Archives About Staff BagNews is dedicated to visual politics, media literacy and the analysis of news images.
August 25, 2005

Signature Issue

Robertssignature

(click on image for larger version)

In the vacuum surrounding John Roberts, BAGreader Carolly called out this image to me and added comments.  (The photo depicts a reporter’s hand examining written samples of John Roberts’ work as an attorney in the Reagan Administration.)

Rich, warm, antique coloring… reassuring? 

But the text that is readable appears to be a legalese brush-off: dry and formal.  The white curve of the paper almost cradles the signature, which I read as assertive, with a nice patriotic 5-pointed star at the end, totally ignoring the final "s" which might hamper the boldness of the final stroke. 

This macro shot of hands and words on paper is also more intimate than most news images of explosions, hurricanes, and wrecked trains, not to mention wars engulfing entire regions, which might indicate how important those few words can be in determining what lies under that too-polished veneer.  To paraphrase slightly, "by his words, ye shall know him".  I hope so, if this is all the data we are going to have!

In particular, the BAG was interested in the signature.  I’m no graphologist, but the presence or absence of the "s" seems significant to me.  Specifically, are we looking at an example of "attenuation" — indicating someone who tends to suppress his personality and resist putting his ultimate mark on things?  Or, is that an almost sexy, stylized "s" subtlety submerged inside the "t" ?   

(Autoposted for your review while the BAG is likely toasting a marshmallow somewhere.)

 
(image: AP Photo/unattributed. August 19, 2005.  At washingtonpost.com)

  • ummabdulla

    It looks like he left out the “n” at the end of “John”, too; it’s like “Joh G Robert”. Not that I know what that means…

  • eva

    The “t” is his ego’s final flourish, and adding an “s” after it would diminish the drama or (self)importance of the gesture? Sad that we are reduced to examining his signature (for lack of the documents that have been requested, but the White House is suppressing) for signs of what might be behind this man’s name.

  • charles

    My last name ends with a ‘ts’ also, and the end of my signature looks eerily similar to Robert’s. Maybe there is some psychological meaning to the star-esque ‘t’, but I’ve always figured it was a combination of bad handwriting (his and mine); writing quickly, as one does with the familiar signature; and not picking the pen up off of the paper to cross the ‘t’. Try it yourself, see what happens. It’s very possible that ego is actually the right answer – I’ve been accused in my time…

  • lytom

    I do not care for J. Roberts, but whatever his signiture looks like (with s or without) will/not prove that his judgments are going to benefit US.

  • Asta

    Graphology is a hobby of mine and I place much confidence in this type of analysis.
    The star-shaped “t” says more than ego. The letter is more like a knot, with sharp angles, revealing not just the quality of persistence in this man’s personality, but also an angry obstinance. The overly long cross-bar implies a person consumed with ambition who cannot be stopped. Psst, Charles, is that you? ;)
    The beginning “J” is in conflict with the last “t”. It is not exaggerated, as a person with a big ego would start a signature with a big entrance to say “here I am!” I am thinking there is something being repressed here, and that he left off the “n” in his first name is very interesting.
    In fact, I cannot find any mention of dropped or omitted letters in any of my references so I may have to use my intuition on this feature and suggest that the missing letters are not missing but that they are being hidden. No, wait, here it is on page 146 of “Handwriting Analysis, the Complete Basic Book” by Karen Amend and Mary Ruiz — “omitted small letters” indicates a person who leaves out essential parts of information, ability to slide past commitment. (Well, I was close.)
    He starts out his signature with large, but not exaggerated, capitals, but look at how pinched the letters “o” and “e” are. Sexually frustrated. And again, the characteristics of secretiveness and deceptiveness are reinforced.
    As none of his letters are pointed or particularly long above or below the baseline, I see this as an indication of a mind that is not curious or probing. He’s not likely to do any in-depth thinking on an issue.
    On the other hand, since I am in the middle of reading “The Da Vinci Code”, I am quite willing to throw all this analyses out the window and exclaim, “Good Heavens, Mother of Christ! That’s a pentagram at the end of his name! The mark of the Devil!” It may be closer to the truth.
    You just never know.
    (My other references are “The Handwriting Analyst’s Toolkit” by Peter West, and “Handwriting Analysis: The Art and Science of Reading Character by Grapho Analysis” by M.N. Bunker, published in 1959. The latter book is fabulous, the author being the founder of the Grapho Analysis Society. If any of you can find this book, I highly recommend reading it. It is a goldmine.)

  • http://www.lananfrank.net/lana/ amanuensis

    Well, the signature is intersting, but two things hit me first about the image:
    1. The clearest and best-framed word on the page is “inappropriate.” What is inappropriate here, Roberts? People asking questions about him?
    2. The large hands in the photo almost appear to be in a position of signing the letter. Odd that they are fairly dark hands for a man that is overwhelming white.
    On to other things. The font in the letter is monospace. It is terrifically old-fashioned in this age of computers, it is a throw-back to typewriters. It is out-moded and out-dated.
    One more note on the signature: he can’t keep his baseline straight; it makes the whole signature appear uneven. It’s a stark contrast to the uniformity of the monospace font.

  • fotonique
  • Realpolitik

    Hmmmm…a pentagram. Is he a Proctor and Gamble Satanist for the fundies to fight? Or is he just Marilyn Chambers’ bastard fascist lovechild? Time will tell…

Refresh Archives

Random Notes