We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.
In June of 2011, a major auction house sold a 1968/69 datebook containing multiple signatures, including several from the Jimi Hendrix Experience. Individual signatures and signature sets from this book were subsequently offered through various autograph dealers and auction houses. The majority of the Jimi Hendrix Experience signatures and inscriptions appear rushed and loose, but bear an overall resemblance to authentic exemplars. The cover of the book is adorned with detailed artwork credited to a Liz Shaw, giving the appearance that it was once owned by a devoted fan. However, setting these things aside and taking a closer look at the signatures together with another person has revealed a number of issues. First and foremost, authentic signatures and inscriptions closely resembling those in the book appear to have been used as templates. In addition, the signatures and inscriptions contained in the datebook show a number of inconsistencies including incorrect letter formations, stops and starts, letter separation issues, uncrossed “T”s, undotted “I”s, a lack of detail in areas, sharp angles, and one instance of a signature that appears to contain an attempt at correcting a mistake.
In 2013, another major auction house previewed a similarly signed University of Exeter diary dated 1966/67, which was withdrawn prior to the time of the auction. That book contained signatures and signature sets that clearly duplicate some of those contained in the 1968/69 datebook. Some of those signatures avoid apparent mistakes present in the datebook signatures, while others duplicate them.
This one appears to have been used twice, with one set including the "Best Wishes" inscription and the other the instrument names and "Jimi Hendrix Experience" inscription.
The set on the left appears to have missed the "N" in "Hendrix", which is written directly over the "D". The set on the right shows incorrect pen lifts between the "EN" and "DR" in "Hendrix." The pen is slightly shifted and the signature continues. I don't believe I've ever seen a clearly uncrossed "T" in "Mitch" outside of this datebook, which contains two.
Here are closer pics:
This page appears to contain a number of errors as follows:
Incorrect formation of the "O" in a clockwise direction.
A "V" that is too sharp and angular.
A pen lift and shift while forming the first "A" in "Always."
An incorrect formation of the second "A" in "Always." It appears that the formation of the top portion of this "A" was misinterpreted, and was mistakenly written in a counterclockwise direction.
A lack of letter separation between the "AN" in "And."
A stutter of the pen between the "IM" in "Jimi."
The heart is incorrectly formed.
This one appears to contain additional letter separation issues along with a change in direction during the formation of the "N" in "And." In addition, the formation of the "A" in "Stay" is incorrect.
The "A" should be formed in a single motion. Here you can see that the lower portion of the "A" has been drawn separately.
Note: The purpose of this discussion is to provide information to buyers and sellers of Jimi Hendrix Experience autographs. Please keep the scope of the discussion limited to the two books and their contents. Thanks!
Tags: 1968, Calendar, Datebook, Ewbank's, Exeter, Experience, Forgery, Hendrix, Jimi, Liz, More…Paddle8, Shaw, Sotheby's, T00421, T03860, U07893, X87664, thetreasuredrock
It's hard to tell which posts your replying to. You should click on "Reply" directly beneath those posts.
As I have said previously in this thread, this is an absolute case study by Ballroom into the alleged JHE signatures in this datebook. I have zero doubt that they are forged. The problem is getting the Emperor to believe that he really has no clothes [or in Sotheby's case, a legitimate autograph].
If PSA has already authenticated it, then Sotheby's is not going to do anything, until PSA withdraws its COA. The consignor certainly does not want to acknowledge its issues, and Sotheby's is financially motivated to see the sale proceed.
It really sucks for customers out there who have no clue about what is behind this particular item. Maybe we need to establish a "fake" or "questioned" autograph registry.
heres a very similar style Hendrix to the august 68 page Roger Epperson has seen this and doesnt think its authentic
No doubt at all. As far as I'm aware, these pages have passed through eight different auction houses, two autograph dealers and three third-party authenticators. I'm not aware of a reversal of opinion. I don't think PSA authenticated this particular set, but they did authenticate at least three others. I should say that this didn't start with PSA. They got caught up in it.
A couple of updates on this long running fiasco:
The elaborately framed May 1968 page sold on eBay for $25K, and was subsequently relisted.
PSA has added the awful Jan/Feb 1968 page shown in the OP to their Jimi Hendrix AutographFacts database.
I saw this yesterday. Very sad (did I just quote...nevermind).
I dunno, but the Autograph Facts database...the Autograph Facts page for Jackie Gleason has 2/3 bad, including a long-known well-established secretarial. :(
This is a very valuable and informative thread! Thank you.
Thanks, Eric.
Posted by CJCollector on November 27, 2024 at 2:23pm 0 Comments 1 Like
Posted by CJCollector on November 11, 2024 at 6:03pm 0 Comments 1 Like
Posted by CJCollector on November 9, 2024 at 2:32pm 7 Comments 0 Likes
© 2024 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin. Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service