Some people think that governments should give financial support to creative artists such as painters and musicians. Others believe that creative artists should be funded by alternative sources. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Sample Response
Although Proficient creators like musicians and painters are the assets of our society, whether they should be given sufficient fiscal support by their own authorities has triggered spirited debates. Some assert that government is obliged to generate money for their skilfulness, whereas others contend that alternative ways are to be taken into account. In my perspective, the latter should be considered highly, for they provide clear-cut advantages.
The idea is that government must lend a helping hand to its artists does have a handful benefits. One reason why people propose this is that artists could easily collect reasonable income to bring forth remarkable creations. The perceived general idea is that this readily available fund would encourage the talents to bring out the best in them, which, in turn, enhances remarkable achievements not only to the artists but also to the government. Nevertheless, it is highly likely that, if they get necessary resources as easily as ABC, they would develop laziness and this drawback retard the overall cultural promotion and improvement of their nation.
However, the counter arguments of supporting talents financially seem more likely to be effective rationally than the former. This is partly because people who work hard to earn money for their creative works will definitely value their job and thereby they strive tirelessly to achieve their dreams. They will, for example, estimate the needed costs and use it adequately. It is also relevant that artists can do further alterations in their creations as they are not bound by any rules and regulations, and they can clearly do whatever they want for better accomplishments. Moreover, each and every authority is mandated to rather consider other big issues, which is chiefly important to protect its public.
To put it in a nutshell, while getting promoted economically by the government is supportive, I believe, other options such as private funds are to be chosen, in addition to the government budget, it would be argued, could be allocated for other necessary purposes.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Capitalisation Original: Although Proficient creators Suggested revision: Although proficient creators Why it matters: Do not capitalise common adjectives in the middle of a sentence.
- 2. More common phrase Original: fiscal support Suggested revision: financial support Why it matters: "Financial support" is clearer and closer to the task.
- 3. Wrong collocation Original: generate money for their skilfulness Suggested revision: provide funding for their creative work Why it matters: Governments do not "generate money for skilfulness"; the intended meaning is public funding.
- 4. Natural opinion phrase Original: the latter should be considered highly Suggested revision: the latter should be given more weight Why it matters: This is a more idiomatic way to express preference.
- 5. Article and preposition Original: does have a handful benefits Suggested revision: does have a handful of benefits Why it matters: The phrase requires "of" after "handful".
- 6. Natural collocation Original: collect reasonable income Suggested revision: secure a reasonable income Why it matters: "Secure an income" is more natural than "collect income".
- 7. Less inflated wording Original: bring forth remarkable creations Suggested revision: produce strong creative work Why it matters: The original is understandable but unnecessarily grand.
- 8. Agreement Original: this drawback retard Suggested revision: this drawback retards Why it matters: The singular subject "drawback" needs a singular verb.
- 9. Natural phrase Original: cultural promotion and improvement Suggested revision: cultural development Why it matters: This is simpler and more standard.
- 10. Unclear phrase Original: counter arguments of supporting talents financially Suggested revision: arguments for alternative funding Why it matters: The paragraph is about non-government funding, not simply the counter-arguments of support.
- 11. Wrong adverb phrase Original: effective rationally Suggested revision: more convincing Why it matters: "Effective rationally" is not idiomatic.
- 12. Pronoun agreement Original: use it adequately Suggested revision: use the money wisely Why it matters: The pronoun is vague and "adequately" is not the best adverb here.
Suggested Rewrites
- Although Proficient creators Although proficient creators
- fiscal support financial support
- generate money for their skilfulness provide funding for their creative work
- the latter should be considered highly the latter should be given more weight
- does have a handful benefits does have a handful of benefits
- collect reasonable income secure a reasonable income
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Detailed feedback by IELTS writing criterion after the annotated essay.
Task Response
Both views are discussed and the writer gives a clear preference for alternative funding. Development is relevant, but the government-funding side is partly weakened by an unsupported claim that easy funding causes laziness.
Balance the discussion by giving one stronger public-benefit argument for government support and one clearer example of alternative funding.
Coherence and Cohesion
The essay has a logical discuss-both-views structure and uses contrast markers effectively. Some sentence-to-sentence links are heavy or awkward, and the conclusion becomes grammatically tangled.
Keep the three-paragraph body structure but use simpler topic sentences and make the conclusion state the final opinion in one clean sentence.
Lexical Resource
Vocabulary range is fairly wide, with phrases such as "triggered spirited debates" and "clear-cut advantages". However, several ambitious choices are unnatural or imprecise, including "skilfulness", "generate money" and "effective rationally".
Prioritise precise collocations over showy wording: "public funding", "private sponsorship", "creative work", "cultural value" and "artistic independence".
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
The writer attempts complex clauses, but article errors, subject-verb agreement problems and awkward clause patterns appear regularly. Meaning is usually clear, though some sentences are overloaded.
Break long sentences into shorter ones and check that each clause has a clear subject and finite verb.