Real or Fake - Action #1 Recreation by Joe Shuster 0

[pemart1966]

23 minutes ago, vodou said:

Not that I've ever seen. Somebody should share image/s if they own or used to owne on, but please no random grabs off tumblr

He did chest up profiles that's for sure but if I've even seen one of his Action 1 re-creations I can't remember.  He was, at times, in need of $ so I'd be surprised if a) no one ever asked him to do a cover recreation and b) he turned down all requests to do cover recreations.

[Mmehdy]

On 1/18/2020 at 8:25 AM, alxjhnsn said:

Easily the most complicated piece I've seen by Joe if it's real.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/293429370200?ul_noapp=true&fbclid=IwAR1EpSXEEyUEQVo-vtGB6BmqeIiZu_ziKt712AIatWrSCAGVH3a8Z3oRtvo

 

wow..amazing

[grapeape]

On 1/18/2020 at 8:25 AM, alxjhnsn said:

Easily the most complicated piece I've seen by Joe if it's real.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/293429370200?ul_noapp=true&fbclid=IwAR1EpSXEEyUEQVo-vtGB6BmqeIiZu_ziKt712AIatWrSCAGVH3a8Z3oRtvo

 

All this talk got me to thinking why not compare to a real Action Comics 1?Then I remembered this picture taken of Grandpa Ape back in 1938. Oh but for a quick trip back in time.

“Grandpa! Grandpa! Buy them all!!!!” “Wrap them in Saran Wrap, lay them flat  and put them in a suitcase in the closet.” “I’ll pay you back in 1973 when I get my first months allowance.”

 

Edited January 19, 2020 by grapeape

[Crowzilla]

8 hours ago, Timely said:

Imagine if this was a recreation of Amazing Fantasy #15 by Steve Ditko, done with a shaky hand, how much would that be worth? Sure, the art wouldn't be that great, but I think it would go for at least $50k.

Assuming the Shuster art is real, shaky hand or not, it's got to be worth a lot! Question is... is it 100% unquestionably authentic?

So you are going to compare the price of art by a guy who never drew the character again for the last 50 years of his life, to a guy who did it as often as possible for the last 50 years of his life?

 

[Bronty]

I still have a hard time believing a professional artist drew that.  I suppose it’s possible but yikes

[pemart1966]

6 hours ago, grapeape said:

All this talk got me to thinking why not compare to a real Action Comics 1?Then I remembered this picture taken of Grandpa Ape back in 1938. Oh but for a quick trip back in time.

“Grandpa! Grandpa! Buy them all!!!!” “Wrap them in Saran Wrap, lay them flat  and put them in a suitcase in the closet.” “I’ll pay you back in 1973 when I get my first months allowance.”

 

Hmmm - 10 cents for this new comic Action # 1 OR 10 cents for a malted milk with Horton's Ice Cream?  Comic book...or Malted Milk?   Meh..it's a hot day...I'm going with the malted...

[Michael Browning]

In my 21 years of comic art collecting, I’ve seen a lot of Joe Shuster drawings come up for sale, but I’ve never seen an Action #1 cover recreation, nor have I seen anything Shuster drew later that looked like a really bad tracing - like this one does.

This can’t really be by Shuster.

[BCarter27]

https://www.hakes.com/Auction/ItemDetail/209995/ACTION-COMICS-1-COVER-RECREATION-ORIGINAL-ART-BY-SUPERMAN-CREATOR-JOE-SHUSTER

The Hake's listing.

[pemart1966]

One potentially interesting thing about this piece is the "copyright DC Comics" on the lower left hand corner of the page.  It does appear on some of Joe's chest up profiles and they appear to be in the same hand writing as this piece.

If Shuster did this piece then he may have been under contractual obligation to put the DC copyright on it.

If he didn't do this piece and just signed it, then why would there be any need for him to put the copyright information on it?

[comicartcom]

as Alex Johnson posted from my facebook comment, I'm pretty sure this is a Gary Coddington fan drawing that he had Joe sign. Gary did lots of such drawings and being a friend of Joe, it would not be out of the ordinary for him to have Joe sign all sorts of items. Gary used to show me some of his fan drawings way back when (as well as others) and If Gary Carter (friend of Gary before he passed away) was asked and shown this image, I'm sure he would come to the same conclusion.

for absolutely certain, this is not drawn by Shuster and Hakes blew it when they indicated it was. If the piece was still owned by that buyer, it would be my recommendation that they return it, although it probably is no longer owned by that winner and any claim the current owner might have, would be against the person they got it from. (and backwards from that person to each previous owner, until you get to the Hakes buyer vs Hakes.

By the way, this is what happens in this field now, because many of the older experts like myself are no longer in the hobby, or dead and as a result, that expertise is absent here.

the proper descritpion & attribution of this illustration should be "Fan Illustrated Drawing of Action #1 Cover Autographed By Joe Shuster"

BTW: that picture of the action #1 on the newsstands is fake. The picture can be found in it's unedited state.

 

[comicartcom]

and yes, I do believe the signature is authentic.

[alxjhnsn]

I had a pleasant exchange with Sharon of comics-warehouse about this auction.

Here's my summary:

• She has this on consignment and the consigner is “very experienced"
• She realizes now that:
  • This is not the piece from the Hake’s auction.
  • This did not belong to Frank Toscanini at any point.
• She wants to remove the item from sale and has asked the bidder to cancel their bid so she can do so without incurring eBay’s fees.
• She’s intends to update the description to prevent further bids (as of 1:55pm Central on Jan 20 that has not happened)
• She believes that Joe drew it
• She trusts JSA
• She has "no time or interest to look at the chat boards” to check the authenticity of her offers
• She wants out of the OA game because it is too “risky."

Here's a transcript of our conversation

Quote

Alex wrote:
Would you be able to send me a high resolution scan, e.g., 300 dpi?

Ebay is full of fakes and this is a lot of money.

Alex wrote:
I hit send too soon. Can you talk about how it moved from Hakes to you? Thanks again.

 

Sharon from comic-warehouse wrote:
Hello. I didn't respond to your question before because I was still researching which exact piece that had been consigned to me. I have now found out that this was NOT the same piece that was from the Hake's auction, nor was it part of the Frank Toscanini collection. My consignor actually had three of these Shuster re-creations and just got confused about which one was consigned to me. I am going to be removing the auction as soon as the current bidder retracts his bid, so I don't have to pay the eBay fees associated with the removal of an active auction item that has a bid. I have updated the listing with a note stating what I am sharing with you. I am sorry for the confusion. The art is real though, as Joe Shuster would never have signed a piece of somebody else's art and his signature on this piece was authenticated by JSA, a very respected authentication company. I am very sorry about the confusion, as I should have checked out the image from the Hake's auction before listing the art. I just took my consignor's word for it since she is very experienced. It was a simple mistake on her part and she has profusely apologized to me for the embarrassment. Sincerely, Sharon Hughes

 

Alex wrote:
Sharron,

There is a pretty strong consensus that Joe did not draw the image, but did sign the document.

The story goes that a man named Gary Coddington did the drawing for his own use / as a tribute and had Joe sign them. Gary was at one point a representative of Joe's.

This thread (https://www.cgccomics.com/boards/topic/462921-real-or-fake-action-1-recreation-by-joe-shuster/) has some examples of Joe's late in life work and his line was still much better than that in this piece which leads one to believe the story of Gary.

I'd also mention that no one is disputing the signature; it's definitely Joe's in the opinion of everyone that has commented, but the art is definitely in dispute.

As you've noted, the piece you have is not the one from Hake's; that was also pointed out on a FB thread.

Here are some threads that are running on FB Original Art groups as we discussed your sale, you may need to join the group to view them all:

FB: Original Comic Art Collectors (https://www.facebook.com/groups/459273764470607/permalink/937831273281518/) - general discussion on the art and first to raise Gary Coddington
FB: Original Comic Art (https://www.facebook.com/groups/374046949941/permalink/10159364642619942/) - first to compare yours to the Hake's piece

These are the two threads with the most information.

When you list it again, you might want to explain the dispute over the creator of the art and that the consensus is that signature is valid.

I think Hake's did a shoddy job of vetting their sale, but that's not uncommon sadly.

You will find that the community as a whole is quite helpful to those wanting to vet art. The two Facebook threads and the CGC board are the obvious starting points.

Sharon from comic-warehouse wrote:
Hello again. While I have no time or interest to look at the chat boards, I greatly appreciate your response and would also greatly appreciate it if you could post something there regarding the fact that we've spoken and that the correction was made to the listing and that the listing is going to be removed as soon as the current bid is retracted,  which is what I'm waiting for so I dont have to lose $500+ in fees. I understand if you dont care to go to the extra trouble. Have a great day!My best, Sharon 

Alex wrote:
I will.

Do you sell comic book art regularly?

 

Sharon from comic-warehouse wrote:
used to, but don't get pieces in very often anymore. It's gotten so competitive and expense. We are used to dealing with greater profit margins so the art market has become too risky for our needs.
 

 

[comicartcom]

thanks Alex, until I started reading your new post, I hadn't compared the piece on ebay and hakes, which are not the same piece. The ebay piece is obviously not the same and most likely is a second fraud (the haqkes piece is probably the Coddington drawing, signed by Joe.) The piece on ebay is 100% fake, including the signature and clearly someone was hoping to cash in on the s***** piece Hakes sold. Hilarious. A fake, of a fake..

Edited January 20, 2020 by comicartcom

[glendgold]

21 minutes ago, comicartcom said:

thanks Alex, until I started reading your new post, I hadn't compared the piece on ebay and hakes, which are not the same piece. The ebay piece is obviously not the same and most likely is a second fraud (the haqkes piece is probably the Coddington drawing, signed by Joe.) The piece on ebay is 100% fake, including the signature and clearly someone was hoping to cash in on the s***** piece Hakes sold. Hilarious. A fake, of a fake..

Thanks for your info, Rich.  You're right - true knowledge is getting lost.  It's disappointing when people rely on their guts instead, and might write things like "Joe would never sign a piece of art he didn't draw" without any understanding of how, yeah, he did.  History is a lot weirder than people think.

[grapeape]

39 minutes ago, glendgold said:

Thanks for your info, Rich.  You're right - true knowledge is getting lost.  It's disappointing when people rely on their guts instead, and might write things like "Joe would never sign a piece of art he didn't draw" without any understanding of how, yeah, he did.  History is a lot weirder than people think.

I tried to explain this to some friends. Just because Stan Lee signed your white athletic tube socks does not mean he ran the wool yarn through the machine.

A fake of a fake. Yeesh !!

Alex is one of about fifty of us that contacted Sharon about the Action 1. She held up pretty well though I more than suspect she is sick of us about now.

I would encourage her to stay in the art business, though perhaps it’s time auctioneers decline to offer this kind of drek. I fear the likely wear and tear on the confidence of collectors.

 

 

[Peter L]

2 hours ago, comicartcom said:

as Alex Johnson posted from my facebook comment, I'm pretty sure this is a Gary Coddington fan drawing that he had Joe sign. Gary did lots of such drawings and being a friend of Joe, it would not be out of the ordinary for him to have Joe sign all sorts of items. Gary used to show me some of his fan drawings way back when (as well as others) and If Gary Carter (friend of Gary before he passed away) was asked and shown this image, I'm sure he would come to the same conclusion.

for absolutely certain, this is not drawn by Shuster and Hakes blew it when they indicated it was. If the piece was still owned by that buyer, it would be my recommendation that they return it, although it probably is no longer owned by that winner and any claim the current owner might have, would be against the person they got it from. (and backwards from that person to each previous owner, until you get to the Hakes buyer vs Hakes.

By the way, this is what happens in this field now, because many of the older experts like myself are no longer in the hobby, or dead and as a result, that expertise is absent here.

the proper descritpion & attribution of this illustration should be "Fan Illustrated Drawing of Action #1 Cover Autographed By Joe Shuster"

BTW: that picture of the action #1 on the newsstands is fake. The picture can be found in it's unedited state.

 

Thank you for this great answer.  The biggest reason I can find in favor of posting on CAF is to avoid future challenges as to authenticity or lack of provenance long after any bad deal can be unwound.  Let's say I bought a piece that I think is real.  I post it on CAF.  If it is disputed then I can unwind it perhaps closer to the event.  However let's say I pass away and my heirs try to sell something.  20 years from now it will be harder to challenge a bad deal or claims of other ownership.  If the art community knows that it has been in my CAF for the last 12 years and there have been no challenges, it is probably a safe bet it is ok.  

[grapeape]

52 minutes ago, glendgold said:

Thanks for your info, Rich.  You're right - true knowledge is getting lost.  It's disappointing when people rely on their guts instead, and might write things like "Joe would never sign a piece of art he didn't draw" without any understanding of how, yeah, he did.  History is a lot weirder than people think.

1) I took my experienced sellers word for it

2) Joe signed it means art is his

3) I don’t have time ( to learn, get better) to read the comments on CGC

I have said over and over I learn a lot on this board. I try to give back. Never feel so expert that further learning and research are unnecessary. 
 

Several pieces of art have sold via auction or dealer that are pure fakes. Faulty reasoning used all the time.

•I saw this hanging on the artists office wall so I know he did it.•

•The guy I bought it from saw the artist sign their name on it.•
 

Provenance requires more than a COA or someone’s word. More than anything before buying art  it takes a critical, professional analysis of the artwork.

My prayers for the newbies.

 

[Kal-L]

It seems to be the popular opinion that this recreation is not authentic, but I’m not so sure. Joe is known to have signed preprinted copies of his drawings (even some colored in by fans), but I’ve never heard of him signing pieces that he didn’t draw either original or preprinted copies of originals.  Additionally, he was generous to friends (including Gary) in terms of giving them art, but he almost always inscribed/personalized them unless it was a commission piece.  This brings us to the DC Comics label on the piece with was something Joe added to pieces for which he was paid; I can’t begin to understand the legal reasons for this.  So if this was Coddington fan art, and even if I we were inclined to believe Joe would sign it, I’d still be surprised by the lack of personalization and the DC Comics label.  Finally, as far as legend (noted earlier in this post), I’ve heard for many years that Joe was paid to do a dozen large recreations late in life of popular Superman covers (AC1, Superman #1, and Superman #14).  So having a couple variations of the AC1 covers actually makes sense, and “the story” is similarly supported when you go back and look at the large recreations that are out there (Hakes sales, Comiclink, and some posts on Comicartfans) as they are almost always these covers.  I’d love to hear Hake’s weigh in on their vetting process, but Franco Toscanini didn’t put things in his collection lightly.  While this copy is not his, I’m inclined to believe that if his was legitimate (I believe it was) that this one likely is as well.  Just my opinion...

Regards,

Ryan

[glendgold]

5 minutes ago, grapeape said:

1) I took my experienced sellers word for it

2) Joe signed it means art is his

3) I don’t have time ( to learn, get better) to read the comments on CGC

I have said over and over I learn a lot on this board. I try to give back. Never feel so expert that further learning and research are unnecessary. 
 

Several pieces of art have sold via auction or dealer that are pure fakes. Faulty reasoning used all the time.

•I saw this hanging on the artists office wall so I know he did it.•

•The guy I bought it from saw the artist sign their name on it.•
 

Provenance requires more than a COA or someone’s word. More than anything before buying art  it takes a critical, professional analysis of the artwork.

My prayers for the newbies.

 

 

The loop that this all ends up with is "The experts don't know anything but I do," and that way of thinking isn't exactly in retreat these days.

[grapeape]

11 minutes ago, Peter L said:

Thank you for this great answer.  The biggest reason I can find in favor of posting on CAF is to avoid future challenges as to authenticity or lack of provenance long after any bad deal can be unwound.  Let's say I bought a piece that I think is real.  I post it on CAF.  If it is disputed then I can unwind it perhaps closer to the event.  However let's say I pass away and my heirs try to sell something.  20 years from now it will be harder to challenge a bad deal or claims of other ownership.  If the art community knows that it has been in my CAF for the last 12 years and there have been no challenges, it is probably a safe bet it is ok.  

Peter I respect your opinion.

Careful though with the assumptions.

No challenges for X amount of years means safe bet/ ok.

I can’t stress enough the number one protection against being sorry later is to summon every bit of research and expert opinion before a purchase.