Larry Rivers, a figure often associated with the transition from Abstract Expressionism to Pop Art, was known for using his personal life as primary source material. In the mid-1970s, this inclination took a turn that would later be heavily scrutinized.
The piece is noted for its specific technical and thematic elements:
The proposed acquisition led to a public outcry when it was revealed that the daughters did not consent to the footage being preserved or viewed. One of the daughters publicly spoke out against the film, describing it as a violation of privacy rather than a work of art. In response to the controversy and the realization that the family was not in agreement with the archive’s inclusion, NYU withdrew from the deal, returning the footage to the foundation. Ethical Implications in Art History
: Upon reviewing the material, NYU officials expressed grave concerns. The university eventually declined to accept the specific tapes related to the daughters, citing ethical standards and the potential for legal complications. growing 1981 larry rivers
Journalist Tracy Clark-Flory, writing in Salon, starkly described the footage as including "close-up shots of one daughter's genitals and detailed commentary by Mr. Rivers on the girls' changing bodies". This led to a furious public debate: was this a legitimate artistic exploration of a taboo subject — female adolescence — or was it simply a form of parental exploitation and a violation of trust? For many, the question was clear: a father filming his adolescent daughters' naked bodies for his own artistic purposes was not a sign of progressive thinking but a profound abuse of authority.
The late 1970s and early 1980s were a period of reflection for Rivers. Having achieved fame in the 1950s with works like Washington Crossing the Delaware , he spent much of the 1970s on large-scale historical pastiches and multimedia experiments. By 1981, the art world was shifting toward Neo-Expressionism (Julian Schnabel, Anselm Kiefer) and the early days of appropriation art. Rivers, then 58, did not follow these trends. Instead, Growing looks inward. The work was created at his studio in Southampton, New York, and reflects a pastoral, almost meditative quality—a departure from the frenetic energy of his earlier jazz-influenced pieces.
Today, the film remains a symbol of the boundaries of artistic freedom. It is cited in discussions regarding the protection of minors in creative projects and the evolving standards for archival ethics in the 21st century. Share public link Larry Rivers, a figure often associated with the
Rivers interviewed his daughters about their feelings regarding their changing bodies, sometimes including their mother, Clarice, in the frames. Intent vs. Reception:
The controversy did not fade. In 2023, a new documentary titled premiered, revisiting the artist's entire life and legacy, with a significant portion dedicated to "Growing" and its aftermath. The film does not shy away from the difficult questions, featuring interviews with Rivers' children (including his son) who reflect on the complex and often painful nature of their father's behavior.
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. One of the daughters publicly spoke out against
[1976: Filming Begins] ──> [Bi-Annual Sessions (Ages 11-16)] ──> [1981: 45-Min Film Edited] ──> [Exhibition Blocked / Archived] The Archival Scandal and Public Outcry
Larry Rivers’ Growing (1981) is not a radical departure but a quiet masterpiece of synthesis. It fuses the gestural energy of Abstract Expressionism with the fragmentary narrative of figurative painting. Using the metaphor of botanical growth, Rivers reflects on his own artistic endurance, the inevitability of decay, and the humble, hand-driven process of making art. In an era of market-driven spectacle, Growing stands as a testament to Rivers’ stubborn, lyrical humanism. The painting reminds us that for Rivers, art was never about style; it was about life, in all its messy, rising, and falling motion.
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.
The revelation of the project's existence prompted a public discussion about the impact of such artistic endeavors on the individuals involved.