Chuck Jones And Bob Clampett

[Dafffy Duck]

It's well known that Chuck Jones had a severe dislike of Clampett (Not sure of Clampett's feelings to Jones though). But does anyone know if any of the information on this link is true, because here it sure seems like Jones was the one who was wrong.

http://www.michaelbarrier.com/Essays/Milt_Gray/Gray_on_Clampett.htm

[Matthew Hunter]

I'm starting to really, really hate this debate. It's interesting to know how the great animation artists interacted with one another, but what's the point in perpetuating this idea of Chuck Jones and Bob Clampett not getting along? Seriously, does it make the quality of their work any better or worse? It's almost like there are people who take SIDES on this, and claim that one was a better director than the other based on a clash of egos in the 70's!

I could almost compare this whole thing to the arguments music fans have about the Beatles...about "just how well did John Lennon and Paul McCartney get along?" and digging into documented accounts of infighting before the band broke up. As though it somehow negates the talents and creative products of one or the other. John Lennon made great music, as did Paul McCartney, as did George Harrison and Ringo Starr. When the final product is so great, who really cares about how one felt about the other on any given day?

We can say that "The Hep Cat" and "Porky in Wackyland" are great cartoons, just as we can say that "Rabbit Seasoning" or "One Froggy Evening" are great cartoons. As with all great artists, these great works have lived on long after the passing of their creators. Can't we just say that both Charles M. Jones and Robert Clampett were great cartoon directors, and leave it at that? :tweety: :coyote:

[Thad]

Tired of this. But the only comment I'll leave is that the article linked in the first post is hopelessly biased. So yes, in some aspects, it is wrong. It's quite a few years old though, and its internet debut was on the BobClampett.com site, if that says anything.

[Toonami]

OH NO NOT THAT!! ANYTHING BUT THAT!!

This is another war waiting to happen. I suggest someone closes this thread before we have an army of undead animators, lead by Captain Clampett and Commander Jones who start WWIII. Snafu vs. Mr. Hook.

[JIM ENGEL]

I dunno, I find it interesting. I can't think of any artist that I admire, or have taken inspiration from, whom I did not want to know about in terms of their personal lives/biographies. And that would include their relationships w/peers.

I don't really have casual interests in the sense that I have no interest in the PERSON behind the WORK. So, I'd disagree with those who say "the work is great, and who cares about the people and their feelings?". I do. A lot. It's history, and it makes the whole subject more interesting. The thread title is revealing enough---maybe those who find the discussion so taxing should simply not read it or participate.

I can add THIS, for those who care---I talked to Bob and Sody Clampett about the "feud", and they both seemed hurt by it. And Bob Clampett had nothing bad to say (at least to me) about Jones. He talked about them being good friends when they were starting out (and roomates), and seemed unhappy that they were no longer friends.

[Jack]

I dunno, I find it interesting. I can't think of any artist that I admire, or have taken inspiration from, whom I did not want to know about in terms of their personal lives/biographies. And that would include their relationships w/peers.

I don't really have casual interests in the sense that I have no interest in the PERSON behind the WORK. So, I'd disagree with those who say "the work is great, and who cares about the people and their feelings?". I do. A lot. It's history, and it makes the whole subject more interesting. The thread title is revealing enough---maybe those who find the discussion so taxing should simply not read it or participate.
I'm with you, it's interesting from a historical perspective to know what these people were like, just as it's interesting and insightful to know what figures like George Washington or Abraham Lincoln were like as people. How can you really analyse a piece of art without looking at the artist even a little bit? Of course, I hate it when people judge the work of an artist based on who he was personally, and some people in this Clampett/Jones debate do seem to do this.


Jack :bosko:

[Thad]

I agree with Jim's comments, but a lot of people were manipulated (whether they've realized by now or not) by either Jones or Clampett, and it gets tiring knocking down bogus claims by either one of their pushers who can't see the light that both were imperfect like every human being who ever lived.

[Dafffy Duck]

Thanks to JIM ENGEL and Jack, really I don't understand why if people hate this subject so much, they bother to post. Its simple, if your not interested don't post.

[Jon Cooke]

Its simple, if your not interested don't post.

Its also just as simple to use the search box and read the dozen or so threads about this exact same topic. ;)

[Jack G.]

There are quite a few threads here on this subject for folks to explore.
Just search for 'em.

As for the Milt Gray article it's just more of the same:
this person said this about Bob, that person said that about Chuck.
No real facts, just hearsay.

Whether you're a fan of Clampett or Jones,
no one tends to like hearing there heros might be flawed human beings.

[JIM ENGEL]

How do you separate "facts" from "hearsay" in discussions like this? If some old-timer had an experience with say,Clampett, to HIM it's a fact. Does that person relaying it to Gray, and then Gray relaying it to us (his readers)via an essay make it "hearsay"?


What would satisfy you?

[dendawg]

http://www.creakyjoints.com/graphics/images/desktops/beatingadeadhorse_400x300.jpg

^Says it all.:rolleyes:

[Daffysleftfoot]

Personally, I don't mind hearing about the good and/or the bad about any famous figure. Great art is great art no matter what the artist did within his/her lifetime.

For example, I assume most of us know what Woody Allen did with his adopted daughter. :eek: All the same, I still enjoy his movies because he's still a great writer (even if work does seem exhausted nowadays). It's the same with Clampett, Jones, and everybody else.

I say let there be as many Clampett/Jones discussions as this site's server can hold. Just keep everything civil and we should be fine.

[JIM ENGEL]

Great art may be great art, but certainly (for me, anyway) an artist can cross lines that make it impossible for me to enjoy their work any longer.

People simply arguing or disliking eachother (like say, Jones & Clampett) wouldn't qualify for that, but Michael Jackson does.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

The controversy will never end because no one can prove one side's claim or the other's. All we have to go on is the recollections animators made in their autumn years.

Overall, though, not as big a mystery as the murder of the Black Dahlia...but still interesting.

[Thad]

Great art may be great art, but certainly (for me, anyway) an artist can cross lines that make it impossible for me to enjoy their work any longer.

People simply arguing or disliking eachother (like say, Jones & Clampett) wouldn't qualify for that, but Michael Jackson does.

Yes exactly. The egomaniacal thing of Clampett, Jones, Johnston, Thomas, and Kimball doesn't really bother me - that's their prerogative.

[The Silver Fox]

Wasn't there a one riverary between Jones, Clampet and Freeling over who came up with :ysam: idea orginally, I read that that what started the whole problem. But Since Clampett was leaving WB soon, it was never resolved and

with Clampett's Death in 1980's, it was never resolved.

The riverary between Jones and Freeling from the information i did read, says they never did solve even when Freeling passed away.

They way i see it is that no one who was in the TT would resolve there differances.