Here are two different contracts between The Doors and Elektra. The contract from 1970 is currently being offered for sale. According to the seller, it was displayed at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland, and has been authenticated by Jac Holzman. The contract from 1968 was sold through a now-defunct auction house.
1970 Contract
1968 Contract
Notice how similar in appearance the two sets of signatures are to each other. They are so similar that it appears as though one set of signatures has been copied from the other, right down to the unusual pointed second “r” in Morrison. I’m no handwriting expert, but on the 1968 contract the “ri” in “Morrison” somehow looks unnatural. It’s as though it were very carefully copied from the signature on the 1970 contract. I also see what I consider to be a problem with the John signature on the 1968 contract. The “n” in “John” is very unusual, and actually looks more like an “m” than an “n”. Overall, the signatures on the 1970 contract have a clear, fluid and natural appearance that is somewhat missing on the 1968 contract.
Something that really sticks out about the contents of the contracts is the title under each of the Holzman signatures. On the 1970 contract, Holzman has signed above the title “President”. This makes sense, being that he was the president of Elektra. However, on the 1968 contract, the Holzman signature appears above Lawrence Harris’ printed name. Why would Holzman sign above someone else’s name?
If I didn’t have the 1970 contract (which I believe to be authentic) to use for a comparison, the signatures on the 1968 contract would look pretty good to me. However, all things considered, it appears to me that the 1968 contract was forged. Thoughts?
Doors Signed Contracts
Moderators: The Freedom Man, TheDoorsMusic
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1976
- Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 12:06 am
- lizardkingteo
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2456
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 2:00 pm
- Location: Greece
if you ask me i have my thoughts about both these contracts . In the first one the second "r" looks a bit unusual ,and in the second contract the things that you pointed before .
I asked the owner of the contract and he said that in the second contract it was a usual thing for an executive of E to sign for the president ( if the president was too busy ) , so it make sense
The only thing that dont make sense is the R's in both Morrison Sigs
i dont know ... any other thoughts ?
I asked the owner of the contract and he said that in the second contract it was a usual thing for an executive of E to sign for the president ( if the president was too busy ) , so it make sense
The only thing that dont make sense is the R's in both Morrison Sigs
i dont know ... any other thoughts ?
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1976
- Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 12:06 am
- lizardkingteo
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2456
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 2:00 pm
- Location: Greece
youre right , got confused , its a common thing that a president signs for an executive , he is The President anyway ....BallroomDays67 wrote:It would actually be the president signing for an executive, and not the other way around. It's Holzman's signature.
Just to clarify this , i was in contact with the owner and he does NOT provide any letter of authenticy from Jac Holzman , only an email from him ..
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1976
- Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 12:06 am
Here's yet another signed copy of the 1968 contract:
and here's one that was sold recently and posted in another thread:
It looks to me as though the appearance of the signatures on all of these 1968 contracts originated with the 1970 contract. That would explain the Holzman signature above Lawrence Harris' printed name.
and here's one that was sold recently and posted in another thread:
It looks to me as though the appearance of the signatures on all of these 1968 contracts originated with the 1970 contract. That would explain the Holzman signature above Lawrence Harris' printed name.
- universalmind69
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1911
- Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 9:10 pm
Some of the signatures on those contracts seem to be exact copies of one particular original.....probably the '70 one like you've pointed to.
There's no way in hell that any of them would be able to replicate their own signatures and even the exact positioning of them in some cases with two years apart.
I could probably collect 20 of my own signatures and when inspected closely they wouldn't even once match up as closely as some of those contract sigs do...carbon copies....
Comparing and analyzing handwriting etc. is just silly to me if you're not a trained professional, barring any and all obvious flaws/differences to a good selection of known authentic signed/handwritten pieces of course.
There's no way in hell that any of them would be able to replicate their own signatures and even the exact positioning of them in some cases with two years apart.
I could probably collect 20 of my own signatures and when inspected closely they wouldn't even once match up as closely as some of those contract sigs do...carbon copies....
Comparing and analyzing handwriting etc. is just silly to me if you're not a trained professional, barring any and all obvious flaws/differences to a good selection of known authentic signed/handwritten pieces of course.