Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by RobTwoRs on July 24, 2014 at 5:11pm

Ha ha I should of known! Too good to be true item

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on July 25, 2014 at 8:44am

I believe this seller has had another two similar 10 x 8s (one also "signed" by Jane Russell) on ebay. After many re-lists one sold eventually but for only around $3,000 - indicating that something is amiss. I have bought photos from the seller before and I don't believe he is looking to deceive. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on July 25, 2014 at 10:56pm

I agree that a seller's ignorance does not help the buyer. The other two autographed 10 x 8s I mentioned are attached. Having looked at the $3,000 item again it does appear more genuine than the example at the top of this thread. In fact, I remember being a bit tempted myself but there were some things that put me off - I hope not wrongly. I thought the dedication was atypical and the Monroe too indecipherable. The one with Russell looks truly awful but it didn't sell anyway.              

Attachments: No photo uploads here

• MM 3000 - 1.jpg, 177 KB
• MM & Russell.jpg, 218 KB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ryelane on March 22, 2017 at 8:51am

What do you think of this? Real or secretarial? The paper is right, it's cut from an autograph book. Signed in fountain pen ink.

Attachments: No photo uploads here

• image.jpeg, 1.3 MB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on March 22, 2017 at 10:14am

Avoid like the plague!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ryelane on March 22, 2017 at 10:38am

Why? What makes you say that?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on March 22, 2017 at 11:03am

Apologies for not explaining myself. I hate it as well when people just say "not real" without explaining why. I guess I thought this one was too clear cut.

There is a very small chance that I may be wrong but for me this signature is too neat and even to be real. The upper case Ms look too laboured and the lower case letters appear too large, legible and upright. There is also no inscription, which is unusual.

Marilyn's signature was a bit of a slanted scrawl, except perhaps in the very early years (i.e. late 40s). The "Marilyn", in particular, is often hard to read and in two parts.  

Here is a very good article:

http://www.rrauction.com/marilyn.cfm

Your example could easily be one of the secretarial signatures shown in the article.

Hope this helps.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ryelane on March 22, 2017 at 11:33am

Thanks. I had my reservations due to the lack of pronounced slant. But if it's a forgery it's a very old one as the ink is from a fountain pen and faded, on autograph book style paper. Blue and not purple. So no iodine in the ink. So not from the 60s. If it's a secretarial it's one of the really good ones. The dot above the "I" is bang on the right place for a real sig. Not just above, and slightly dragged. The "m" in Marilyn is impressive but a little aimless. But who doesn't do that from time to time?

Another thing that bugged me was the line of the signature. It's almost as if it were written using lined paper. It's so straight! Even! Thanks for the opinion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ryelane on March 22, 2017 at 11:40am

Btw. Something else bothers me. The "roe" takes off from the page.... Higher than the rest of the sig. I think it looks right.....

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on March 22, 2017 at 11:47am

Are you referring to "your" example? What do you mean by "taking off from the page". I don't really see any great variation between "Mon" and "roe".

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Robert Chase on March 22, 2017 at 12:21pm

Forgery in my opinion. A secretary could have done a better job 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ryelane on March 22, 2017 at 1:09pm

Ok. Why do you think that? Because if it's a secretarial it's a very, very good one. If you use the online comparators. If it's a forgery it's an old one. Which is perfectly possible. Just Saying, " I think it's a forgery" doesn't help me much. Why do you think it's a forgery? Please?

• ▶ Reply

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