Quote:
Originally Posted by GrayGhost
Wow. That signature doesn’t look anywhere near the license and will. Refund please!
|
I'm going to differ in my opinion, as I believe it to be the genuine article. Autographs can tend to evolve somewhat with a person's age. The signature on the black & white photo matches up very well with the contract Joe signed in 1920, according to Steve Grad in the film clip on this subject (see the link on Post #4), and I don't disagree. The Shoeless Joe Museum appears to be basing their opinion on the comparison between the photo signature and Joe's signature on his will in 1951. Even comparing those two signatures, I can see a strong resemblance in the way he signed "Joe" and the first four letters in his last name as well. There only seems to be a significant difference in the "son" portion of the signature, as Joe just went with squiggly lines on his will rather than an attempt at getting every letter right like he did on his contract and on the signed photo. In 30 years, and illiterate person could easily get tired of trying to get every letter right and just go with squiggles instead. Ascertaining the authenticity of an autograph is not a complete science, and there is enough consistency for me to believe it is genuine.