Growing 1981 Larry Rivers -
Searching for "growing 1981 Larry Rivers" is not simply a query about a painting; it is an inquiry into how we age. In this monumental work, Larry Rivers took a universal verb—"growing"—and twisted it until it bled irony. He showed us that to grow is to accumulate loss. To grow is to watch your children surpass you. To grow is to watch the plant wither even as it reaches for the sun.
If you ever stand before this painting, do not look for hope. Look for honesty. Rivers offers no antidote to death, only a magnificent, sprawling, messy acknowledgment of the process. In 1981, Larry Rivers was growing. He was growing older, wiser, and more ruthless in his vision. And he left that growth on the canvas for us to witness—a beautiful, rotting garden of American art.
Key Takeaway for Collectors: Growing is a quintessential Larry Rivers—lyrical, vulgar, intellectual, and heartbreaking. It is a reminder that the best art about life is rarely about the highlights; it is about the long, strange, inevitable stretch in between.
If you have leads on the current exhibition schedule for Larry Rivers’ late works, or if you are looking to authenticate a study for "Growing," contact the Larry Rivers Estate.
In 1981, the American artist Larry Rivers completed a 45-minute documentary film titled "Growing." While Rivers was a celebrated "Godfather of Pop Art" known for his rebellious and innovative style, this specific project remains one of the most controversial and unsettling chapters of his career. The Project’s Origin
Beginning in 1976, Rivers set out to document the physical and psychological changes of his two adolescent daughters, Gwynne and Emma, as they navigated puberty. Twice a year for five years, he filmed them at his home, often asking them to appear topless or entirely naked. The Outcome of the Project
Upon completing the editing in 1981, Rivers faced immediate opposition. His former wife, Clarice Rivers, strongly objected to the film being shown publicly. Consequently, the project was suppressed and stored in private archives, remaining largely out of public view for several decades. Rediscovery and Public Debate
The existence and nature of the film became a matter of significant public record following Rivers' death in 2002. When New York University (NYU) moved to acquire the artist’s archives, the content of the footage led to a major controversy regarding the ethics of the project. The debate centered on several key points:
The Impact on the Subjects: In subsequent years, the daughters expressed that the filming process was a source of significant personal distress. Emma Tamburlini (née Rivers) has spoken publicly about the lasting negative psychological impact the project had on her life, advocating for the permanent removal of the footage from academic and public institutions.
Institutional Decisions: In 2010, following the public outcry and legal discussions, NYU returned the films to the Larry Rivers Foundation. The university indicated that the material was not suitable for its collections due to the nature of the content and the lack of consent from the subjects.
Ethical Boundaries in Art: The case became a landmark discussion in the art world, prompting biographers and critics to evaluate the line between artistic expression and the protection of minors. It serves as a study of how cultural standards and legal understandings of consent have evolved since the late 20th century.
The project remains a significant point of discussion regarding the responsibilities of artists toward their subjects and the legal protections afforded to children in the context of private and professional filming. Portrait of the Artist as Creep - Glasstire
(1981) is one of Larry Rivers' most controversial works, moving beyond his traditional canvas into the medium of film and video. While often categorized alongside his late 20th-century experimentation, the piece has sparked significant ethical debate regarding art, privacy, and the exploitation of family members. Overview of the Work growing 1981 larry rivers
Medium & Format: Unlike his famous "Pop Art" paintings, Growing was a series of films and videotapes edited into a final project in the early 1980s.
Subject Matter: The project documented the physical maturation of his two daughters, Gwynne and Emma Tamburlini, over a five-year period from 1976 to 1981.
Content: Rivers filmed his daughters at six-month intervals, often focusing on their developing bodies and asking them intimate, probing questions about puberty and sexuality. Artistic and Ethical Controversy
The piece was originally intended to be displayed in a continuous loop alongside his paintings. However, it remained largely unseen for decades due to its highly sensitive nature:
Lack of Consent: In recent years, his daughter Emma Tamburlini has publicly stated she felt extremely uncomfortable and did not consent to the filming.
Public Fallout: When the Larry Rivers Foundation attempted to donate his archives to New York University in 2010, the inclusion of Growing caused a "firestorm" of criticism. NYU eventually returned the tapes to the foundation to avoid legal and ethical complications.
Critical Reception: The work is often used as a case study for the "line between nudity and pornography" and the ethics of using family members as artistic subjects. Relation to Rivers' Broader Style
While Growing is a video work, it reflects Rivers' lifelong obsession with the human figure and "unfashionable" subjects. His style—often described by The Art Story as a bridge between Abstract Expressionism and Pop Art—frequently used "iconographic clichés" and personal imagery to challenge established norms.
🎨 Larry Rivers (1923–2002) – Growing, 1981
Often called the "godfather of Pop Art" (though he preferred "figurative realist"), Larry Rivers was known for his loose, gestural style and irreverent subject matter. By 1981, Rivers had long since moved past his early Abstract Expressionist influences, fully embracing a multimedia, collage-like approach that blended painting, sculpture, and everyday objects.
Growing (1981) is a quintessential late-career Rivers piece. It features:
The work reflects Rivers’ ongoing fascination with memory, sexuality, and the passage of time. By the early ‘80s, he was incorporating xerox transfers, spray paint, and even 3D elements into his canvases — breaking down the boundary between "fine art" and "just stuff." Searching for "growing 1981 Larry Rivers" is not
If you ever get a chance to see Growing in person (it’s in several private collections; one edition was shown at the Marlborough Gallery in NYC), notice how Rivers uses negative space and repetition — like a visual echo — to make the painting feel alive and, well, growing in front of you.
Why it matters today:
Rivers anticipated the postmodern mashup — mixing high and low, abstraction and representation, serious and silly. Growing feels like a 1981 punk-jazz poem about how art, like a vine, just keeps moving.
The keyword "Growing 1981 Larry Rivers" refers to a deeply controversial and largely unexhibited 45-minute video work by the American artist Larry Rivers (1923–2002). While Rivers is celebrated as a "godfather of Pop Art," his 1981 film Growing remains one of the most polarizing entries in his career, sparking intense debate over the boundaries between avant-garde art and the exploitation of family. The Origin and Content of Growing
The film was the culmination of a five-year project beginning in the mid-1970s. During this time, Rivers filmed his adolescent daughters, Gwynne and Emma, every six months to document their physical development.
Format and Method: In 1981, Rivers edited this footage into a single film. The content consists of Rivers instructing his daughters to remove their clothing while he uses the camera to zoom in on their developing bodies, specifically their breasts.
The Interviews: Accompanying the visual documentation, Rivers interrogated his daughters about their feelings regarding their bodies and burgeoning sexuality.
The Interrupted Debut: Rivers originally intended to debut the 45-minute cut as part of a 1981 exhibition. However, the girls' mother, Clarice Rivers, intervened and successfully prevented the public screening. Critical and Family Perspectives
The legacy of Growing resurfaced years after Rivers' death when his daughter, Emma Tamburlini, publicly condemned the work.
Condemnation as Exploitation: Emma has described the film as "nothing less than child pornography". She reported that objecting to the filming resulted in being labeled "uptight" or a "bad daughter" by her father.
The Artist's Defense: At the time, Rivers reportedly justified the project to his teenage daughter by telling her that her "intellectual development had been arrested" for not understanding the artistic merit of the work.
Institutional Reaction: When the existence of the film became widely known through Rivers' archived papers, New York University officials distanced themselves from the material, stating they wanted no part in showcasing Growing. Artistic Context of 1981
In the broader context of 1981, Rivers was experiencing a high degree of professional esteem. That same year, a major retrospective of his work traveled through European institutions, including the Kestner-Gesellschaft in Hanover and the Kunsthalle in Berlin. His other 1981 works, such as his cast paper relief Dutch Masters, continued his tradition of blending high art with consumer iconography—a stark contrast to the intensely private and controversial nature of the Growing project. If you have leads on the current exhibition
Today, Growing is often cited in discussions regarding the ethical responsibilities of artists when using their children as subjects, sitting at the uncomfortable "crossroads of Abstract Expressionism and Pop Art" where Rivers’ desire to "shatter taboos" collided with the reality of personal trauma. Archives And Privacy In The Age Of Accessibility - AVP
"Growing" (1981) is an experimental video project by artist Larry Rivers documenting his daughters from childhood to their mid-teens, which became the subject of intense ethical and legal controversy due to its content [1]. Following attempts to sell the tapes, the artist's daughter, Emma Tamburlini, publicly denounced the work as exploitative and sought its destruction, leading to its refusal by NYU [1]. The case is widely cited in debates concerning the boundaries of transgressive art and the protection of minors, according to reports from the New York Times and Vanity Fair.
Larry Rivers was a pivotal figure in American art, often described by contemporaries like Andy Warhol as the bridge between Abstract Expressionism and Pop Art. While he is celebrated for his "unique personality" and draftsmanship, the specific keyword "Growing 1981" refers to one of the most controversial chapters of his career: a documentary film project titled Growing, completed in 1981, which remains a focal point of intense ethical debate. The Context of Growing (1976–1981)
Growing was a multi-year documentary project where Rivers filmed his two daughters, Gwynne and Emma, at six-month intervals starting when they were roughly 11 years old. The footage, spanning from 1976 to 1981, recorded their physical development during puberty.
Rivers intended the 45-minute film to be an artistic exploration of human growth and a challenge to social taboos regarding the body. However, the methods he used—which included filming his daughters topless or naked and questioning them about their changing bodies—have been condemned by his children and critics alike. The 1981 Turning Point
In 1981, Rivers edited the five years of footage into a final version intended for public exhibition. This release was blocked by the girls' mother, Clarice Rivers, and the film was subsequently withheld from the public eye for decades.
The controversy resurfaced in 2010 when New York University (NYU) attempted to acquire the Larry Rivers Foundation archive. Upon learning of the film's contents and the lack of consent from the subjects, NYU returned the tapes to the Foundation. Emma Rivers Tamburlini has since characterized the work as child pornography and "a document of exploitation and abuse," leading to a movement to have the original tapes destroyed or permanently suppressed. Art Style and Wider Influence in 1981
Beyond the Growing controversy, 1981 was a significant year for Rivers' established career:
In the sprawling narrative of 20th-century American art, Larry Rivers occupies a unique, often unclassifiable space. He was a proto-Pop artist who preceded Warhol, a figurative painter when Abstract Expressionism was king, and a poet who blurred the lines between text and image. To search for "Growing 1981 Larry Rivers" is to land squarely in the mature period of this iconoclast’s career—a moment where his technical bravado met a deep, often uncomfortable, introspection about time, mortality, and the body.
Growing (1981) is not merely a painting; it is a manifesto rendered in charcoal and oil. At first glance, it appears to be a simple anatomical study of a plant. But as the eye adjusts, the viewer realizes that Rivers has done something subversive: he has turned the natural world into a psychological mirror.
If you are researching growing 1981 larry rivers, you likely have seen the piece (or a reproduction) and are trying to parse its strangeness. The composition typically features a stark, isolated plant—often a thick-stemmed succulent or a bleeding heart—set against a muted, grayish background.
But the "growing" is not passive.
To understand Growing, one must look at the artist’s timeline. By 1981, Rivers had survived the tumultuous 60s and 70s. He had moved away from the clean, appropriated imagery of his early Pop works toward a more complex, multi-paneled narrative style often referred to as "History Painting with a dirty mouth." He was also dealing with the recent death of friends (like poet Frank O’Hara) and the aging of his own body.
The year 1981 marked a cultural shift. The excesses of the 70s were giving way to the neoliberal conservatism of the Reagan/Thatcher era. In the art world, Neo-Expressionism (Basquiat, Schnabel) was beginning to roar. Rivers, always a step ahead, had already been doing a grittier, more emotionally raw form of figuration for decades. Growing was his response to the idea of "maturity" in a culture obsessed with youth.