Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Abcd on August 24, 2018 at 1:50pm

I've darkened the handwriting a bit. Does the signature look like the text?

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Abcd on August 24, 2018 at 2:10pm

Look at this way. PSA/DNA will accept it. RR auction will accept it. All other auction houses will accept it. 

I can't find that killer document. So that's me done. I'm at 50/50.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rfitzz on August 24, 2018 at 2:20pm

Thanks for all your help.  At least you came up to 50% from 45% being authentic !!! LOL.  Thanks again, please chime in whenever you can or if others like Andreas get involved.  I appreciate your input.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rfitzz on August 24, 2018 at 2:19pm

The signature and the text look the same to me.  Are you saying it does to you as well ?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Abcd on August 24, 2018 at 2:36pm

It looks better now I've darkened the writing. I think, unless anyone else can prove otherwise, It's authentic. But would I put up $1000 for one? No, I would need a bit more certainty. I need to be 90%+ before I buy. Auction houses and authenticators' threshold is somewhat lower.

The search goes on...…………………………………

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rfitzz on August 24, 2018 at 3:25pm

..and on...and on....

Thanks

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Abcd on August 25, 2018 at 12:33am

I going to go with authentic, unless anyone can prove otherwise.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paulrichards on August 24, 2018 at 7:50pm

Authentic signature and postscript

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paulrichards on August 25, 2018 at 9:11am

Rfitzz and Michael Wain:

Appreciate your ongoing discussion but this will be my last posting on your JFK letters etc. I get the sense that we are having parallel conversations. With all due respect Rfitzz, your need for 100% certitude is unrealistic and unreasonable.  In the end only one and possibly two people know whether JFK signed those letters (jfk and possibly Evelyn Lincoln) and both of them are deceased. An expert opinion is just that, an opinion. Experts are sometimes wrong—but more often than not they are right. But they were not born experts— they acquired their knowledge by looking, seeing, and handling a lot of material before offering up their opinions. This was before the days of the Internet and so it was no accident that these people were typically autograph dealers and auctioneers. Now with the web, ANYONE can view from the comfort of their couch, thousands upon thousands of exemplars, with eBay, rrauction and heritage galleries just name 3 huge sources of the top of my head.

it would be much better, if instead of discarding informed opinions that you have already received, at the expense of “more informed opinions,” you actually did a little research on your own. Mr Wain describes himself as a JFK expert of sorts and I have no reason to dispute this—except that most experts I know would discard the signature on the second as being too atypical for JFK in 1954 to merit taking seriously.  His statement that he considers it genuine until proven otherwise to me is misleading. If you read Raab and his means of authenticating autographs you will find and I would endorse his view that if ANYTHING does not seem right it is assumed to be no good. In other words the autograph has to prove itself genuine not the assumption of genuine ss by default. This, the second letter to Rfitzz’ father cannot do.

Rfitzz:  when you do research on presidential autographs seriously you will find out certain facts.

1. While the two of you are trying to “figure out” whether the form of the letter or the content determines whether the signature is genuine, the more items you see you will come to the conclusion that much of which is genuinely signed is purely at random. Herbert Hoover in his memoirs reports that one of his first acts as president was to have his attorney general research the law to see if others could sign his name for him. But Hoover even with his feeling that signing routine documents was a waste of time, signed most WH letters, most justice department appointments but very few diplomatic appoints and I have never seen an authentically signed postal appointment. As an extreme example of this randomness, Ronald reagan’s Presidential medal of freedom certificate to his entertainment colleague, pearl bailey, was signed by autopen. So anyone claiming to understand Reagan’s signing practices, needs to really look at things more closely.

2. “Rarity” is a relative term. Twenty years ago JFK was considered rare in genuinely signed items as president and LBJ was considered excessively rare. What we find out is that both can be found with ease . In fact, I would argue that there are no true presidential rarities, even in office . Taylor and Garfield, ranked 3 and 2 consecutively in presidential rarity in office can likely be found in any major city in the country on any given day as well as in auction and on eBay. Even William Henry Harrison, in office for a month only, can be found in some presidential format (partialDS) within a month or two if one is well heeled enough to afford one—availability NOT being the limiting factor.

3. There is no substitute for educating yourself.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rfitzz on August 25, 2018 at 1:04pm

Paul, I appreciate and completely understand your response.  Let me be very clear regarding your second paragraph. 1. This IS me educating myself. I am still very new at this and I have been gathering information via the internet and was hoping that the "well informed" members of this community would help further my education regarding this subject and collecting in general. I am hoping to gain enough knowledge to make a determination for myself so that I can feel confident one way or the other regarding the authenticity of these personal letters.  2. With all due respect, please don't misunderstand me: my comment regarding "more informed opinions" should have read "ADDITIONAL" opinions.  This was, in no way, meant to diminish your opinion or any others that have been expressed on the subject.  Again, part of the education process for me is to gather as much information, opinions, examples and samples to make my own determination.  3. Mr Wain's input has been invaluable to me and I appreciate the efforts he has put forth to try and assist me.  I don't think it's fair to question his credibility when, given additional information, he questions his original assessment and wants to investigate further. I understand the concept of "working backwards", assume it's fake until you prove that it is real. Most people have been taking that approach, however, both Paul and James have been trying to help me gather information pertaining to that particular timeframe to both educate me and make a determination. I don't think any expert has ever NOT questioned his original assessment when provided with an opposing view or conflicting information.  This helps to further educate everyone who desires to be educated and certainly adds to the "fun" of the collecting community.

I will continue to do my research and look forward to the opinions of others.

I appreciate all of your efforts and your opinion which I am taking into valued consideration in helping me make my final determination. I know that you said that this is your final post on the subject and I thank you for your input. However, if I could impose on you one final time. You mentioned in an earlier post "I have the exemplar in Charles Hamilton book where Kennedy in May 1954 is writing to someone about autographs—he was a collector as well"  If you would be so kind as to site the page number and book or provide a photo of that, it would prove invaluable to my research as both Michael and I cannot seem to located it.  Again, I thank you for your assistance and hope to hear from you again.  Sincerely, Rfitzz

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paulrichards on August 25, 2018 at 3:39pm

I don’t have the book or page to cite off the top of my head but it is important to note that The Robot that made a President is not the only book Hamilton wrote. I am specifically not referring to his two volume American Autographs which I would consider essential for anyone collecting presidential autographs through Reagan, signers of DOI and the Revolutionary war. It is out of print but copies can usually be found. Be prepared to pay around $250.

with regard to the Hamilton citation, in the 1980’s I came across a framed item at Sessler’s Bookstore in Philadelphia. At the top was a head shot of a toothy JFK with a scribble signature in the region of his forehead signed with a bic or similar pen in blue. Below it was a June 25, 1954 TLS on Senate stationary wherein JFK was writing to man about a “three panel screen” which I took to be a three window framed autograph and wherein JFK then Adds: “I am a collector of autograph letters written by outstanding figures in American history.” The words “American History” were underlined with what appeared to be red crayon.

On the back of the frame was an expertization by Mabel Zahn who I came to learn was an early autograph expert legend. Frankly I had no idea how she could determine that the scribble signature on the photo was genuine and obtained in person during the 1960 campaign. But when I researched it, she was exactly correct. Unless you have actually seen these signatures you would never figure out that they were signed by JFK—a testament I think to the chaos of a presidential campaign, particularly if you have movie star attractiveness as JFK did.

the signature on the letter is very similar to Your Jan 11 letter and the ink is medium bluish gray. As I am suggesting to you, I started to do research and read. Kennedy fascinated Charles Hamilton as well since he is the poster child for someone who had million forms of his signatures. But even with the variances, not on the campaign trial but signing in his office—as he matured and entered the Senate his signature became more fluid and his last name often looked like Kenn.. and then a curved loop to finish it. Many times the ed of Kennedy was not to be seen. However the K was not a capital K as shown on your second letter. It is the form of this K and the non fluid nature of the rest of the signature on your letter #2 that leads me to conclude that it is not signed by him.these characteristics were part of his signature from an earlier time-pre senate.

while persuing one of Hamilton’s books I was shocked as all get out to actually see my letter in publication. Since Hamilton was THE name, even though previously expertized by his mentor in Zahn, it was at that point that I considered the issue closed—so I can certainly understand your caution. I can only say that that was in the beginning of my collecting almost 40 years ago. Suffice it to say I have dealt with a lot of JFK since—so my opinion is more seasoned at this point.

you will find if you collect that there are 2 groups of collectors in terms of presidential items of more recent presidents. Some will not touch them because of concerns about secretariats, autopen, etc. it is true that are a lot of mind fields out there. Knowledge and information has never been more important. But I look at this as a challenge. Understanding that the bulk of what you come across today with presidents post Carter nonetheless, genuine items of Reagan on do exist. The thrill of the hunt is to separate the wheat from the chaff. You have my best wishes on that journey.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rfitzz on August 25, 2018 at 5:28pm

Thank you so much for all the information and for being so generous with your time.  I appreciate it and will continue my journey and education regarding the authenticity of these letters. Unfortunately and fortunately, one of the most complicated signers in history was our local congressman and assisted my father in becoming a US citizen, couldn't have made it easier on me...LOL  Thanks again for everything.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• Next ›
• Page