5 thoughts on “Joan Mitchell

  1. Rating: 3.9* of five

    The Book Report: This is a life, not a biography, in the sense that it offers more of a rounded picture of Joan Mitchell than a rigorous analysis of her milieu and her position and her place in history. Mitchell, a hard-drinking, hard-loving, hard broad, is famous if you know who she is, and invisible if you don’t. I suspect that would make her really, really mad. Mitchell was a daughter of privilege, wealthy dermatologist father and novelist/poet/editor ([[Marion Sobel Mitch

  2. This was a grueling book to get through. Joan was a hard person to like and an even harder person to read about. The episodes containing her mistreatment of friends and the passages about her drinking alone are disheartening. That being said, I can’t stop thinking about her story, even a few weeks after I’m done reading.

    I consider her one of my favorite painters so I came to the book as a fan. I had no idea she led such a privileged life growing up. I agree the backstory spelling out the histor

  3. 1. So far it’s a tedious review of family history. Interesting that Mitchell’s grandfather was an engineer who built bridges, including the original Van Buren Street drawbridge in Chicago.
    2. Now I’m in her NY days. I do not like her, which is good. It means the book is honest. It portrays Mitchell as fastidiously self-serving. OK, she’s also deeply troubled. And bent on being an artist. I’m at the part where she despises her wealthy parents, while living off their $$, of course. Once her father

  4. Delighted to discover a new-to-me artist in Joan Mitchell whose paintings stir me.

    I’m learning that art and artist are separate entities and one can appreciate one and not the other. For example, earlier this year I read Flannery O’Connor’s letters and came away with enormous admiration for her talent, vision, and character, but found her fiction very difficult to read. In that case I value the artist, not so much the art.

    With this book, it’s the reverse. Love the art, but Mitchell the artist,

  5. I wish Patricia Albers could write as well as Mitchell could paint.

    It’s frustrating to read descriptions of breakthrough or outstanding paints without an image to reference; this volume should have had many more images of Mitchell’s work, as where she was and who she was with had so much influence on what she painted. Albers’ fact-checking is sloppy; for example,Mitchell was in the 1989 Whitney Biennial; there was no Biennial in 1990, as stated in the book. There is a lot of speculation and di

Leave a Reply