We're an eBay affiliate and may be compensated on purchases made through clicks.

John Lennon Signed Lithograph

John Lennon Signed Lithograph. Signed in pencil circa 1969. Edition 129/300
Is this autograph authentic?????? Thanks

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on May 13, 2022 at 8:19pm

It’s my understanding that John produced the 14 drawings in the Bag One series of lithos, including the one in the OP, which appears to be one of the originals. The signature appears consistent with others he signed on those lithos.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on May 13, 2022 at 8:55pm

The point is he did 13 drawings in ink on paper. and only one on zinc. Someone else transferred an image like John's to the zinc plate used to strike them. Then some else printed them. John should be doing all of this and pulling the prints with an eyes for quaiity, choosing which he likes and destroying the rest. When all is done and dry, by others, John comes along and signs it - having never seen it before. Who chose the paper etc? This is a signed transferred reproduction of his drawing. It is not original by law and logic.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by JK on May 13, 2022 at 8:49pm

That was an interesting article and well-researched but ultimately it's just one person's opinion. Most of the random legal references would have no relevance in this situation and are presented out of context.

I know a little about the art market and the situation with the Lennon prints is nothing compared to what goes on and what is considered acceptable in the art world.

As for posthumous issue of prints, Yoko presumably controlled John's estate, so it was within her right to issue them. (Certain representations in the marketing of them could be problematic, of course).

In regard to the print in the original post, if the signature is real then that's what would be most important.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on May 13, 2022 at 9:07pm

13 of the 14 images are reproductions made from transfers like John's drawings by someone else and then applied to the zinc plate by another and then printed by another as mentioned in the article, like his 1969/70 PA admitting he did some of the work. I doubt John did, or even oversaw, the printing of "Frontis Peice". What would prevent Yoko from getting this article shut down for slander?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by JK on May 13, 2022 at 9:19pm

Many artists don't pull their own prints (etchings or silkscreens). And virtually none (or none) print their own serigraphs or lithographs (those are done by professional printers).

An artist (or their estate) can authorize the production of their artwork in any format.

Many of the world's top artists don't even create their own artworks - they specify the design and they hire studios or art fabricators to actually create the artwork.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on May 13, 2022 at 9:30pm

Yes, I know. I've been producing artwork since my first 1 man museum show in 1987. I framed and hung every painting myself.

Anyway, its a practice dating way before Rembrandt's production line and way after Warhola's oxidation art. But he at least cut his own stencils from time to time in The Factory.

The meaning of "original" should not be be muddied at any cost.