Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Scott Paul on February 1, 2016 at 7:05am

The one Joe has is I am sure authentic.  The photographs may be ok but since the one comes right from the Universal Publicity Department I would really research it.  It may be just an early example like Joe said.  I have never had Tierney myself.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on January 24, 2018 at 9:07am

I know this is an ancient thread but I was looking at it the other day to help out a friend with his (alas secretarial-looking) Tierney, my own being in storage. I dug mine out today to send my friend some pics so I thought I may as well include them here too.

This Tierney is as likely genuine as you’re ever likely to get. I say this because she has written half a book in French to expresses her gratitude for the time she spent at finishing school in the French-speaking part of Switzerland. I bought this at a movie fair in Zurich many moons ago along with a Michel Simon (with some sentiments about the Swiss film industry).

I’ve done a full and close-up shot because Gene didn’t do the autograph collector community any favours by signing in a dark part. As usual, jpgs also attached.

Full....

Close-up...

Attachments: No photo uploads here

• tierney full.JPG, 1.2 MB
• Tierney closest.JPG, 1.2 MB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on January 24, 2018 at 9:12am

Maybe this one shows the "Gene" better...

Attachments: No photo uploads here

• Tierney closer still.JPG, 2.1 MB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by pjc on January 24, 2018 at 9:45am

Very nice picture. I am afraid I know next to nothing about autographs. But was given about 500 vintage photos, about 200 signed. From what I have seen on other sites they look the same as yours. When I was trying to research my autographs I found history for sale gave me a good idea. And the have one or two like mine on there site, so I thought she may of had different signature at sometime. I have found the guys on here were fantastic helping me find out about them.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on January 24, 2018 at 11:03am

Thanks. The camera man obviously used his angles to accentuate certain features!

Yours is a tough one.

Generally speaking, signed photos sent by a publicity dept. are secretarial. As such, the signatures are usually pretty neat, legible and well placed (i.e. in a light part of the photo).

Yours ticks the boxes of neat, legible and well placed so the old alarm bells are ringing but it does have some similarities to mine (e.g. the capital "S").

Most of the Tierney's I have seen are "signed in later years" examples, like Joe's. In fact the only really early one I could find with a quick Google search was this beauty from Leading Lights Autographs. This is very similar to mine, particularly the "Gene" and is also not signed in an ideal place. It is priced at $185 and is actually pretty tempting. 

Attachments: No photo uploads here

• gtierney_1.jpg, 221 KB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by pjc on January 24, 2018 at 11:11am

Yes makes me think mine is defently sectorial. I have a few including a Monroe. But luckily most have come from someone on the set. So are good.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jason on June 5, 2019 at 11:06am

I know I'm a few years late to this thread, but I was also recently looking for examples of earlier Tierneys.  I have been collecting Gene Tierney for over 20 years now and of course, most of the ones I've seen or purchased are from her later years.  Some of the ones posted on here of what we suspect are secretarial, COULD be authentic if her signature changed sometime after the 1950s. We've all seen how drastic Ginger Rogers signature changed over the years (pre-1950s was really different). However, I am not totally ruling out that the original example posted by pjc could indeed be authentic. There are some things to consider and the one thing that seems to be consistent in all of her signatures over time is the way she combines the "T" and "i" in her last name. The cross of her "T" rolls directly into the "i" in both period styles, so there is some consistency (see my pic).  I would assume if somebody was signing on her behalf, they may not follow that pattern. Of course, anybody can duplicate it if they really wanted it to seem authentic, but it just seems less likely to me. We all carry over certain writing habits/styles throughout our lives (even if your signature has noticeably changed overall).  Also, there is some consistency with the way she has written her "G"s.

Does anybody have any other older examples to confirm this?  I'm surprised we don't have a vintage collector here who would be familiar with her signature over time. She was a pretty big star in the 40s.  

I would like some examples to go off of as I've been in the market for her vintage signatures as well.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by pjc on June 5, 2019 at 1:19pm

Historyforsale has a few similar to this.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by pjc on January 30, 2021 at 2:45am

Hi Jason interesting what you are saying about Ginger Rogers. I was told this also was not in her hand, but have seen quiet that are being sold.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe W. on January 30, 2021 at 6:53am

This Rogers signature was her early career style and is authentic. IMO.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by pjc on January 30, 2021 at 7:35am

Thanks for that Joe. Hope you are keeping well mate. Still got them all it the draw. Not sure what to do with them.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jason on January 31, 2021 at 10:50am

Hi pjc, I agree with Joe in that this could be authentic Rigers. I have about 3 examples like this all from the 40s. I was also told by a dealer that this style was likely secretarial,  but I'm guessing that opinion was based on comparing it to her post 1970s style signatures that are so prevalent. I have a hunch it's authentic though. 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page