Growing 1981 Larry Rivers

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.

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:

The keyword "growing 1981 larry rivers" is searched by those who have stumbled upon a strange image and need to understand why a drawing of a plant has the emotional weight of a Greek tragedy.

The answer is simple: Rivers painted the anxiety of existence. The plant is not just a plant. It is the artist in his studio at 58, looking at the window, realizing that he is still growing, still reaching for the light, even as his roots dry out and his leaves yellow.

Growing is not a pleasant picture. It is a necessary one. It asks the viewer: Are you growing, or are you just getting older? And it refuses to answer the question for you.

Key Takeaways for SEO:

Title: Organic Abstraction and Figurative Echoes: An Analysis of Larry Rivers’ Growing (1981)

Introduction Larry Rivers (1923–2002) occupies a unique position in the history of postwar American art. Often cited as a "godfather" of Pop Art for his incorporation of commercial imagery and text, Rivers consistently defied easy categorization. By 1981, Rivers had moved through Abstract Expressionism, figurative realism, and Pop, synthesizing these influences into a mature, idiosyncratic style. His painting Growing (1981) exemplifies this synthesis, using botanical metaphor to explore themes of creativity, mortality, and the cyclical nature of life. This paper argues that Growing represents a pivotal moment in Rivers’ late career, where the tension between abstraction and figuration serves as a visual allegory for the artistic process itself. growing 1981 larry rivers

Context: Rivers in 1981 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.

Visual Analysis Growing is a mixed-media work on canvas, typical of Rivers’ method of combining oil paint, charcoal, and sometimes collage elements. At first glance, the composition is dominated by organic, phallic-like vertical forms that rise from a dark, undulating earth. These forms—reminiscent of stalks, fungi, or even unrolled scrolls of paper—are rendered in muted greens, ochres, and fleshy pinks. The brushwork is loose and gestural, a clear debt to his Abstract Expressionist training under Hans Hofmann. However, unlike a purely abstract painting, Growing contains fractured figurative elements: a disembodied hand reaching upward, a suggestion of a facial profile near the lower right quadrant, and what appears to be a window or frame within the canvas.

The title, Growing, operates on multiple levels. Literally, it depicts biological growth. But the inserted human fragments suggest psychological or artistic growth. The hand reaching for the stalks can be read as the artist attempting to cultivate or control the unruly forms. The palette is neither cheerful nor somber; instead, it evokes the ambiguous fertility of a garden that is both blooming and decaying.

Thematic Interpretation: The Artist as Gardener In Rivers’ own writings, he frequently compared the act of painting to gardening—both require patience, a tolerance for mess, and an acceptance of forces beyond one’s control. Growing can be interpreted as a self-portrait of Rivers’ creative process in 1981. The vertical forms, which resemble both plant life and the erect brushstrokes of Franz Kline, represent ideas “sprouting” from the subconscious (the dark ground). The disembodied hand, a recurring motif in Rivers’ work from the 1960s onward, signifies the artist’s intervention without glorifying the artist’s ego. It is not a heroic hand but a tentative, searching one.

Furthermore, the painting engages with the theme of mortality. By 1981, Rivers had outlived many of his peers (Jackson Pollock, Frank O’Hara, Willem de Kooning was still alive but declining). The fungal, slightly morbid quality of the stalks—some appear to be wilting even as others grow—suggests a memento mori. Growth implies decay; creation implies destruction. This dualism is central to understanding Rivers’ late work: he refuses the purely heroic or purely nihilistic stance.

Comparison to Contemporaries Compared to the Neo-Expressionists of the early 1980s, Growing is remarkably restrained. Where Schnabel used broken plates and aggressive scale, Rivers uses a modest, intimate format. Compared to the Pop Art he helped pioneer, Growing is deeply subjective. It lacks the cool irony of Andy Warhol’s Oxidation Paintings (also from the late 1970s), which used metallic paint and urine to simulate decay. Rivers’ decay is organic and sad, not mechanical and cynical. The painting is closer in spirit to the late works of Philip Guston, who also returned to a clumsy, cartoonish figuration in the 1970s to explore existential themes. Like Guston’s Painting, Smoking, Eating (1973), Rivers’ Growing finds profundity in the awkward, bodily act of living.

Conclusion 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.

References (Selected)

"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. To understand Growing , one must look at

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.

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

" (1976–1981) is a controversial video series by American artist Larry Rivers

that documented the physical development of his two adolescent daughters, Gwynne and Emma. Rivers, often cited as a "Godfather" of Pop Art, filmed the girls at six-month intervals over five years, focusing on their maturing bodies and specifically their breasts. Artistic and Personal Context Methodology:

Rivers interviewed his daughters about their feelings regarding their changing bodies, sometimes including their mother, Clarice, in the frames. Intent vs. Reception:

While Rivers described the project as a document of development for his daughters to look back on, it remained unexhibited during his lifetime. In later years, his daughter Emma Tamburlini condemned the work, describing it as child pornography and stating it contributed to her developing an eating disorder. Controversial Legacy:

The series is often cited as a prime example of Rivers' "taboo-busting" nature overstepping ethical boundaries. It gained significant media attention in 2010 when his daughters sought the return of the footage from New York University. Career Milestones in 1981

Aside from the completion of the "Growing" project, 1981 was a significant year for Rivers' established career: Bio - Larry Rivers Foundation

The piece you are referring to is likely (1976–1981), a highly controversial video-series and documentary project by American artist Larry Rivers . Overview of " Key Takeaways for SEO:

The Project: Larry Rivers filmed his two daughters, Gwynne and Emma, at six-month intervals from 1976 until 1981.

Content: The series documented their physical development and transition through puberty into young adulthood.

Controversy: The work remained largely unexhibited for decades but became the center of a major ethical and legal debate in 2010. Critics and family members have characterized the footage as exploitative, with some even calling it child pornography due to its intrusive nature. Legal and Ethical Resolution

Return of Materials: In 2010, following a request from one of Rivers' daughters, New York University (which held the artist's archives) agreed to return the "Growing" films and videos to the family.

The "Line" of Ethics: The Larry Rivers Foundation initially resisted the destruction of these materials, arguing that an archivist's job is to protect an artist's work, leading to a complex discussion on the convergence of accessibility and ethics in art history.

Larry Rivers was often called the "Grandfather of Pop Art" and was known for pushing boundaries between Abstract Expressionism and Pop Art. However, Growing remains his most polarized and legally contentious work due to the personal nature of its subject matter. Documentary Growing 1981 Larry Rivers Download - Facebook

Growing 1981 is a controversial documentary by the American artist Larry Rivers that explored his daughter's puberty. Archives And Privacy In The Age Of Accessibility - AVP

It seems you're interested in information about Larry Rivers, an American artist known for his work in painting, sculpture, and other media, particularly in the context of his artistic development or specific works from around 1981. Larry Rivers (1925-2002) was a significant figure in American art, often associated with the Pop Art movement, although his work spanned a broad range of styles and themes.

If you're looking for information on Larry Rivers' work from 1981 or his artistic growth around that period, here are a few points to consider: