1919 Reds Pennant

[gratefuldog3]

What blows me away is the reverse of the piece. You can see what looks like natural bleeding through of the ink. That would take a hell of a long time to have a " stamp " bleed through a canvas type material. Also, the overall toning of the piece is remarkable. I really don't know what the hell to think. I was psyched.. If any of you guys live in the Boston area and you'd like to see the pennant, give me an e-mail and we'll try to hook up. I have until Monday to make my decision, and before anyone thinks anything derogatory, that was the date I gave the seller. He gave me a few weeks. I don't think I should take that long in fairness to him. Really is hard to conceive anyone would create this to deceive.

[baseballart]

I don't know if you're a member of the 1919 Black sox group on yahoo, but I can post a link to that group as well as to the SABR-L group to see if anyone not on net54 has seen an original of the 1919.

Max

[Rob D.]

Originally Posted by gratefuldog3

Really is hard to conceive anyone would create this to deceive.

This has been a really interesting thread, and I hope whatever you decide works out for you. But I don't understand your statement above. The pennant sold for $3,000-plus. Doesn't that seem to be incentive for fraud? And I'm not suggesting the seller committed fraud or even knows that the pennant is a fake. But you've got to concede that when a crook sees an item that has about $10 in raw materials sell for this kind of money, it's easy to see how he'd conceive the idea to deceive.

Good luck with this.

[GoldenAge50s]

One other thing to consider is that 4 other bidders besides Gratefuldog bid over $550 for that pennant and judging by their other items bid on seemed to be possibly knowledgeable collectors of pennants & vintage baseball.

I'm positive the Seller wasn't expecting anything near the high bids it generated.

No doubt I'm convinced the last 3 are more recent poor copycats, but I still have this gut feeling the Cincy pennant has merit, even more so considering what Gratefuldog has said upon inspection.

I wish the real truth could be known.

[perezfan]

Well, believe what you like...

The overwhelming evidence points to these all being made at the same point in time. The style, workmanship and materials are all virtually identical. If you put all four together in a group, I don't think many people would single out the Reds Pennant as the higher quality original.

[rhettyeakley]

Regardless of whether it was a well done fake or not it doesn't change the fact that it is still fake. I don't doubt that you have vintage sack-cloth (or something like that) that these were made on, but the thing that looks really bogus to me is the actual stencilling of the letters and stars. The letters and stars look "worn" because there are portions of each letter that aren't as dark as the rest BUT it is not honest wear to ink that was applied to the surface 90 years ago. If you look at the letters most of the "wear" is on the inner portion or "middle of each letter (or star) which is just WAY too uniform of a wear pattern. In real life there would be areas of the pennant that exhibited more wear than others NOT areas of wear to each and every letter and star uniformly across the entire piece. Looks like way too much effort was put in to make the "antiqued" look for it to be honest wear. As soon as I saw the piece and took a step or two back it was painfully obvious this was done for one of two reasons...1.) to deceive, or 2.) to make a cool "period looking" piece that would display nicely (in other words a modern "craft".) Bottomline it just doesn't "look right", the other pennants are just icing on the cake. Get your money back and never look back!

PS--Barry thanks for noticing my "red flag" comment above, I couldn't help myself!

[sporteq]

WOW...some one got RIPPED OFF... I believe 100% it's a fake!! Nothing about the pennant looks vintage. Stay away from this type/style of pennant!!!

Have fun,
aL

[mjkm90]

Don't be pulled in by the fact that experienced baseball collectors or even pennant collectors bid on this piece.

Many vintage baseball collectors have specialties as you know. A person may be an advanced collector of cards, photos, or bats, but know beans about pennants, gloves, and jerseys. Unless they handle and study a particular niche over time, mistakes can be made. Just think about how many Black Sox collectors there are who simply search for anything 1919 Reds and Sox. Any of them would want this piece and 90% may not have a single pennant in thier collection.

Regarding this pennant specifically...NOBODY has experience because these are all one of a kind. Those who bid were pulled in by the allure and look of this pennant, but wishing it real doesn't make it so.

If it was $50 I might keep it just to hang on the wall, but never for a significant sum. I would get a sick feeling in my gut every time I walked past this piece if I paid serious $ for it. Run away and forget it. You will not be sorry you avoided this mistake. You can purchase an amazing and 100% genuine pennant for significantly less than this and enjoy it forever.

[william_9]

I don't know enough about the subject matter to feel strongly one way or the other, but here are a couple of thoughts.....

For it being genuine folk art - it looks old and it's crude. It's very likely not a commercial product. Based on other known examples, the artist clearly had an interest in the subject and we can now see that there are other pieces to the puzzle. I'm wondering if all of these pieces may have once been sewn together to form something larger like a blanket or quilt? The technique looks naive and child like, as if it was made from scrap material for personal enjoyment. Also, the stitch style would suggest that it was tacked down to temporarily hold it's shape before a final sew on a machine. That's significant if were intended to be part of a larger piece.

For it being fake - in two words, bleed through. The dirty surface is somewhat expected but it looks overly dirty. The fact that ink bleeds through to the back suggests to me that it has taken a bath at some point, and not to get cleaned. Dirty + water damage always makes me suspect that something is up.

A simple test that may tell you something, or nothing, is to slightly trim some of the fray from the canvas and the felt and the thread. If it burns clean, then it's likely all natural fiber, and thus, likely old. If it burns and melts, it's newer. The odds of it containing synthetic fibers in the 1920's, I would think, be slim to none. The canvas and thread would be cotton and the felt would be wool. Of course, it could be made in the 1990's from salvaged materials from the 1920's. Who's to say for sure?