It is my opinion these are very learned but ultimately unsuccessful forgeries that can't decide what decade they claim to be from. The "j" is unprecedented and the "k" highly atypical, and those "a"'s match. Spacing and relative size problems as well and they have much more in common with each other than authentic examples from any period. Sorry Jeff.
I agree with you, Eric. These are particularly good attempts though--far better than most I've seen. The one personalized to Marilyn is especially good. Yikes.
They are very good but not that good. The handwriting is a touch better than the signature, but still uncomfortable overall.
Agreed. Neither one holds up to close scrutiny.
I see that neither one of these got Jackie's highly characteristic "k" just right. In fact, the uninscribed TWA tag got it horribly wrong. It's way too big for starters.
In the top example personalized to "Marilyn," the first warning sign I saw was the "M" in "Marilyn." Jackie's "M's" have always looked pretty consistent to me in all the authentic exemplars I've seen but both of these two "M's" are off. The second "M" directly underneath the "M" in "Marilyn" looks much closer to what it's supposed to look like but neither "M" holds up to scrutiny. That top "M" is just egregious.
I'm starting to long for the good old days when the only fake Gleason autographs in the marketplace were the flood of well-intentioned secretarials that could be found just about anywhere. Now that the autograph community has finally woken up to the true rarity of authentic Gleason autographs, the forgers have clearly been honing their craft.
I'm so grateful to you, Eric, for the PhD-level education in Gleason autographs that you have provided through your research and posts!
Thank you - that means a lot to me. Agree fully re those "M"'s. There are other problems as you can see. I'd hate to think this thread is being used for nefarious purposes but I have deliberately left out some key diagnostics.
It is also very disconcerting to have two that share those and other traits at once. His signature would vary wildly in a short space of time. I have a scan of a TWA guest flight log from C. 1970 and the signature looks nothing like these; same for the 1970's golf programs. In fact, I have never seen anything like these two. Same hand but not jackie's.
What is even crazier is that they came from two completely different separate places that would never in a million years have connection with each other so I highly highly doubt the same person could have done both. Thanks again for the input your research is great.
Thank you Jeff.
How much are these two sources asking for these?
The one on the back of the old Buick owners manual bag they wanted 300. The TWA eight of clubs I have no idea. The only reason I thought they could be legit was that they don't have anything to do with each other and are so similar. Who knows?
This crap is on eBay now - it is the back of a Buick manual. This forger likes to write on things that suggest authenticity... Poor forgery though. The TWA sticker sold for $114. This manual, the first sig shown above, is item # 164745373491. Seller Flammingmoe - who also sold the TWA sticker. When I said same hand Jeff said - "...What is even crazier is that they came from two completely different separate places that would never in a million years have connection with each other so I highly highly doubt the same person could have done both..." - now the same eBay seller has both. Same hand. Same junk.