What's an autograph, anyway?

[Mr. Zipper]

Originally Posted by mighty bombjack

You don't sound harsh. However, I am more interested in opinions, a la what someone who collects would accept in their collection.

I do have to ask, by your standard, anything written in someone's hand is their autograph? They don't even have to write their name?

In my view, any form of someone writing their name could be seen as an autograph. It could be block letters, script... Whatever. The key is they are identifying themselves.

The Joss item in my view is not an autograph. Writing someone else's name -- even if part of it coincides with your own -- is not an autograph IMO.

I would gladly take the joss item to own his writing, but I don't think I could fool myself into thinking it was his autograph.

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by Mr. Zipper

In my view, any form of someone writing their name could be seen as an autograph. It could be block letters, script... Whatever. The key is they are identifying themselves.

The Joss item in my view is not an autograph. Writing someone else's name -- even if part of it coincides with your own -- is not an autograph IMO.

I would gladly take the joss item to own his writing, but I don't think I could fool myself into thinking it was his autograph.

I think a lot of people agree with you.

I wish I had the photo, but there was an auction a few years ago that had a note from Tris Speaker to his wife. He didn't sign it, but he did write "Mrs. Tris Speaker" on the verso so that a messenger knew the intended receiver. The script looked like any Speaker auto I've ever seen (he had beautiful penmanship), but that little "Mrs." in front of it made me contemplate whether this was an autograph or not. He was not technically writing his own name, but if someone were to make a simple cut, there would be no way to know that.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by Mr. Zipper

The Joss item in my view is not an autograph. Writing someone else's name -- even if part of it coincides with your own -- is not an autograph IMO.

I'll try again. The long-accepted definition of autograph is not simply a person's signature. The Joss is technically an A.D.--an Autograph Document, and would be advertised as such in a professional historical autograph dealer's catalog. It is a document written in Joss' hand. If he had signed his name on it as well, it would be an A.D.S.--an Autograph Document Signed. You, personally, may not want an A.D. in your collection, preferring something containing a signature, but the postcard is an autograph nonetheless.

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

I'll try again. The long-accepted definition of autograph is not simply a person's signature. The Joss is technically an A.D.--an Autograph Document, and would be advertised as such in a professional historical autograph dealer's catalog. It is a document written in Joss' hand. If he had signed his name on it as well, it would be an A.D.S.--an Autograph Document Signed. You. personally may not want an A.D. in your collection, preferring something containing a signature, but the postcard is an autograph nonetheless.

It seems that autograph=handwriting, no?