Virgil Ross & Bugs' Bunny in Animato! 1989

[SEATTLECHEF]

I found an interview of Virgil Ross in an edition of Animato! magazine.

I've posted the entire interview @ http://bugshardaway.blogspot.com/

If you don't want to read the whole thing, an interesting paragraph follows;

*** You worked with him on the first Bugs Bunny cartoon. That was A Wild Hare, back in 1940.

"Yes, that was all Tex's stuff. We received orders from the story department that they needed a drawing of a bunny. We all did drawings and tacked them on the wall, and the storymen voted on them. We had one writer nicknamed "Bugs" Hardaway, and for some reason, this one drawing became known as "Bugs' Bunny". Leon Schlesinger liked the sound of the name, and told them to keep it, and that's how Bugs Bunny got his name. Years later, before he died, Hardaway tried to get some credit for making the character, which he probably deserved. But Warner Bros. owned the right to everything we created." ***

[Jack G.]

Thanks for the heads up.

[Chow Hound]

Thanks SEATTLECHEF. It's an interesting read for me, as I don't own any of the animation history tomes most people here seem to have.

[SEATTLECHEF]

You're welcome, I'm happy to contribute.
I read an old post from one of the moderators on the BCDB forum that said he'd read an interview with Virgil Ross wherein Virgil said "hands down" it was Hardaway that really deserved the credit for the character's personality. I was naturally interested so I emailed him to ask where I might find that interview. He answered that he thought it was in a local newspaper but he really had no idea where to find it. I started then to search and found a reference to an interview in the bibliography of the book Reading the Rabbit. I found the reference on Google book search (incidentally, I have that book and hadn't found that footnote). The reference said that a full description of how the personality was chosen could be found in Animato! #19. After some searching, I found one copy for $4.95. I'll have to admit that I was suprised to find such a ringing endorsement of Hardaway's contribution and I'm obviously intrigued by his mentioning, "this one drawing became known as Bugs" Bunny" as I had theorized such long before finding this magazine. I think it a good thing that Ross seems to have been well regarded as far as his character is concerned, trustable. (I still don't know if this is the same interview that the moderator remembered.)

[Sogturtle]

Chris~

I've had the John Province interview with Virgil for quite a while in my files, there's also another interview with Ross but I can't remember who did it (it's in my files along with the Province one). But it has nothing to help you with your theory.

The problem is the same as with any number of other interviews with mentally "with-it" but elderly animators, that is, much is remembered well but some is clearly misremembered.

There is no dispute that the "Bugs" name is for Ben Hardaway. BUT the whole scenario of the various artists at the studio submitting drawings had occurred when Hardaway & Dalton's two rabbit cartoons were being planned out (and possibly in the early Winter of 1937 for "Porky's Hare Hunt" since by the time of 1939's "Hare-um Scare-um", designer Charlie Thorson had been hired to be character designer)... Though of course Thorson's labeling HIS model-sheet drawing with "Bug's Bunny" was for the latter cartoon.
But definitely NOT when Tex was writing and directing "A Wild Hare" in early 1940. Hardaway QUIT Schlesinger in Jan. 1940 and was NOT a part of the story crew working for Tex at that juncture on "A Wild Hare" (the storymen in question were Rich Hogan, Dave Monahan and Robert Givens). As mentioned previously, Bob Givens also assisted Avery by drawing up the definitive model-sheet for "A Wild Hare". The "Bugs Bunny" name of course DID linger thanks to Schlesinger's secretary (Rose) lobbying for it.

The one REAL gem of this interview is something that is not even of interest to you , namely that Virgil pointed out that Chuck Jones and Bob Clampett first co-directed cartoons together before being split up to head separate units.

[Thad]

Originally Posted by Sogturtle

The problem is the same as with any number of other interviews with mentally "with-it" but elderly animators, that is, much is remembered well but some is clearly misremembered.
.......
The one REAL gem of this interview is something that is not even of interest to you , namely that Virgil pointed out that Chuck Jones and Bob Clampett first co-directed cartoons together before being split up to head separate units.

Bonus points if you can spot the discrepancy.

[Detroiter]

Originally Posted by Thad Komorowski

Bonus points if you can spot the discrepancy.

But aren't the discrepancies part of the fun of it all? Let's remember what has happened over the past thirty or so years. In the 1930's and '40's, cartoons are very popular but frankly most of the cartoon studios operated in the movie industry's margins. Almost all of the creators of these films were all but anonymous. (Chuck who? Friz who?).

Then the baby boomers grow up watching the things all day long on television, seeing far more cartoons then moviegoers could have. And they love them. In the late 1960's boomers like Mike Barrier and Leonard Maltin begin to hunt up these anonymous creators, who are now in late middle age, and interview them. Barrier, Maltin, and the likes of Joe Adamson, Mark Langer, Mark Kausler, the Midrot/Animania crew (Jerry Beck, Jim Korkis, etc.), the Animato folks and other fellow travelers start to compile this marvelous oral history of the cartoon business and cartoon creation. These and others begin scratching around and digging up animator drafts and copyright deposits and whatever other written documentation still exists, to say nothing of the drawings scattered hither and yon, and the films themselves become more and more available. All of them - and all of us - work on this gigantic puzzle to try to figure out what happened 60-80 years ago when these creators were young and making these great little films.

And puzzle it is, because the definitive record of their activities went out in the dumpster literal moments after it was created, and we're left with bit and pieces and memories, faulty and excellent. These memories are helpful and insightful, but cannot be definitive. An old client of mine asked for help on a new project which he said was just like something we had worked on about nine years ago. When I pulled out the files, I found that I had completely misremembered an important aspect - got it completely wrong.

So Virgil's comment is an important indicator that Bob and Chuck co-directed, but not definitive. More digging, more fun.

F Flood

[Sogturtle]

Originally Posted by Detroiter

But aren't the discrepancies part of the fun of it all? Let's remember what has happened over the past thirty or so years. In the 1930's and '40's, cartoons are very popular but frankly most of the cartoon studios operated in the movie industry's margins. Almost all of the creators of these films were all but anonymous. (Chuck who? Friz who?).

Then the baby boomers grow up watching the things all day long on television, seeing far more cartoons then moviegoers could have. And they love them. In the late 1960's boomers like Mike Barrier and Leonard Maltin begin to hunt up these anonymous creators, who are now in late middle age, and interview them. Barrier, Maltin, and the likes of Joe Adamson, Mark Langer, Mark Kausler, the Midrot/Animania crew (Jerry Beck, Jim Korkis, etc.), the Animato folks and other fellow travelers start to compile this marvelous oral history of the cartoon business and cartoon creation. These and others begin scratching around and digging up animator drafts and copyright deposits and whatever other written documentation still exists, to say nothing of the drawings scattered hither and yon, and the films themselves become more and more available. All of them - and all of us - work on this gigantic puzzle to try to figure out what happened 60-80 years ago when these creators were young and making these great little films.

And puzzle it is, because the definitive record of their activities went out in the dumpster literal moments after it was created, and we're left with bit and pieces and memories, faulty and excellent. These memories are helpful and insightful, but cannot be definitive. An old client of mine asked for help on a new project which he said was just like something we had worked on about nine years ago. When I pulled out the files, I found that I had completely misremembered an important aspect - got it completely wrong.

So Virgil's comment is an important indicator that Bob and Chuck co-directed, but not definitive. More digging, more fun.
F Flood

Hi Frank~

Thanks for the supportive input! In all truth there is no discrepancy in what I wrote, though there is very often times a discrepancy in people remembering every single thing correctly. Like with any witness SOME of what they say will be dead on the money and some will be flat-out misremembered or whole incidents completely forgotten.
And you and I both know that when you get two or three folks telling the same (or basically the same) story THEN you've really got something strong to go on... Kinda like the two Katz-unit animators supporting Jones story that he was co-director with Clampett on the first Katz unit cartoons. THERE you've got corroborating witnesses, three voices basically makes a group that's HARD to ignore.

AND Virgil was in a special position "way back then" to have known exactly what went on since he was animating in the Avery unit right alongside Jones and Clampett when the order came to send them heading over to the Iwerks operation and then the succeeding Katz unit. Ross would've LITERALLY heard it first-hand from his boss Avery AND from Jones and Clampett that Bob and Chuck were going to co-direct. So let's see... that means that there's at least three animators who remember that (plus of course Jones ).

[SEATTLECHEF]

Originally Posted by Sogturtle

Hi Frank~

Thanks for the supportive input! In all truth there is no discrepancy in what I wrote, though there is very often times a discrepancy in people remembering every single thing correctly. Like with any witness SOME of what they say will be dead on the money and some will be flat-out misremembered or whole incidents completely forgotten.
And you and I both know that when you get two or three folks telling the same (or basically the same) story THEN you've really got something strong to go on... Kinda like the two Katz-unit animators supporting Jones story that he was co-director with Clampett on the first Katz unit cartoons. THERE you've got corroborating witnesses, three voices basically makes a group that's HARD to ignore.

AND Virgil was in a special position "way back then" to have known exactly what went on since he was animating in the Avery unit right alongside Jones and Clampett when the order came to send them heading over to the Iwerks operation and then the succeeding Katz unit. Ross would've LITERALLY heard it first-hand from his boss Avery AND from Jones and Clampett that Bob and Chuck were going to co-direct. So let's see... that means that there's at least three animators who remember that (plus of course Jones ).

Virgil Ross (whose "special position" you described) and Mel Blanc both tell the same basic story that in 1938 the story department ordered a drawing of a bunny and that "we all did drawings" and then the Hardaway drawing was chosen.
Would a third voice make that hard to ignore? Are the testimonies of the first two easy to ignore?

[SEATTLECHEF]

Originally Posted by Sogturtle

Chris~


The problem is the same as with any number of other interviews with mentally "with-it" but elderly animators, that is, much is remembered well but some is clearly misremembered.



The one REAL gem of this interview is something that is not even of interest to you , namely that Virgil pointed out that Chuck Jones and Bob Clampett first co-directed cartoons together before being split up to head separate units.

Tim,
How come when Virgil describes that everyone offered drawings, the Hardaway drawing was chosen, and this one drawing became known as Bugs' Bunny, you want to characterize him as misremembering? Yet, in the next breath you characterize his memory, of Jones and Clampett co-directing, a "real gem". Let's be realistic, either his memory was functional or it wasn't. It doesn't make any sense that he misremembered when it doesn't suit you yet he has a gem of a memory when it interests you.

I hope you know that I'm trying to understand the developement of the personality, I'm not trying to irritate or contradict you. I appreciate your voracious appetite for the subject and your depth of knowledge. (Although nobody is correct 100% of the time)