Anyone familiar with this Babe Ruth Postcard Issue?
 

Anyone familiar with this Babe Ruth issue?

never seen it...but I love it!!!!

Never seen it before. His eyes being closed is a bit disconcerting. Neat card and it's always great to see something not too known, with the Babe on it.

Here is the best I could find for you:
https://www.playle.com/realphoto/photop.php

Found this for you too.
http://centuryoldcards.com/1920/1920-30Postcards.html

Not much info but its a start I guess. lol.

It is the same image as on the dust jacket of Babe Ruth, Home Run King, published in 1920

http://farm1.staticflickr.com/29/929...dafdc6d3_o.jpg

This looks modern to me from the looks of the back.

Rob

Have to say that I am inclined to agree. The back looks like a stamp rather than printed back. We've been seeing these a bit over the last few years, though not this particular back. How is the fidelity of the image when looked at through a loop? Print dots or photographic?

Hi Jason...good to hear from you. I have my concerns too about the vintage of this card. The stamp box (1917) doesn't really match up with the picture (1920) but I could rationalize that away with old RPPC stock bring used.

A quick search on the publisher Societe Anonyme, shows that this was an organization of New York based art enthusiasts who did publish postcards. All other subjects seem to be art related, may be Ruth coming to New York was such a big deal that they did a card with his image...??

I don't have the card, I'm considering a purchase and was hoping I'd find a Net54 member with another I could use as a comparison.

....

Nice card. Looks like Frank W has sold this card before: Link

...

Thanks Scott..I've seen the AZO and CYKO fakes, this PRC back with publisher name is new to me, I don't have any postcard in my collection (real or fake) that has that back. I can't seem to find one on line either.

I did notice that the link Gary provided had this postcard along with two other know Ruth fakes (one of which you've shown too).

At this point I have doubts about this card being authentic.

Those look really well done.

What's the pointers to them being fake? If there are fake RPPCs of Ruth there are probably some of other interesting subjects and it would be good to know how to spot them.

Those two Ruths would fool me unless I had them in hand and it's a paper difference.

Steve b

Jim

I bought the one that Frank W had.

I sent it go SGC and was graded. When I can, I will post it. Its was real(at least the one I have, I dont know about that one you show)

I do not recall what the back looks like, as I bought it quite awhile back. The back you show does not look familiar. I'll scan front and back for you when I can get to the postcard.

Part of a Match...
 

Here is a match at-least on the left side text.....

http://artsalesindex.artinfo.com/asi/lots/4902284

According to this.
 

According to this write-up, Society Anonyme was only at the 47th Street address for one year - 1920.



In 1920 Dreier and her friend and infamous fellow artist Marcel Duchamp decided to form a new organization devoted to exhibiting and promoting modern art to Americans. (Duchamp was one of the most provocative Dada/Surrealist artists of his time. He is best known for his Cubist/Futurist-inspired painting Nude Descending a Staircase, No. 2 which scandalized the American audience at the 1913 Armory Show in New York City, and the urinal that he found and exhibited as the sculpture Fountain by the artist “R. Mutt”). They invited Man Ray, a Dada/Surrealist artist and avant-garde photographer to join them in their efforts.It was Man Ray who came up with the name “Société Anonyme,” which he thought literally meant “Anonymous Society” in French. Duchamp informed him that in French the true meaning is equivalent to the English word “Incorporated.” Drier liked the name because it had the ring of impartiality – it put the focus on the art, not the individual artists and puts a capitalist spin on an anti-materialist art organization. Drier rented two small rooms at 19 East 47th Street in New York City for the exhibit space and the library of the fledgling organization. When it was officially incorporated in New York, it became more Dada joke since it now meant “Incorporated, Inc.”On April 30, 1920, the Société Anonyme, with the now-appended title “Museum of Modern Art: 1920” had its first exhibition. Duchamp designed the space with a neutral, industrial look. The floor was ribbed rubber and the walls and woodwork were a pale blue. The exhibit featured the European artists Jacques Villon (half-brother of Marcel Duchamp), Alexander Archipenko, Juan Gris, Heinrich Vogler, Vincent van Gogh and the sculptor Brancusi. American artists included Joseph Stella, Patrick Henry Bruce, James Daugherty, and works by New York Dadaists Duchamp, Man Ray, Morton Schamberg and others.Dreier had hoped to raise enough money to establish a permanent space to exhibit modern art, but wasn’t successful. She gave up the 47th Street space after a year but the Société Anonyme continued to function as a museum-without-walls by holding exhibits, lectures and symposia in other galleries, clubs, workers’ centers and rental spaces. The Société also produced publications and had an acquisitions program. It continued to draw on the talents of international artists including Cubists, Dadaists, Futurists, Expressionists, Constructivists and other progressive artistic genres.Drier’s real hope of founding the first permanent museum of modern art in the United States was eclipsed when the Museum of Modern Art (now commonly referred to as MoMA) in New York City was established in 1929 by a more diplomatic Alfred Barr, the museum’s founding director, with very substantial financial backing from its most prominent supporters.Villon Duchamp drawing on Society Anonyme postcard.The postcards shown here are all from the Société’s first year on East 47th Street. Oddly enough these postcards are all real photo postcards that can hardly do justice to some of the most colorful and exciting artworks of that time. Other artists whose work is shown on the postcards (and are not already mentioned above) are Louis Eilshemius, Pablo Picasso, Kurt Schwitters, Heinrich Campendonk and R. Villon-Duchamp (brother of Marcel Duchamp). - See more at: http://www.antiquetrader.com/antique....Vi90hFMg.dpuf

Posted the wrong PC. Thought Joe was talking about a Ruth portrait RPPC.

If this Ruth rppc was real, it would be worth A LOT. Cool Ruth image, early date, and probably most important... the Société Anonyme link.

However, as noted above, the reverse doesn't look good. The back looks stamped vs printed... compare it to the genuine Société Anonyme pc back and note the difference.

http://artinfo-images-350.s3.amazona...07888/34_a.jpg

Also, no Société Anonyme credit anywhere on the front is not a good sign. Should at least have the S©A. Ideally would also have a photographer credit.

Wouldn't be surprised to see SGC slab one, they are pretty clueless when it comes to postcards.

Reuben Nakian
 

How can an 8 foot statue of "The Babe" go missing???? This made me think of the OPs postcard....

http://www.nakian.org/Babe_Ruth.html

We had a nice board melee over ten years ago regarding this, so I'll refrain from discussing further. I had always assumed that they were removed from the market at that time. I felt like I should give my 2 cents in this thread since I was involved way back when, but that's it for me regarding these particular items. I can't be the RPPC police :)

Edited: I've removed all of my other posts related to this topic. This is slowly turning into a repeat of ten years ago, and I can assure you that it was no fun then, and nothing was accomplished.

in looking through my 2 real photo postcard guides
 

published in the early 1990's by Bob Ward and the Antique Paper Guild that I purchased when I was chasing some of these - I couldn't find much relevent to the discussion except a reference to a "bible" of sorts "Prairie Fires and Paper Moons, The American Photographic Postcard" where one could presumably research the back configuration and stamp box. If it isn't a photograph when looking at it with a loupe - it isn't real. If it IS a photograph more steps need to be taken with regard to the verso. Previous comments about attribution, "stamped" vs. printed, etc. are appropriate starting points. Making copy images has been around nearly as long as photography as has counterfitting for profit. Hard to tell without the item in hand but I lean to the no good camp as the image appears too flat.

no guarantees whether written or implied.

interesting
 

that your stamp box is listed as circa 1910. I'm sure there was some overlap in production but surprised at the length of the apparent gap......

Jeff, yur hurtin me.

sorry! (but they are)

So they are all fake? What about the one that Joe bought from Frank that was graded?

Henry, do you have the actual title of these? And are they worthwhile as references? (I assume so, since you're still referring to them). I'm always looking for "good" references to add to the library, but haven't picked up any related to RPPC's as yet.

Jeff

Just kiddin. I've been burned before. But i'm all for the "benefit of the doubt"

Ill try and get it tomorrow and post it and have everyone have a whack at whether SGC misgraded it.

Any thread that has a post with a reference to Marcel Duchamps has to be good for the collective intellect of Net54 ;). Luckily (perhaps) for this postcard, there are no Magritte references.

I've always questioned the ones on Frank's page. For the reasons Jeff mentioned and also because anytime a PC with those images comes up, it's a fake. So, for the ones Frank to have sold to be the only real ones, I question that. More than likely they are fake like the rest of them.

And Jeff makes a good point. SGC doesn't know anything about postcards. I realize some board members rely on them for slabbing postcards with HOFers on them, but I've seen as many bad attribution as good ones. And heard as many stories of them rejecting obvious cards and slabbing questionable ones. It's just not their area of expertise.

Here is all I got, a front scan. Found it in my scan file. Dont keep majority of my stuff near and it takes a bit to get it(God/family/career). Sorry.

With my little knowledge of postcards I would say that scan is inconclusive and a back scan would be very helpful... Is there one on Franks site?

Even holding them in your hands and looking at the fronts, they will be inconclusive - they are RPFPC's.

Shouldn't someone like you Scott be able to tell if the photo is period?

removed, as I see one of our board members would prefer to live in blissful ignorance.

Pete, I am not taking any further bait :)

Thanks for the conjecture.

Edited: I've removed all of my other posts related to this topic. This is slowly turning into a repeat of ten years ago, and I can assure you that it was no fun then, and nothing was accomplished. I have no inclination to keep anyone from living in blissful ignorance if that's what they enjoy.

Yours is published by Photo-Roto Inc....interesting, here it is font & back......and other Photo-Roto comparisons.

The PRC backs match up...the Will Rogers has smudging too.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/BEAUTIFUL-SE...-/291073681401

http://www.ebay.com/itm/WILL-ROGERS-...-/191073120417

censorship blows!

Thanks for the scan Jim.

Interesting, Jim. Seeing that Will Rogers PC is interesting because the photo quality is very poor on it as well. I wish I could put it under a loop and take a look. I suppose if you could get it at the right price, it would be worth a shot.

Yikes... Ruth in Span~dex!

If I was Ruth I would of destroyed it my self...

Did you end up buying or passing Jim?

It's being shipped to me. I wanted to take a good look. Will let you know.

Well, inspired by this topic, I sent the Ruth postcard that I bought from Frank to SGC, & they would not grade it. Here's a quote from an email reply I received from SGC. "I just spoke to Bob Luce, Senior Grader. He said that he has a suspicion that the card may not be from that era based on the look and feel of the card. And we could not confirm the date."

I think SGC made the right call on this one. I have always found it much easier to authenticate the photo engraved cards vs the RPPCs. I suppose I just haven't handled enough of them. Its an expensive lesson, but I'm learning....

Paul

Sorry man

bummer. PAul...I hope u didn't spend too much on it?

200 bucks. Its the most I've ever spent on something that turned out to be a fake.

This postcard just sold on Ebay for $2,350. Has the forum's opinion changed? I was interested in bidding, but after doing some research here, I was concerned.

From Wikipedia-- "Societe Anonyme (art) was an art organization founded in 1920 by Katherine Dreier, Man Ray, and Marcel Duchamp."

The term is also a legal term, roughly "private corporation".

The Babe Ruth book that Max posted may have a photo credit for the front cover.
Here's a foreign rppc that uses the term. Not the NY art company.

If it's not a modern piece, it would be pretty cool if the photo is by Man Ray. That seems more likely than "someone took some left-over supplies of Man Ray and made a baseball card" or whatever the rppc expert was quoted in the auction description.

I was wondering the same thing. It seemed by the tone of this thread, no one believed the card to be correct, but it sure just sold for a good chunk of change, and was advertised as circa 1920. What new discovery made this card the real deal? Can Jim say how he now knows this is for sure circa 1920, as advertised?

+1

This card is now for auction in the current REA auction: Link. Has it been determined conclusively if this card is real or fake?

(Edit: To be open about it, I put an initial placeholder bid on this card before thinking it looked familiar from before.)

Fabulous discussion among guys that know a lot. That's why I love Net54. Can't wait to see what happens in the auction.

Here’s my thoughts: Man Ray and Marcel Duchamp were part of the Dada/ Surrealist art movement. Duchamp was the dude that exhibited a urinal in an art show. Man Ray was the guy who photographed a lady with perfectly circular tear drops. Google Man Ray and Marcel Duchamps and you’ll get a better idea of what they did.

But to put it simply, their type of art was more akin to the type of stuff that you’d see in the strip cards.That photo of Ruth is realistic and doesn’t fit into anything either one of them will do. I don’t think the PC came from their studio.

I am not familiar at all with the stampbox on that PC so I can’t put a date on it.

I’ll go out on the line and say SGC got it wrong. But that’s just my $0.02.

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. I do remember the post card being discussed on here before and couldn't find the original post. Glad you found it. Will be interesting to hear the conclusion to this if we get one.

From Wiki regarding Man Ray:
“ Man Ray abandoned conventional painting to involve himself with Dada, a radical anti-art movement. He published two Dadaist periodicals, that each only had one issue, The Ridgefield Gazook (1915) and TNT (1919), the latter co-edited by Adolf Wolff and Mitchell Dawson.[13][14] He started making objects and developed unique mechanical and photographic methods of making images. For the 1918 version of Rope Dancer, he combined a spray-gun technique with a pen drawing. Like Duchamp, he worked with readymades—ordinary objects that are selected and modified. His Gift readymade (1921) is a flatiron with metal tacks attached to the bottom, and Enigma of Isidore Ducasse[15] is an unseen object (a sewing machine) wrapped in cloth and tied with cord. Aerograph (1919), another work from this period, was done with airbrush on glass.[16]”


From Wiki regarding Marcel Duchamp:
“ Duchamp created the Société Anonyme in 1920, along with Katherine Dreier and Man Ray. This was the beginning of his lifelong involvement in art dealing and collecting. The group collected modern art works, and arranged modern art exhibitions and lectures throughout the 1930s.

By this time Walter Pach, one of the coordinators of the 1913 Armory Show, sought Duchamp's advice on modern art. Beginning with Société Anonyme, Dreier also depended on Duchamp's counsel in gathering her collection, as did Arensberg. Later Peggy Guggenheim, Museum of Modern Art directors Alfred Barr and James Johnson Sweeney consulted with Duchamp on their modern art collections and shows.‘

Looking at a previous post by pencil1974 the PRC poststamp was used by the Phot Roto Company in 1910-1917.

Again this postcard of Ruth is a very conventional photo. There are no embellishments added to this postcards to make it absurd ( e.g. drawing a mustache on Ruth, drawing a bseball in the picture etc). I am very skeptical that is was produced by the Societe Anonyme in NYC. Based on the poststamp box Ruth should be wearing a RedSox uniform. I believed “ Societe Anonyme” was added to the postcard in order to establish the date to 1920.

I’m on the fence on this one. It uses an older post card back which is printed on and a current picture for 1920. Has there been more of these cards found?

+1
.

The card ended up hammering at $9,300 at REA.

A stunning price for an inconclusive, from all I can tell, postcard. Leap of faith or did I miss something?
.

Agreed I am still not sold on the authenticity of this issue

I just saw this post, Net54 members should know that I submitted this postcard twice to SCG and once to PSA. PSA commented that they were not familiar with the postcard and therefore could not authenticate.

SCG had previously graded another example this card (different back) but refused to authenticate my example because the stamp box was older than the photo. I called SCG and discussed the card, they asked for more information. I sent a copy of the card they had already authenticated along with a written opinion from Don Preziosi. Don is long time postcard collector/dealer who goes by the ebay nickname of Dinerdon. He has written many articles about postcards including one on the Societe Anonyme postcards. (If interested, https://postcardhistory.net/2022/08/...ciete-anonyme/)

Even with this additional information SCG refused to authenticate, again citing the "date" difference. Here's Don's note to me, I had asked his opinion as to authenticity and the likelihood that it was produced by photographer Man Ray:

From: dinerdon <dinerdon@aol.com>
To: jsrna <jsrna@aol.com>
Sent: Tue, Feb 17, 2015 5:11 am
Subject: Re: Societe Anonyme Postcard Question

Hi Jim,
This is a real curiosity! It is definitely an original 1920's postcard (assuming the front hasn't been glued to the back, which I assume you can ascertain by the weight/thickness of the card). The Societe Anonyme postcards were all done in 1920. I have never seen nor heard of a PRC with the SA imprint on the back that didn't relate to the art show. All of these were done by the famous artist Man Ray. He also did fashion and portrait photography, but this does not in any way resemble any photos of his that I know about, and although he photographed celebrities, he didn't do athletes and Ruth was not quite a celebrity in 1920. Have you seen this exact photo anywhere else and is it attributed to any particular photographer? If for some strange reason it was made by Man Ray it would be worth a tidy sum, but I don't know how you could prove that unless you can find a reference. The card does not look like a photo of a photo, but that would be more in line with what Man Ray didn't with the paintings. A line art version of that exact Ruth pose was used in a 1920 Lifebuoy soap newspaper ad.

If you are relying on the info on Playle about the 1917 production dates it is somewhat irrelevant and based on very small sampling because PRC postcards are not common.

Let me know what you think.

Best,
Don

Wow, someone may be out $9000+. Will REA reimburse?