We're an eBay affiliate and may be compensated on purchases made through clicks.
Authenticity is Everything
People with Razors..or, How to Destroy a Jackie Gleason.
Very disturbing. Dedication, 1/21/53 postmark and context sliced away...I should have kept it just to prevent this.
Plastic really will ruin the planet...
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Scott Paul on
-
Absolutely, I agree 100 percent! Especially considering this was not plain white index card it was a postal card that gives you pretty much the exact time it was signed! A rock solid autograph with great proof. Just so very sad in my opinion. I know that a person buying an autograph can do anything they want with it, but that doesn't mean I have to like it lol.
-
Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on
-
I just feel bad.
-
-
And I am darn glad I got his for $24 total!
Click for full images:
-
-
-
I think a majority of us that collect classic entertainment feel the same way. Your new Jackie Gleason is great so glad you were able to get it.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Mark Saunders on
-
I feel your pain
-
Permalink Reply by Stepeanut on
-
The mentality behind removing personalisations appears to be to allow the new owner to suspend disbelief and pretend that the autograph was signed for them. They are not interested in historical context or preservation of the original item. In that sense it certainly is vain and also very, very childish. I can almost understand it for modern sports stars, if someone is looking to create a display piece. But for 99.99% of items, especially where the subject is long dead, just leave it alone. Even using a matte board to cover the personalisation seems childish to me. You’re kidding no one, least of all yourself.
Cutting books is anathema to me. Maybe if the book was severely damaged, but the signature page was salvageable. I’ve only ever been tempted one time in this particular scenario, but in the end I sold the book on to someone else rather than inflict more damage myself.
-
-
Interesting discussion! In general with very few exceptions such as if damage was going to spread, I wouldn't cut a signature out of something that I have in my collection. And even still I would try to find out if there was an alternative. I feel that I would be missing the context behind the item and also I like having the additional handwriting. Also, I try to think about how once you do something how easy is it to undo. Although nobody is perfect....
In general I do not like slabbed items but have bought them from time to time if best value and I am not paying anything for them to be in the slab. Also, if they are so rare that is all I can find. Part of that is the additional cost and I find them more difficult to store as well.
I recall in the past seeing an autographed piece where the subject's autograph was attached with the person's first and last name each cut out separately and then attached to a card. How do you feel about that?
-
-
You mean they took for example a "Jackie" from one item and "Gleason" from another?
-
-
I am obviously reading incorrectly!
-
-
I may be causing the confusion because I just used Jackie Gleason as an example of what DP was saying. I think he means taking a first name from one source and a last name from another source then pasting the two on a card to try to make a "signature." I have seen examples of people taking a first name of a star and pasting that on a card. I do not recall ever seeing a first name pasted down then a last name pasted down. That is not a true autograph in my book.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next ›
Photos
Videos
Groups
© 2024 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
