.

In conclusion, I partly agree that AI pictures and music is not art. If a person only press a button, the result is not art. But if the person use AI as a tool and put his own ideas into the work, it can be art. I think in the future people will accept this kind of art more and more, like they accepted photography.

**Examiner notes.** This Band 6 essay gives a relevant, partly agreeing position and supports both sides with examples, such as the friend who typed "a cat on the moon". However, the worry about permission is mentioned and then dropped, and the musician example is general rather than explained. Linking is mechanical ("Firstly", "Secondly, however"), and errors such as "it depend", "the camera do all the work" and "a computer software" are noticeable but do not block meaning. For Band 7, the writer would explain why intention matters and develop each point fully.

## Band 7 sample

Artificial intelligence can now produce convincing paintings and songs within seconds, and this has led some people to argue that such work cannot be considered art. I agree with this view only partly: when a machine generates a piece with almost no human input, the result is not art, but when a person uses AI as a tool to express their own ideas, the outcome can be.

The strongest argument for the first view is that art depends on intention. A painting or a song matters to us because someone chose to communicate an emotion or an idea through it. An image generator has no experiences to share; it simply predicts what a picture matching a few typed words should look like. If someone enters a short instruction such as "sunset over a lake" and accepts the first image, there is very little that could be called creative, so it seems more accurate to describe the result as a product than as a work of art.

However, this does not apply to every use of AI. Many new technologies were rejected by the art world at first. Photography, for instance, has been criticised in the nineteenth century because a machine seemed to do the work, yet photographers are now recognised as artists because of the choices they make about subject, light and timing. Similarly, a composer might generate dozens of musical ideas with AI, reject most of them, and then rework the best into a piece that reflects their own style. In such cases, the human vision remains central.

In conclusion, I believe the question is not whether AI was used but how much of the work reflects human decisions. Images and music produced by simply typing a few words should not be considered art, whereas works in which people direct and shape the technology deserve that name.

**Examiner notes.** This Band 7 essay keeps a clear position throughout: AI output is not art without human intention, but can be when a person directs it. The photography comparison is well chosen and the "sunset over a lake" example makes the first view concrete. However, the composer example is asserted rather than explained, and there is a tense slip ("has been criticised in the nineteenth century"). For Band 8, the writer would develop the second view as fully as the first and use more precise language.

The Band 8 and 9 samples are free with an account on the [topic page](https://testmigo.com/ielts/writing/topics/task-2/ai-generated-art).

## Common questions

### How many words should I write?

At least 150 words for Task 1 and 250 for Task 2. Writing a little more is fine; an answer under the minimum loses marks.

### Can I use these sample answers in my test?

No. Memorised material is marked down and you will not get this exact question. Use the samples to see what each band does with the same task.