1. Why did everyone who animated for Robert McKimson leave when the studio re-opened? I also don't know why most historians dislike him. It sucks, as his earlier work as a Director looked like Clampett's, but less zany.

2. Why do Chuck Jones' earliest cartoons look like have great depth perception? They're so round and look completely different. I know he was copying Disney's style, but his design changed so drastically. His late 50s on style is even different to that, too!

3. Why are Cats always beaten up in cartoons? I know they usually base it on Tom and Jerry, but even before that, cats had bad things happen to them! I also can't watch Tiny Toons because Furball keeps on being beaten up by Sweetie Pie. Seriously, that show took it too far! There's a line between comedy and tragedy and they crossed it WAY too many times. There's absolutely NOTHING funny about a poor kitten being beaten up by a sadistic bird! Most of the time it's Sweetie who starts it anyway, so it's not like Carma is punishing Furball or anything.

1. Most likely the older animators were getting tired of McKimson's stifling direction. Reading Mike Barrier's interview with McKimson, it's clear he had no affinity for Rod Scribner, in particular. Sadly, his layouts, while professional-looking, just weren't the most expressive. (Take a look  at how Scribner improved on this layout from "Fool Coverage".)

2. Jones's early cartoons, being Disney imitations, clearly tried to be as detailed as possible, to the point where at times the characters even looked "shiny". The round designs, if nothing else, are at least solid drawing.

3. Cats make good material for comedy. They can be sly or stupid or just instinct-following, but they're also domesticated and common.

And whether or not cats being beaten is funny depends on the execution. I'll be darned if "Chow Hound" and "Feline Frame-Up" aren't funny.

---