Terry Pratchett Signature - Fake?

Welcome to the Sir Terry Pratchett Forums
Register here for the Sir Terry Pratchett forum and message boards.
Sign up

Frank

New Member
Dec 22, 2009
3
1,650
#1
Hi,

I am proposing to buy a signed first edition of a discworld book. The book was published in 1991. I have a picture of the signature as below, but am a bit suspicious that it is fake.

Can anyone help?



[/img]
 

Dotsie

Sergeant-at-Arms
Jul 28, 2008
9,068
2,850
#2
Hi Frank

I don't think it looks real. I don't have enough signed copies to know how much his sig has changed, but it doesn't look much like the one I have (signed in 2000 I think), and that was signed in front of me.

The thickness of the pen lines makes it look like someone has drawn this quite slowly. The sig in my book has uniform thickness!

Lots of people on here have more experience in TP's sigs, I'm sure you'll hear more.

ETA I've looked at my second signed book, signed 7 years after the first, and the sigs have changed hugely. So now I don't know - sorry! o_O
 

Frank

New Member
Dec 22, 2009
3
1,650
#3
The thickness of the pen lines makes it look like someone has drawn this quite slowly. The sig in my book has uniform thickness!
That's what I thought, the signature isn't fluid enough to be drawn in a few movements as you would a signature.

Thanks, anyone else got any thoughts?
 

poohcarrot

Sergeant-at-Arms
Sep 13, 2009
8,317
2,300
NOT The land of the risen Son!!
#4
Hi Frank

I have approx 30 TP signatures ranging from Pyramids to this year.

I think the signature looks a bit iffy.

To me that signature does not look like a 1991 signature. It looks a lot later that that.

My motto is if you think it's false, it probably is false.

Which book do you want to buy?
How much do you want to pay for it?
 

Tonyblack

Super Moderator
City Watch
Jul 25, 2008
30,841
3,650
Cardiff, Wales
#5
It definitely looks dodgy to me. It's possible that it was a 1991 book that was signed much more recently, but there's very little fluidity to the signature. The vertical lines also look odd. o_O

I think Pooh is right - if in doubt - don't buy it.

This is what Terry signature looks like:



That's from PJSM Prints.
 
Jul 27, 2008
19,425
3,400
Stirlingshire, Scotland
#6
It would be helpful if you can provide more info is it from a bookdealer, ebay, or from a private sale, or something like Amazon or Abe and what book title it was as Terry was writing two a year then as I have all the early signatures at the time except one I can check which one he was using then. As such that sig looks suspect. :devil:
 

Jan Van Quirm

Sergeant-at-Arms
Nov 7, 2008
8,524
2,800
Dunheved, Kernow
www.janhawke.me.uk
#7
Dotsie said:
The thickness of the pen lines makes it look like someone has drawn this quite slowly. The sig in my book has uniform thickness!
No experience of Pterry's siggie but some of forgeries. Depending on the type of pen used it is highly unusual for the pen strokes to be totally uniform especially if a pencil, trad ink pen or even a bog standard biro is used. Rollerballs perhaps may have uniformity, but even then you generally see 'pressure' areas. Digital and rubber 'hand-signature' stamps generally are uniform naturally.

So from that PoV your sig is someone's signature. However, I agree that it does look 'drawn' rather than scrawled - especially the bottom curl of the 'T' and at the top of the 'P' and the 3 cross strokes at the end also look too 'studied'. All of the distinct characters curves have a 'coloured' technique (I'm assuming this is an upsized image you've posted) and don't look at all fluid or practiced. So yeah - very likely a fake.

And welcome to the forum Frank :laugh:
 

kakaze

Lance-Corporal
Jun 3, 2009
488
1,775
#8
It looks fake to me too.

My signed book is 4 months old. Based on it, and the image provided by Tony, it seems that Terry goes right with the bottom of his "T".

Also, the "S" shape, between the T and the P is too short. It's taller in Tony's and, in mine, is actually continuous from the top of the "T".

The loop between the "T" and the "P" is too small (in mine it's practically a circle).

The very bottom of both Tony and my signatures is very flat, but yours is not.

Finally, the three little vertical lines look funny to me. I've only got 2, though Tony's has 3, so maybe it's just my imagination.
 

Frank

New Member
Dec 22, 2009
3
1,650
#10
Thanks for all the comments and help, i'm not going to buy the book. It's so annoying that people nowadays just want to con you out of money!
 

poohcarrot

Sergeant-at-Arms
Sep 13, 2009
8,317
2,300
NOT The land of the risen Son!!
#12
Frank said:
Thanks for all the comments and help, i'm not going to buy the book. It's so annoying that people nowadays just want to con you out of money!
I totally agree Frank, it's terrible!

Oh, by the way, our advice isn't free, so please pm your credit card number to me, and I'll make sure the correct fees are deducted. :twisted:
 

Cheery

Sergeant
Jun 22, 2009
1,280
2,650
30
Switzerland
jellymish-art.tumblr.com
#14
poohcarrot said:
Frank said:
Thanks for all the comments and help, i'm not going to buy the book. It's so annoying that people nowadays just want to con you out of money!
I totally agree Frank, it's terrible!

Oh, by the way, our advice isn't free, so please pm your credit card number to me, and I'll make sure the correct fees are deducted. :twisted:
:rolleyes: you can't leave it, can you? :laugh:
 
Jul 26, 2008
261
2,275
#17
mmmmm concidering all things happening with terry and checking my latest signed book which i know is genuinly signed i would say it could very well be real, im no writing expert but its close enough to my last one for me to think it is, of course theres always that posibilty someone else signed it on his behalf, alot of writers used to do that, oh and i should add yes its a later signature signed on an early book you get alot of people doing that trying to get everything signed by him at events, well you did but not so much now.
 

Fi

New Member
Oct 4, 2008
4
1,650
#18
I have to say Terry's sig in my signed books changes a bit in each time but I know they're definitely his cos I was there when he signed them. :laugh: Also the majority of my books were signed long after he'd written them so you cant rely on that as a way of veryifying the sig either.
 

User Menu

Newsletter