Ray Pointer's thinly veiled comments directed toward the hypothosis that I've furthered should be judged on their own merits. http://forums.goldenagecartoons.com/showthread.php?t=12570
Ray Pointer posted the following comments on the GAC Forum, "As for the thread on this over at The Animation Show, there was a "gentleman" in Seattle who called me to claim that a relative of his had designed the first BUGS BUNNY."
Perhaps Mr Pointer is confused or suffering from debilitating dementia as his assertion has no basis in reality. His comments are not only slanderous, but entirely incorrect. I've never claimed that any relative had any association with the subject.
I'm obliged to post the exchange between the two of us because Mr Pointer refuses to retract his erroneous comments.
Ray Pointer's original comments on the GAC FORUM,
"As for the thread on this over at The Animation Show, there was a "gentleman" in Seattle who called me to claim that a relative of his had designed the first BUGS BUNNY. I asked him to send me a scan of it so I could see. When I opened the Email and saw the scan, I told him that this was a generic drawing of a type of rabbit, but not a design that could be considered BUGS BUNNY. He was not content with the considerate response I gave him and posted a thread at both The Animation Show and here at GAC proposing his agenda that his relative designed the first BUGS BUNNY."
I responded to him via email because I'm banned from the forum that he frequents;
My response follows;
Hello Mr. Pointer,I understand that you're a well respected professional and as such I'm confident that your personal integrity demands accuracy.I certainly respect your right to disagree with my thoughts on the subject of the Hardaway drawing, but please don't ascribe statements to me that I've never made. Your mischaracterization of my argument makes it quite clear that you haven't really considered the possibility of its correctness.I've never said anything about any relative of mine having had anything to do with this drawing or with animation.I've never said that this was the first Warner Bros rabbit.I have said that I think this drawing is the drawing described in the encyclopedia Britannica http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/83789/Bugs-Bunny , and by Virgil Ross http://bugshardaway.blogspot.com/2007_10_01_archive.htmland by Mel Blanc in several interviews http://bugshardaway.blogspot.com/2007_09_01_archive.html .My thoughts regarding the drawing are well reasoned and substantiated with references every step of the way.Please afford me the common courtesy of disagreeing with my actual statements, not imagined statements.
Cordially,
Chris
Mr Pointer responded;
Dear Sir,
You will notice that I made no direct reference to you, or used your name in the matter you describe. So you have not been "mischaracterized" or damaged in any way. Since it happened quite a while ago, I can only recall certain specifics of what happened since it was essentially a trivial issue that most everyone has forgotten about.
I have been, and am presently dealing with some far more important family issues that outweigh any petty arguments such as this. So you say I'm wrong. Fine. But the majority, including myself tried to diplomatically explain that you were mistaken in your concept, and gave you all of the reasons why. Your citing Encyclopedia Britannica and other sources that support your position does not make it so since these sources can be, and have on occasion been mistaken. This was not simply from me, but from other actual authorities on the subject, Jerry Beck being one of them.
Very sincerely yours,
Ray Pointer
Since the recent exchange, I've been excluded from Ray's email.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Friday, February 1, 2008
Encyclopedia Brittanica's version
The Encyclopedia Brittanica seems to corroborate the Hardaway drawing theory.
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9095426/Bugs-Bunny
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9095426/Bugs-Bunny
Only one question from Milton Gray
A while back, a member of Apatoons offered to show the Hardaway drawing to some of the members. Some time later I received a forwarded copy of a comment received. The question, as presented to me, was from Milton Gray, a well respected and knowledgeable animation historian, a pioneer of the study of cartoon history.
From Milt Gray:"I have only one question regarding your [friend's]speculations over the origin of the "Speedy" rabbit drawing: If this is the way that Ben Hardaway was inclined to draw rabbits, then why didn't "the rabbit" look more that way in "Porky's Hare Hunt"?
I was a little suprised that there was only one question and even more suprised at the question. I had read an interview published in the magazine Funnyworld vol 12 from 1970. In the interview, Bob Clampett describes, in great detail, how he spent a weekend drawing the prototype rabbit for "his story" which was "Porky's Hare Hunt".
The interview lasted for five hours and took place in Clampett's office in Hollywood in June of 1969. Clampett was joined by his wife, Sody. The interview was conducted and recorded by Mike Barrier and Milton Gray. The interview is posted at http://www.michaelbarrier.com/Funnyworld/Clampett/interview_bob_clampett.htm
From Milt Gray:"I have only one question regarding your [friend's]speculations over the origin of the "Speedy" rabbit drawing: If this is the way that Ben Hardaway was inclined to draw rabbits, then why didn't "the rabbit" look more that way in "Porky's Hare Hunt"?
I was a little suprised that there was only one question and even more suprised at the question. I had read an interview published in the magazine Funnyworld vol 12 from 1970. In the interview, Bob Clampett describes, in great detail, how he spent a weekend drawing the prototype rabbit for "his story" which was "Porky's Hare Hunt".
The interview lasted for five hours and took place in Clampett's office in Hollywood in June of 1969. Clampett was joined by his wife, Sody. The interview was conducted and recorded by Mike Barrier and Milton Gray. The interview is posted at http://www.michaelbarrier.com/Funnyworld/Clampett/interview_bob_clampett.htm
Friday, January 11, 2008
Animation Enthusiast Jerry Beck & The Dissappearing Thread
I started a thread on an active animation forum. The thread asked a question about an omissision in the book, "Warner Bros, The Complete Visual Guide" by animation enthusiast Jerry Beck. The index lists Ben Hardaway as appearing on page 14 of the book. However, neither Bugs Hardaway nor his artwork appear anywhere in the book. As far as I can see, Hardaway is the only person completely excluded from the book. (Cal Dalton is also conspicuously absent) Why would the character's namesake be included in the index yet excluded from the book? It seems obvious to me that an honest, forthright, and complete history would have included the subject of the character's namesake creator. The subject of Hardaway was also obviously included in the original version of the text then purposefully removed. Hardaway's contribution wasn't minimized or diminished it was deleted entirely.
The thread got no response, so I started the same thread on the Animation Show forum. After about 50 people had viewed the thread it simply vanished. Confused, as the thread was neither offensive nor off topic, I reposted the same thread. A few hours later, Jerry Beck posted to the thread that he would be deleting the thread a second time within a few hours.
His exact response was, "I'll let David Gerstien explain it to you in this thread at GAC: http://forums.goldenagecartoons.com/showthread.php?t=10228There was some heavy last minute editing which caused that omission. I will be deleting this thread in a few hours."
I don't understand why a 60 year old topic would require, "heavy last minute editing".
I posted what had happened on the first forum (GAC) and had some response. Basically they told me that Warner Bros had purposefully obscured all details of the timing and history of the creation of the character and because of legal issues I couldn't discuss or post regarding the subject.
Years ago, I emailed the picture to Jerry Beck. He responded and remarked, "Thanks for sharing, the initials only heighten the mystery". He even said that he'd be willing to study the matter. I was told it would cost a hundred dollars a day and would take about three days. He said that his schedule wouldn't allow such study for a couple months. I told him that would be great and let to let me know when his schedule would allow. I checked with him every couple of months until it became clear that he was now avoiding me and the subject. Recently, when emailed, his response was, "I have no comment on this matter". I'm having trouble understanding why this cartoon enthusiast would simply ignore the greatest unresolved debate in cartoon history as well as delete all mention of one of the Golden Age's great contributors. Why would Jerry Beck, at the outset, show interest and appreciation and then proceed to ban the subject of the drawing and call it an "idiotic topic" as he did when closing the thread?
The title of the website "cartoon research" must have thrown me off, I was under the impression that such a forum would be where the research of cartoons would be discussed, especially within the "animation history" forum. Apparently there is a difference between "animation historian" and "animation enthusiast", the former concerned with scholarly study and the latter concerned with gossip and opinion.
The thread got no response, so I started the same thread on the Animation Show forum. After about 50 people had viewed the thread it simply vanished. Confused, as the thread was neither offensive nor off topic, I reposted the same thread. A few hours later, Jerry Beck posted to the thread that he would be deleting the thread a second time within a few hours.
His exact response was, "I'll let David Gerstien explain it to you in this thread at GAC: http://forums.goldenagecartoons.com/showthread.php?t=10228There was some heavy last minute editing which caused that omission. I will be deleting this thread in a few hours."
I don't understand why a 60 year old topic would require, "heavy last minute editing".
I posted what had happened on the first forum (GAC) and had some response. Basically they told me that Warner Bros had purposefully obscured all details of the timing and history of the creation of the character and because of legal issues I couldn't discuss or post regarding the subject.
Years ago, I emailed the picture to Jerry Beck. He responded and remarked, "Thanks for sharing, the initials only heighten the mystery". He even said that he'd be willing to study the matter. I was told it would cost a hundred dollars a day and would take about three days. He said that his schedule wouldn't allow such study for a couple months. I told him that would be great and let to let me know when his schedule would allow. I checked with him every couple of months until it became clear that he was now avoiding me and the subject. Recently, when emailed, his response was, "I have no comment on this matter". I'm having trouble understanding why this cartoon enthusiast would simply ignore the greatest unresolved debate in cartoon history as well as delete all mention of one of the Golden Age's great contributors. Why would Jerry Beck, at the outset, show interest and appreciation and then proceed to ban the subject of the drawing and call it an "idiotic topic" as he did when closing the thread?
The title of the website "cartoon research" must have thrown me off, I was under the impression that such a forum would be where the research of cartoons would be discussed, especially within the "animation history" forum. Apparently there is a difference between "animation historian" and "animation enthusiast", the former concerned with scholarly study and the latter concerned with gossip and opinion.
Another animation historian's opinion
I received more feedback from another animation historian,
"The fact that it is not prominently autographed by the artist, and that it is a very neatly, carefully drawn piece, rendered in watercolor and ink on expensive illustration board, would seem to indicate that it wasn't just a quick sketch for a friend or colleague."
"The fact that it is not prominently autographed by the artist, and that it is a very neatly, carefully drawn piece, rendered in watercolor and ink on expensive illustration board, would seem to indicate that it wasn't just a quick sketch for a friend or colleague."
Saturday, January 5, 2008
Another reference to the Hardaway drawing in Animation magazine 1990
This anniversary of Bugs article very clearly cites the sketch by Hardaway as the origin of the possesive apostrophe in Bugs' Bunny.
Monday, November 12, 2007
The whole thing just gets wierder
About a year ago I sent an email of the drawing to an animation enthusiast named Thad Komorowski.
He sent several replies that were mostly positive and supportive of the theory that I've put forth. Recently he posted a comment on an animation history forum calling me, "that crazy guy trying to pass of a drawing as proof that Hardaway created Bugs Bunny". The emails follow in their entirety, I could forward any of them if their origins are at all in doubt.
From July 19 2006
"Chris,What a wonderfully done piece! There are a few errors(mostly spelling, and the citing of Tortoise BeatsHare as a Disney cartoon).Hearing this from you, and from Bob Hardaway andMartha Sigall, I now have no doubt that Ben Hardaway originally created Bugs Bunny. Have you seen "Hare-Um Scare-Um"? It's a film Hardaway did in 1939. It is, in my opinion, a very crude, seriously in-need-of-fine-tuning, version of "A WildHare". For whatever it's worth, my view of Bugs always worked like this... Ben created the character and sparked some of his everlasting personality into it. But Avery totally fine-tuned Bugs Bunny making him into a more winning character (mainly in terms of the design and making him less obnoxious). I am sure you are aware that Hardaway also had his credit for his other big-time creation, Woody Woodpecker stolen by Walter Lantz. If it means anything, I wouldn't go to Steve Worth for any information. I can't say I was surprised by him dismissing your case. At heart, I know we're all geeks, but Steve is a super-geek. I don't think he works and lives off selling art and stuff on eBay. His mission in life isto correct every animation fact and rewrite animation history (usually in favor of Grim Natwick or ArtBabbitt). And also, a bit of fair warning (and please keep this part between us) but stay clear of Milton Gray on this matter as well. He is a very intelligent historian, but he is the biggest sycophant of Bob Clampett in the historian field. (I'd say world, but we all know John Kricfalusi gets that title). He will sugar-coat any event in Clampett's favor.When I showed Milt the Film Dope filmography I spoke to you about (where Clampett not only took credit forco-writing Avery's films, but also creating YosemiteSam and Sylvester!), he not only said he saw nothing wrong with it, but he also called me an asshole for saying that Clampett was a credit-grubber! When you enter into animation history like I do, you learn how dark and pathetic some people can be. You are doing good work, Chris, and I would keep up talking with Jerry Beck and Larry Loc about it. You might try getting in touch with Mike Barrier about it. I have forwarded your piece to my friend, Tim Cohea(aka "Sogturtle"), who will no doubt find it immensely interesting. Also, out of curiosity, how did you get my phone number? Not that I mind, but I don't think I've had it posted anywhere before. Please keep me up to date with any further discoveries. Best,Thad K."
July 19 2006
If it was Genevieve Komorowski, then that was my grandma. Regards to the shorts : There was a sequel to "TheTortoise and the Hare" (1934). It was "Toby TortoiseReturns" (1936). I'll check it tonight if there's any"Speedy" reference. Cecil Turtle definitley calls Bugs "Speedy" several times in the short. Keep in mind Jones' "Elmer's Pet Rabbit" was released very shortly before this, identifying the character as"Bugs Bunny" in the opening credits. I know your pain of trying to get the truth out in regards to animation history. I tried doing the same about exposing Bob Clampett as a brilliant director, but a compulsive liar awhile ago, but Milt Gray got wind of it and put an end to it, threatening to damn my reputation if I dare say anything negative about Saint Clampett. Right now I am working on a project to get the truth out on a very pretentious fellow (who IS still withus), so I'd rather concentrate on that rather than someone who actually did put out good cartoons. Best of luck, and I will get back to you re: TobyTortoise Returns. If you need copies of any cartoons, let me know, I have a pretty complete collection of Warner shorts.Best,Thad K.
July 19 2006
Chris,I just watched both Disney shorts "The Tortoise andthe Hare" and "Toby Tortoise Returns". No characteris referred to as 'Speedy' in either short.Cecil Turtle definitley calls Bugs 'Speedy' in Avery's"Tortoise Beats Hare".Best,Thad K.
July 22nd 2006
Chris,I'd be happy to host an essay on the drawing on my blog. I'll give a fuller response when I get back from work tonight. Did you show the drawing to Martha Sigall? What did she say? She'd know better than Steve Worth. I am absolutely certain that that piece was done by a Warner artist, FOR WORK. It's way too professional to be some kind of card to Jones. Best,Thad K.
July 22nd 2006
Chris,OK here's my full reply.Mel Blanc embelished his career just like Jones andClampett (though not nearly as bad as the latter). I believe he claimed to come up with Porky Pig's voice(which he didn't, Joe Doughtery was his first voice).But the difference is that he's giving someone ELSE credit for this creation. That's what makes me think it's something that speaks in Hardaway's favor.You mentioned speaking with Martha Sigall... Have you shown Martha the drawing? If anyone would know, it'd be her. Let's do a little more research on the drawing (askMartha, like I said), and I'll help you write up an essay on this case. I will post it to my blog and let others see what they think of it. Does that sound like a plan? Best,Thad K.
July 22nd 2006
It just has too fine a draftsmanship to be from any other studio. Someone at Warners did that drawing, because NOBODY at any other studio drew rabbits like that, before or after Bugs. And I've seen Bugs Bunny ripoffs from various studios, and they don't even come close to THAT drawing. It's professional too, as the ink line is too strong to be for leisure.Best,Thad K.
July 22nd 2006
It LOOKS like Hardaway's work to me, but I'm not an expert at these things, and guys like Mark Kausler would probably know. The drawing is definitley of Bugs Bunny I know. I was going to suggest you sending me a check to cover printing costs of running your piece in APATOONS (aprivate publication I belong to, as do Leonard Maltin,Mike Barrier, Jerry Beck), but I'm wary of informing Milton Gray (who is also in the group) of this. He'd find some way to attribute the drawing to Clampett. It might be worth the risk, since most of those guys are pretty knowledgeable, and we are barred fromtelling anyone outside the group the contents of the magazine.Best,Thad K.
July 22nd 2006
Well Mark's reply is fairly decent. I haven't talked with Mark much, but he's an expert in animation (and one of the best animators alive today) and I tend to believe anything he says. I do not like Barrier or Worth's tone toward you. Barrier is getting a little ruder in his old age (both he and Milt Gray are pushing retirement age). He pissed off Art Babbitt's daughter recently really badly. Steve Worth doesn't know shit (he's pushing 500pounds).What I'm afraid all will dismiss (and maybe myself,sorry) is the time-frame for the image you're claiming though. That drawing is by a Warner employee, but if it was definitley done good into production of A WildHare. What I suggest is just keep trying with different people to find out what it is. I would run it in Apatoons, and I would send you a copy of MY zine (I'mnot allowed to send the other people's sections/zines). I would then forward any reactions to you.Best,Thad K.
Oct 21st of 2007
Virgil was a sweet guy and was very open and honest about his co-workers. I think he was one of the many animators who just viewed it as a job they were lucky enough to have. So yeah, his word could be trusted.~Thad
And then Nov 4th 2007 I happened upon a post from Thad on an unrelated thread , this latest comment sure seems diffeent than the previous comments.
Originally Posted by Thad Komorowski
Wow, this is crazier than that guy trying to pass off his rabbit drawing as proof Ben Hardaway created Bugs Bunny.
He sent several replies that were mostly positive and supportive of the theory that I've put forth. Recently he posted a comment on an animation history forum calling me, "that crazy guy trying to pass of a drawing as proof that Hardaway created Bugs Bunny". The emails follow in their entirety, I could forward any of them if their origins are at all in doubt.
From July 19 2006
"Chris,What a wonderfully done piece! There are a few errors(mostly spelling, and the citing of Tortoise BeatsHare as a Disney cartoon).Hearing this from you, and from Bob Hardaway andMartha Sigall, I now have no doubt that Ben Hardaway originally created Bugs Bunny. Have you seen "Hare-Um Scare-Um"? It's a film Hardaway did in 1939. It is, in my opinion, a very crude, seriously in-need-of-fine-tuning, version of "A WildHare". For whatever it's worth, my view of Bugs always worked like this... Ben created the character and sparked some of his everlasting personality into it. But Avery totally fine-tuned Bugs Bunny making him into a more winning character (mainly in terms of the design and making him less obnoxious). I am sure you are aware that Hardaway also had his credit for his other big-time creation, Woody Woodpecker stolen by Walter Lantz. If it means anything, I wouldn't go to Steve Worth for any information. I can't say I was surprised by him dismissing your case. At heart, I know we're all geeks, but Steve is a super-geek. I don't think he works and lives off selling art and stuff on eBay. His mission in life isto correct every animation fact and rewrite animation history (usually in favor of Grim Natwick or ArtBabbitt). And also, a bit of fair warning (and please keep this part between us) but stay clear of Milton Gray on this matter as well. He is a very intelligent historian, but he is the biggest sycophant of Bob Clampett in the historian field. (I'd say world, but we all know John Kricfalusi gets that title). He will sugar-coat any event in Clampett's favor.When I showed Milt the Film Dope filmography I spoke to you about (where Clampett not only took credit forco-writing Avery's films, but also creating YosemiteSam and Sylvester!), he not only said he saw nothing wrong with it, but he also called me an asshole for saying that Clampett was a credit-grubber! When you enter into animation history like I do, you learn how dark and pathetic some people can be. You are doing good work, Chris, and I would keep up talking with Jerry Beck and Larry Loc about it. You might try getting in touch with Mike Barrier about it. I have forwarded your piece to my friend, Tim Cohea(aka "Sogturtle"), who will no doubt find it immensely interesting. Also, out of curiosity, how did you get my phone number? Not that I mind, but I don't think I've had it posted anywhere before. Please keep me up to date with any further discoveries. Best,Thad K."
July 19 2006
If it was Genevieve Komorowski, then that was my grandma. Regards to the shorts : There was a sequel to "TheTortoise and the Hare" (1934). It was "Toby TortoiseReturns" (1936). I'll check it tonight if there's any"Speedy" reference. Cecil Turtle definitley calls Bugs "Speedy" several times in the short. Keep in mind Jones' "Elmer's Pet Rabbit" was released very shortly before this, identifying the character as"Bugs Bunny" in the opening credits. I know your pain of trying to get the truth out in regards to animation history. I tried doing the same about exposing Bob Clampett as a brilliant director, but a compulsive liar awhile ago, but Milt Gray got wind of it and put an end to it, threatening to damn my reputation if I dare say anything negative about Saint Clampett. Right now I am working on a project to get the truth out on a very pretentious fellow (who IS still withus), so I'd rather concentrate on that rather than someone who actually did put out good cartoons. Best of luck, and I will get back to you re: TobyTortoise Returns. If you need copies of any cartoons, let me know, I have a pretty complete collection of Warner shorts.Best,Thad K.
July 19 2006
Chris,I just watched both Disney shorts "The Tortoise andthe Hare" and "Toby Tortoise Returns". No characteris referred to as 'Speedy' in either short.Cecil Turtle definitley calls Bugs 'Speedy' in Avery's"Tortoise Beats Hare".Best,Thad K.
July 22nd 2006
Chris,I'd be happy to host an essay on the drawing on my blog. I'll give a fuller response when I get back from work tonight. Did you show the drawing to Martha Sigall? What did she say? She'd know better than Steve Worth. I am absolutely certain that that piece was done by a Warner artist, FOR WORK. It's way too professional to be some kind of card to Jones. Best,Thad K.
July 22nd 2006
Chris,OK here's my full reply.Mel Blanc embelished his career just like Jones andClampett (though not nearly as bad as the latter). I believe he claimed to come up with Porky Pig's voice(which he didn't, Joe Doughtery was his first voice).But the difference is that he's giving someone ELSE credit for this creation. That's what makes me think it's something that speaks in Hardaway's favor.You mentioned speaking with Martha Sigall... Have you shown Martha the drawing? If anyone would know, it'd be her. Let's do a little more research on the drawing (askMartha, like I said), and I'll help you write up an essay on this case. I will post it to my blog and let others see what they think of it. Does that sound like a plan? Best,Thad K.
July 22nd 2006
It just has too fine a draftsmanship to be from any other studio. Someone at Warners did that drawing, because NOBODY at any other studio drew rabbits like that, before or after Bugs. And I've seen Bugs Bunny ripoffs from various studios, and they don't even come close to THAT drawing. It's professional too, as the ink line is too strong to be for leisure.Best,Thad K.
July 22nd 2006
It LOOKS like Hardaway's work to me, but I'm not an expert at these things, and guys like Mark Kausler would probably know. The drawing is definitley of Bugs Bunny I know. I was going to suggest you sending me a check to cover printing costs of running your piece in APATOONS (aprivate publication I belong to, as do Leonard Maltin,Mike Barrier, Jerry Beck), but I'm wary of informing Milton Gray (who is also in the group) of this. He'd find some way to attribute the drawing to Clampett. It might be worth the risk, since most of those guys are pretty knowledgeable, and we are barred fromtelling anyone outside the group the contents of the magazine.Best,Thad K.
July 22nd 2006
Well Mark's reply is fairly decent. I haven't talked with Mark much, but he's an expert in animation (and one of the best animators alive today) and I tend to believe anything he says. I do not like Barrier or Worth's tone toward you. Barrier is getting a little ruder in his old age (both he and Milt Gray are pushing retirement age). He pissed off Art Babbitt's daughter recently really badly. Steve Worth doesn't know shit (he's pushing 500pounds).What I'm afraid all will dismiss (and maybe myself,sorry) is the time-frame for the image you're claiming though. That drawing is by a Warner employee, but if it was definitley done good into production of A WildHare. What I suggest is just keep trying with different people to find out what it is. I would run it in Apatoons, and I would send you a copy of MY zine (I'mnot allowed to send the other people's sections/zines). I would then forward any reactions to you.Best,Thad K.
Oct 21st of 2007
Virgil was a sweet guy and was very open and honest about his co-workers. I think he was one of the many animators who just viewed it as a job they were lucky enough to have. So yeah, his word could be trusted.~Thad
And then Nov 4th 2007 I happened upon a post from Thad on an unrelated thread , this latest comment sure seems diffeent than the previous comments.
Originally Posted by Thad Komorowski
Wow, this is crazier than that guy trying to pass off his rabbit drawing as proof Ben Hardaway created Bugs Bunny.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
