making mountains out of molehills.
got something you want to get off your chest? email your rants to titties.tuff@gmail.com. follow her teet tweets on twitter @tufftitties and show your support by becoming a fan on facebook!
Theme by nostrich.
Text
larry rivers’ archives: art or pornography?
photo via nyt
child pornography is NOT okay. despite the cultural differences that congest our world, this seems to be something everyone can agree upon. so when a now-deceased artist’s archival video footage is found that depicts such an act claiming it’s art, are we supposed to look the other way for art’s sake?
pop artist larry rivers died in 2002. eight years later, new york university is the proud new owner of his archives, purchasing it directly from the larry rivers foundation for an undisclosed amount. though his work seems to have always received praise, one piece in particular is raising eyebrows as well as debates: just where do we draw the line in defining art when children are involved, shown nude—and coerced into being nude—and overtly sexualized?
the video in question, titled “growing,” shows rivers’ daughters emma and gwynne in various stages of undress, taking particular interest in their “budding breasts.” a sort of virtual diary recording their journeys through puberty, rivers shot his daughters every six months to “document” their growth; rivers gives detailed descriptions of emma and gwynne’s new forms, asking the girls how exactly their bodies were changing and if boys have begun to notice these changes. there’s even a shot that exposes one of the girls’ genitals.
let it be known that this is no home movie. rivers’ edited his footage into a 45-minute film, which would probably have even been longer had his wife not urged him to end his project after five years filming. but mom clarice is no hero; she’s seen in the film exposing her own breasts as well and commenting on them, and then there’s the five years she let daddy film her daughters topless…
regardless of the videographer’s fame or the time period in which it was shot (the ’70s), the content of this film is disturbing. i mean, child pornography is a serious no-no with serious consequences if discovered. there are even countries who have made it illegal for women size a cup or smaller from baring their breasts in adult film as a means to deter lusting over the bodies of underdeveloped girls.
emma tamburlini, the younger rivers’ daughter who is now 43, is now on a mission to retrieve this piece from her father’s collection, hoping to protect herself as well as others. ”i kind of think that a lot of people would be very uptight, or at least a little bit concerned, wondering whether they have in their archives child pornography,” she says.
perhaps what is most upsetting about this whole ordeal is the fact that nyu, in response to emma’s crusade, has promised to not show the video while either of the girls are still alive. that they would even think to let people view this film at all is unfathomable. and unacceptable. child pornography robs a child of her innocence, not to mention all the psychological trauma that will inevitably ensue. that this has even become a matter of debate makes my blood boil, and i question the integrity of what i once considered a “prestigious” university.
what do you think?
