Why are pencil autographs from the pre-1950s era so disrespected by collectors?

[thekingofclout]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

Here's my pencil beauty:

Boy David, that is SWEET ! And you'll never have to worry about it fading.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's my lone lead signature...

mickeymantlePSA9.jpg

[HRBAKER]

Not my lone pencil one but my favorite I think. David that Gehrig is a thing of beauty.

[T206Collector]

[bronxbomber609]

I like my pencil autograph

[mr2686]

To keep the thread going and to pay homage to the pencil autograph, I have included my vintage Dazzy Vance pencil autograph.

[Oldtix]

My uncle got these from New York Giants players at the 1937 World Series.

Gus Mancuso - Eddie Madjeski - Hank Lieber - Carl Hubbell - Al Schacht (the baseball clown) - Jimmy Ripple - Harry Danning - Johnny McCarthy - Sam Leslie - Tom Baker - (plus one I don't know - any help?) Tom Tray

[tinkereversandme]

I love the Rucker. I have no issues with pencil either. It just doesn't get the love.

Larry

[Tom Hufford]

It somewhat amazes me that ANY autographs were signed before the advent of the ballpoint pen. Think of the hassle of carrying a fountain pen, taking off the cap (like a sharpie!), trying not to get ink leaking everywhere. Then think about carrying around a sharp pencil and going to the ballpark. I've carried around a lead mark in the palm of my hand for 40+ years, now, where I reached into my pocket and tangled with a freshly sharpened pencil.

[mr2686]

Tom, I think what helped that along was the fact that people purchased programs at the game and kept score...so they had to have something to do that with. Also, I'm wondering if they gave away pencils with the programs, or you provided your own. Either way there must have been a lot of pencils floating around the ballparks.

[GKreindler]

Not that my opinion means much being that I'm not really a collector, but personally I really dig the pencil autographs. I think it doesn't even really come down to an aesthetic thing with me either, which is weird. I mean, an ink signature's boldness can't really be disputed. However, the pencil autograph has somewhat of a charm.

I guess for me it's mainly because it provides an imaginary narrative, that maybe someone at the ballpark had nothing but his/her scorecard and a pencil to score with when he met his/her hero during batting practice. Coming to mind are all of those wonderful photographs of players signing things with kids leaning over the railing or fence in the hopes of even a look of recognition. And then there they are grasping that pencil...

Of course players in those situations signed anything with pencils or pens, but I guess in my hazy, ideal world, it was always a pencil. Weird.

And by the way, the pieces shown in this thread are unreal. I LOVE that Gehrig, David.

Graig

[JasonL]

That one is worth changing your name to Nick!

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by JasonL

That one is worth changing your name to Nick!

Or investing a couple bucks in an art eraser!

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

Or investing a couple bucks in an art eraser!

I was thinking the exact same....

Seriously though... would a good art eraser likely eliminate the name completely (with no visible remnants). Or would it devalue the piece more by either smearing it, lightening the paper underneath, or only removing a portion of the lead? I guess I'm trying to ask if it would do more harm than good.

I know there are many here who feel that the integrity of the piece would be compromised, etc. (and I get that). My question is strictly about the effectiveness of these erasers... Just wondering how well art erasers work on pencil lead that's been on a paper surface for 80+ years.

Thanks for any input you can provide.

[khkco4bls]

This is my jackie robinson from a 47 leather auto book which people carried around the ballpark. Beautiful bold pencil auto.