We're an eBay affiliate and may be compensated on purchases made through clicks.
Authenticity is Everything
Mick Jagger 1965?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Kristian Breidfjord on
-
The k in Mick looks like an h, which is explainable by the fact that his name is Michael, so for me that and the whole of "Jagger" (with a penlift) looks authentic. Done in a rush, not placed deliberately or dominantly. Yes, quite likely our man. There must be some logical explanation to that conspicuous looking "M", which should be the easiest letter to forge.
-
Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on
-
The "gg" is the same in all 3, the autograph size is similar, pen flow is similar outside of the lift in J. The M and J are unusual but otherwise there's so much in common.
-
Permalink Reply by Steve on
-
My issue with the k isn’t that it looks like an h, it is how the c connects to it, looks unnatural.
-
Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on
-
Does anyone have an example of a similar pen lift during the J? Why the sharp upstroke? Maybe he was bumped? The J then resumes near the very bottom?
-
-
I didn't look. He could have been bumped or just stopped because of the way he was holding the album. This was their first album, out in April 1964. He probably hadn't signed thousands yet. And only Mick signed it so it may have just been handed to him out in public.
-
-
That’s very possible. I think it’s more likely that Mick had one of those things happen rather then it being a forged J.
-
-
He could have hesitated for a moment to make sure he didn't cross the T over the crease. You can tell that the cover was creased when he signed it by the buildup of ink on the first M hump.
-
-
Ballroom,
I think that the sharp upstroke is actually a light start to a downstroke that heads up at the bottom of the T.
-
-
I thought that might be the case, but there’s a very small hook near the bottom of the J that didn’t seem to fit that scenario. I thought that hook was where the J resumed after the pen lift.
-
Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on
-
There are indications that the "M" was signed by a person that has signed many times.
-
-
There are more indications that it is a discreet fake than a genuine autograph. The second leg of the M is unusually long, the M never made it formed like that. And then if you look at it all at once, the autograph looks very slow and forced.
-
-
I do not disagree.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
Photos
Videos
Groups
© 2024 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
