The devastating impact of Growing on his children has only become fully public in the years since Rivers's death in 2002. Rivers's youngest daughter, Emma Rivers Tamburlini, has been the most outspoken, stating that the project was nothing less than an act of betrayal and exploitation. In a 2010 article for Vanity Fair , she declared her father guilty of creating child pornography, using her and her sister as unwilling subjects to serve his own artistic and voyeuristic interests. She noted the years of torment she endured as a result of her father's actions, stating that she sees him not as a rose among thorns, but "as another thorn". Her older sister, Gwynne, has also spoken of the lingering hurt and anger, telling a reporter years later at a museum opening that the memory of the filming has haunted her since she was a pre-adolescent. While the sisters have said Rivers never touched them inappropriately, they describe the experience as profoundly traumatizing and a violation of the father-child relationship.
In 2010, New York University returned the films to the Larry Rivers Foundation following protests regarding their ethical nature and the lack of consent from the subjects.
"Growing" can also be read as a commentary on the expansion and evolution of art itself. By 1981, the art world had grown from the insular New York School of Rivers' youth into a massive, global, commercial industry. The artwork reflects this expansion by absorbing commercial design elements, photography references, and graffiti-adjacent marks, showing an artist expanding his vocabulary to match a rapidly changing culture. Provenance, Exhibition History, and the Art Market
: 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 growing 1981 larry rivers
Growing (1981) stands as a monument to an artist who refused to stop evolving. It is a visual symphony of a life lived intensely, captured through the lens of an artist who knew that to stay alive in art, one must never stop growing. For art historians, it remains a vital text; for collectors, a prize of postmodern innovation; and for viewers, a poignant meditation on the beautiful, messy process of human development.
The controversy surrounding the 1981 project remains a significant case study in art history, focusing on the tension between an artist's desire for "unvarnished" documentation and the fundamental rights of the subjects—particularly when those subjects are minors within the artist's own family.
created by the American artist Larry Rivers. It chronicles the physical puberty of his two young adolescent daughters, Emma and Gwynne, over a five-year period. The devastating impact of Growing on his children
Growing (1981) is a quintessential late-career Rivers piece. It features:
The genius of Growing (1981) lies in its subversion of the word "growing." For most people, growing implies progress. For Rivers, a student of history and a chronicler of the messy human condition, growing is synonymous with entropy.
Aside from the completion of the "Growing" project, 1981 was a significant year for Rivers' established career: Bio - Larry Rivers Foundation She noted the years of torment she endured
In Growing (1981), look closely at the line work. The charcoal is thick and "dirty." Rivers often wiped away lines before they were finished, creating a ghost of an alternative drawing underneath the final piece. This technique—known as pentimento —is crucial to the keyword "growing."
Rivers rejected the digital future (the early 80s saw the rise of the PC and early digital art). He insisted on the hand. In Growing , the hand is shaky, insistent, and sometimes ugly. That ugliness is the truth.