Dear Babs,

One of my greatest music heroes recently started painting. So when a local gallery showed his art in a pop-up show, I was excited to go. But his paintings are really not good. He’s had a very long career as a musician and always puts a ton of effort into his music and it shows. But his paintings look like what they are: indulgent play by someone who hasn’t done the work to understand what they are doing. The problem is that now when I listen to his music, all I can think about are his paintings, and it’s starting to spoil the experience. I guess my question is, are there any examples of famous musicians who eventually became excellent painters? Is there hope for my hero’s paintings?

—Frustrated Fan

Dear Frustrated Fan,

Of course, it’s possible for your hero to make better paintings, but his visual art probably won’t surpass the impact and importance of his music. Becoming an innovative and important artist (musician or painter) takes time and dedication, at least if you want your work to mean something more than name recognition. It’s unfortunate but predictable that galleries are eager to capitalize on his fame to make a quick buck, with little serious investment in ensuring the work can withstand critical scrutiny.

There are few famous artists who are equally well-known for their music AND their visual art. Kim Gordon from Sonic Youth is a good example; she’s just a good artist in general and her visual art is as exploratory as her music. It’s the same with Yoko Ono, but she’s not really a painter. Miles Davis made some inspired paintings and drawings that could hold their own in most galleries today. Joni Mitchell can draw as lyrically as she can sing. What all these musicians/artists have in common is they had to work on their craft, try, fail and try again—and hold their visual work to the same standards as their music. That is a very rare ability indeed. It would actually be surprising if your hero was one of the few who could pull it off