Growing 1981 Larry Rivers | TRENDING • COLLECTION |

Beyond the Canvas: Unpacking the Raw Vitality of "Growing" (1981) by Larry Rivers

In the sprawling, chaotic narrative of 20th-century art, few figures defy categorization as stubbornly as Larry Rivers. A Jewish kid from the Bronx who played jazz saxophone, hung out with the Beat Generation, and bridged the gap between Abstract Expressionism and Pop Art, Rivers spent his career smashing boundaries. But by 1981, Rivers was a different artist than the one who shocked the art world with Washington Crossing the Delaware (1953). He was older, more introspective, and grappling with a new set of anxieties: mortality, legacy, and the relentless forward march of time.

It is within this mature, reflective context that we encounter "Growing" (1981). At first glance, the title suggests nature, biology, or the wholesome passage of time. But in the hands of Larry Rivers, "growing" is a loaded, ironic, and deeply visceral concept. This article explores the history, formal qualities, and thematic depth of this lesser-known but crucial work, revealing why Growing remains a pivotal piece in understanding Rivers’ late-career genius.

Deconstructing the Visual Language of "Growing"

The painting Growing (oil and mixed media on canvas, approximately 72 x 84 inches) is a quintessential example of Rivers’ "multi-panel" approach. The canvas is not a single, unified perspective but a collage of fragmented moments—a visual diary stapled to a single surface.

Here is what the eye encounters:

  1. The Central Figure: A nude male torso, likely a self-portrait of Rivers at age 58, though intentionally distorted. The skin is rendered in muddy pinks, ochres, and bruise-like purples. It is not a heroic, Michelangelo-esque body. Instead, it is a body in flux—sagging in some areas, unnaturally stretched in others. This is the "growing" body, but not outward; rather, it is growing heavier, older, and more complex.

  2. Botanical Motifs: True to the title, Rivers intersperses painted and collaged images of plants, vines, and root systems. However, these are not delicate flowers. The roots look like arteries; the vines wrap around the figure’s limbs like constraints. One section of the canvas features a blown-up, Xeroxed image of a tree ring—a direct symbol of biological "growing" that doubles as a bullseye for time.

  3. Text and Graffiti: Rivers was a poet as much as a painter. Scrawled across the lower right quadrant, in his infamous, jittery handwriting, are lines of verse. They read: "Growing / is the mistake / the body keeps making / until it stops." This dark, elegiac text reframes the entire painting. Growing is not a miracle; it is an accumulation of errors—wrinkles, scars, fat, memory.

Conclusion

Growing (1981) is emblematic of Larry Rivers’s late practice: intimate, referential, and formally resourceful. By layering autobiographical content, painterly bravura, and cultural signifiers, Rivers creates a compact meditation on development—personal, artistic, and cultural—affirming his place in the conversation between mid‑century innovation and late 20th‑century painting’s pluralism. growing 1981 larry rivers

Further reading suggestions (not exhaustive): monographs on Rivers, catalogues raisonnés, and exhibition catalogues from the 1970s–90s provide deeper archival and pictorial context.

(1981) is a controversial video-series and subsequent large-scale painting created by American artist Larry Rivers

. The project is most notable for its explicit documentation of his teenage daughters' physical development through puberty, a work that has faced intense criticism and accusations of exploitation. The Video Series

Rivers filmed his daughters, Emma and Gwynne, at six-month intervals from 1976 to 1981.

: The footage shows the girls either naked or topless as Rivers asks them questions about their changing bodies and budding sexuality.

: The project was edited in the early 1980s with screen credits, intended to play on a continuous loop during exhibitions of his paintings. Controversy

: One of the subjects, Emma Tamburlini, has publicly condemned the film, describing it as "child pornography" and stating that the process contributed to her developing anorexia as a teenager. The 1981 Painting Beyond the Canvas: Unpacking the Raw Vitality of

The video series served as direct source material for a large-scale painting Rivers completed in 1981. Composition

: The painting incorporates still images captured from the video footage.

: True to Rivers' signature style, the work likely features his "drippy, watercolor quality" and a blend of representational figures with abstract elements. Historical Context

: Rivers was known for "smashing sexual taboos," previously painting his aging ex-mother-in-law naked in Double Portrait of Berdie Current Status & Legacy

The project remains largely unexhibited due to its sensitive nature and family opposition. Archive Dispute : In 2010, New York University returned the "Growing" series to the Larry Rivers Foundation after learning of the daughters' objections. Preservation

: The Foundation continues to preserve the film, arguing it is essential "art in itself" and vital context for the 1981 painting, despite Emma's requests for the footage to be destroyed. Larry Rivers' other controversial family portraits or his role in the Larry Rivers Paintings, Bio, Ideas - The Art Story

The work titled Growing" (1981) is a highly controversial documentary series created by American artist Larry Rivers The Central Figure: A nude male torso, likely

. This project has become a central point of debate regarding the boundaries between art, privacy, and exploitation. Overview of the Series 1976 and 1981 , Rivers filmed his two adolescent daughters, Emma Tamburlini Gwynne Rivers , at six-month intervals.

The series documents the girls' physical development through puberty. According to reports from The New York Times Vanity Fair

, the footage often shows them topless or naked while Rivers asks them questions about their changing bodies and sexuality. Intent vs. Reality:

Rivers originally intended for the film to be played in a continuous loop during a 1981 exhibition of his paintings. However, he was dissuaded by the girls' mother, Clarice Rivers , and the footage remained unexhibited during his lifetime. The Modern Controversy The series resurfaced in 2010 when New York University (NYU) was in the process of purchasing Rivers' archive from the Larry Rivers Foundation Daughters' Stance:

Emma Tamburlini has publicly condemned the work, describing it as "nothing less than child pornography" and stating that the experience caused her long-term emotional distress and contributed to an eating disorder. NYU's Response:

After the content of the tapes became public, NYU announced it did not want the footage

as part of its archive and returned the materials to the Foundation. Current Status:

The daughters have spent years seeking the return of the footage to ensure it is never made public, while the Foundation initially sought to keep the materials restricted during the daughters' lifetimes rather than destroying them.

Critics and art historians often cite "Growing" as a significant example of Rivers' "taboo-busting" style overstepping ethical lines. How would you like to frame the discussion around this specific piece for your post? N.Y.U. Doesn't Want Film of Larry Rivers's Naked Daughters

Legal Considerations