Authenticity is Everything
Opinions Sought on this Supposed 1955 Jackie Gleason TLS
Hi All,
Gleason TLS - I find it inconclusive, AutographCOA also, as do some here. But I seek additional opinions based on this new huge scan - please click twice. I will only say I have never seen any secretaries of his sign "Jockie":
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on
-
BTW, that full scan is what I had to work with when buying. As it had a return policy I made an offer.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Shepherd on
-
The paper in the full scan looks much more aged. The apparent lack of flow and stops are also not visible. I am still curious about the paper that was used. If it has never been seen before, it is possible that the autograph is neither authentic nor a secretarial signature. It may very well be a clever forgery. Someone may have done some research to make it very convincing.
-
-
The paper is not quite that yellow and I exposed the scan to show as much of the ink track as I could so they look different.
-
-
Yes, that is precisely my point. Based on the original scan that you received, it was definitely worth a closer examination. Thanks for sharing this with us, Eric. I have been a fan of Jackie Gleason since high school.
-
-
Most welcome :) Its true - from the initial scan it appears worth taking a look at. In the end it didn't cost a dime. ACOA refunded as "inconclusive" and the seller refunded as well. Great exercise. BTW, I am in communication with PSA about the Gleason Facts page which are 50% no good.
-
-
Hi All,
Here is another Gleason TLS from the period. Same stationary and as I mentioned, I am not aware of any secretarial that reads "jockie":
-
-
So we have an nameless secretary, quite good considering she/he has the "Jockie" defined...but only for a relatively short time. I have to check and see when these start popping up.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next ›
© 2025 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
