20 Tanks From Kasseldown - Portfolio, 1946 (1 Viewer)

cirerita

Founding member
"20 Tanks From Kasseldown," story, in PORTFOLIO AN IN¬TERNATIONAL REVIEW (Washington D.C.) 3 (Spring 1946), both sides leaf 8.

Info from Aaron's book:
1 PORTFOLIO III [1946]
TWENTY TANKS FROM KASSELDOWN

Broadside:

[Recto, upper right corner, in black:] Portfolio III Leaf Eight | 20 TANKS FROM KASSELDOWN | CHARLES BUKOWSKI | [2 columns of text] | [verso:] [2 columns of text] [Black Sun Press, Washington, D.C.]

1 sheet. 16 x 11 7/8 in. (40.7 x 30.1 cm.) Price unknown. Stiff cream paper, printed on both sides, edges trimmed.

Circa 1000 copies were published spring 1946. Issued in portfolio.

Portfolio: 30 x 17 1/8 in. (76.2 x 43.5 cm.)Yellow paper cover lettered across front, in red: Portfolio III | Black Sun Press. Front fold over flap: [at tail, in red:] Editorial Offices at 1606 20th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. Additional stiff cream paper portfolio cover with flaps folding to center, printed in brown on upper left flap.

Collation: Recto leaf 1: [in black:] "Portfolio III Cover Leaf | | Portfolio | Designed by Caresse Crosby | The Black Sun Press | 1946"; leaf 2 and recto of leaf 3 printed with biographical data on each contributor; verso, leaf 3: "Deluxe copies of this issue, limited to 300, with a Frontis- | Piece by Romare Bearden will be available at a special price. | Portfolio IV will be published in Italy, Summer, 1946"; recto leaf 4: "An Intercontinental Quarterly | volume III Spring 1946 | Caresse Crosby Editor | Associate Editors | Henry Miller Prose | Selden Rodman Poetry | Sam Rosenberg Photography | Harry T. Moore Reviews" | [contents]; leaf 5 as foreleaf; leaves 1-29 text.

tanks1.jpg

tanks2.jpg
 
That signature was added later right? It wasn't printed like that? I've only seen pictures of that, and I can't recall.
 
I can't recall that, but the signature seems to have been added later on. There's no signature at the end of the story.
 
Red Stodolsky of Baroque Books in Hollywood produced a second edition of 25 numbered and signed copies of 20 Tanks that's almost identical to the first edition (I think the measurements were slightly smaller)...
 
Wow, that's a lot of question marks.

The title reflects Bukowski's hatred of Kasseldown and it's inhabitants. He found Kasseldownians to be lazy, ill-tempered and smelly. They offended and angered him so much that he wanted to train a platoon of 20 combat-ready baboons to drive tanks into Kasseldown and level the town.

His plan never got off the ground though, because he could never get more than 13 or 14 baboons together at one time. He had the tanks and the plan, just not the monkeypower. Which is a good thing for the residents of Kasseldown, that's for sure!
 
Last edited:
but where have you got this information?.... only from the story?....
I used to sell baboons to Bukowski. I have the only baboon farm West of the Mississippi, and he was one of my best customers.

He never fed them properly though, so he could never accumulate 20 baboons. It's an ugly, painful story, and not one that I like to tell often.
 
20 Tanks from Kasseldown

Actually, the whole "20 Tanks from Kasseldown" story was a real mystery to me until a friend recently sent me info re the German Army and Hitler's flame thrower tanks. That SEEMS to be the background, but lately I've wondered whether it's also about Buk's time in prison during the draft-dodging (or draft-ignoring)days, or perhaps a combination of both. In any case, it's great stuff.:)
 
I used to sell baboons to Bukowski. I have the only baboon farm West of the Mississippi, and he was one of my best customers.

He never fed them properly though, so he could never accumulate 20 baboons. It's an ugly, painful story, and not one that I like to tell often.

you have me laughing so hard (silently) that I almost woke up my wife who would bump me off the computer if she were awake. Babboons..


Note that the web site credits Matrix, not Portfolio:

"Originally published in Matrix, v. 11, nos. 1-2, Double Issue, Spring-Summer 1948"

Why is that?

According to my razor sharp memory (har har) Tom Groff reprinted 20 Tanks as a broadside. I've seen a bootleg edition of that reprint, something like five copies only -- forget the name of the press that did it.

It's been years since I read the story -- ought to reread it.
 
Rekrab said:
Note that the web site credits Matrix, not Portfolio:

"Originally published in Matrix, v. 11, nos. 1-2, Double Issue, Spring-Summer 1948"

Why is that?

According to my razor sharp memory (har har) Tom Groff reprinted 20 Tanks as a broadside. I've seen a bootleg edition of that reprint, something like five copies only -- forget the name of the press that did it.

It's been years since I read the story -- ought to reread it.

Yeah, Tom Groff "Reprinted" it. Actually he didn't print it, Blackrose "Printed" it for him.

Then Red Stodolsky xeroxed the original 1946 edition, had Buk sign them and made a limited, but pretty unattractive edition. I think that it was 25 copies.

Bill
 
Wait a minute: just saw on eBay that Groff did a broadside of "Aftermath of a Lengthy Rejection Slip." Did he also do one of "20 Tanks?" Or am I utterly confused as usual? So much for my razor sharp memory. I guess I could always go check my facts, like I should have done to start with. Nice of mjp not to ban me for too many half-cocked posts. Guess I'm getting a geezer pass, like when the kid at the sandwich shop gives me a discount just for having survived this long.
 
Nice to know I'm not the only one who mixes stuff up. Maybe it's infectious.

I went to look up the facts about Groff's reissue broadside in my own biblio (only one I have on Buk) but it's not covered in there. To clarify, the bootleg I mentioned is a reprint of Groff's reprint of "Aftermath of a Lengthy Rejection Slip" (not a bootleg of "20 Tanks"), and it's labeled "A Thai Weed Piracy" and limited to five numbered copies. Undated but it was done in late 1984.
 
Hi,
If that is the case, then it is no more than a pirate edition that has no real value. Especially if it is a xerox or offset of the real thing that was published a year earlier.

Bill
 
True. There are probably many pirated editions of Bukowski stuff done in xerox, and like you say, they have no real value. Do you think a letterpressed piracy of any given title would have some collector value? I don't know of any -- just wondering if that would make a difference. It's a murky area you don't hear much about. Many collectors ignore bootlegs and that's probably wise. Why encourage it?
 
yes, I suspect that a letterpressed bootleg would bring slightly more, but will, not too much, unless it is very early. There is a bootleg from 1962 (?) that is very pricey...

Bill
 
1962? I wouldn't have thought Buk had a big enough following that early to warrant a piracy. Can you spill the beans as to title, who done it, price?
 
Krumhansl #10; Penny Poetry / The Priest And The Matador.

Broadside:

Per Krumhansl "Published sometime in 1962. Bukowski believed that this item was produced by students at Northwestern or Perdue..."

Yes, he warranted a bootleg at that point, but it is odd, because he was not hard to find and would almost certainly granted permission...

I have never seen one of these. Has anyone else ever seen one?

Bill
 
Wow -- I've never heard of this. Wouldn't you love to know more about the students who did it?

What's a copy go for?
 
I have no info re. this one -save the one everybody knows- and I haven't come across a single reference to this broadside in the many unpublished letters I've read so far.

I think to recall there's a copy at UCSB, but I didn't pay attention to it when I was there. I was too busy flirting with the young, female librarian ;)
 
cirerita -- you had your priorities in order.

Guess I should break down and buy a copy of Krumhansl: I could be missing a lot, if this is any indication.
 
True. I hear more about copyright now amongst my academic contacts than I did back when I was in college. In those days, if you wanted to reprint something, you just did it.
 
You are right. I'm loopy from lack of sleep. Groff published "Aftermath", Stodolsky published the reprint of 20 tanks....

This is interesting. How come Groff's is listed in Krumhansl and Stodolsky's is not? Did K. miss Stodolsky's?

It's listed in Water Row Books Catalogue #64 and priced $195: "Xerox reprint of the broadside story originally issued by Black Sun Press [...] One of 25 numbered copies (total edition) signed by Bukowski [...] Very scarce."
 
I would have thought that Stodolsky's xerox is not classed as an 'A' item - it sounds pretty much like a nasty bootleg really, despite the signature.
 
This is interesting. How come Groff's is listed in Krumhansl and Stodolsky's is not? Did K. miss Stodolsky's?

It's listed in Water Row Books Catalogue #64 and priced $195: "Xerox reprint of the broadside story originally issued by Black Sun Press [...] One of 25 numbered copies (total edition) signed by Bukowski [...] Very scarce."

Hi,
This is because Red just bootlegged this with Buk's permission. It is not a Primary "A" item any more than "My First Fax Poem " is a primary item. Red did a few of these limited edition Buk items for himself and good customers, but they are in effect, ephemeral reprints.

Bill
 
Yes, what Bill said. The Groff's Aftermath was a completely separate publication and not just a reprint. It also included an article by Bukowski titled About Aftermath. Red just made a two sided photocopy which Bukowski signed and numbered.
 
Interesting, indeed. I had forgotten K.'s covered "A" items only, though I think it's been discussed more than once whether some items could be considered "A" items or not.

Anyway, do you think that a bootlegged reprint signed by Bukowski can be considered a "bootleg"?
 
Since Bukowski participated in this, "bootleg" would probably be the wrong word. "One-off reprint" would probably be a better description.

It would actually be a nice little item if it weren't so poorly produced. At the time that Red and Bukowski did this, Twenty Tanks had not yet been reprinted anywhere as far as I know.
 
It would actually be a nice little item if it weren't so poorly produced. At the time that Red and Bukowski did this, Twenty Tanks had not yet been reprinted anywhere as far as I know.

Richard Peabody reprinted it in 1981 in one of his cool, slick books.

I think a copy of someone else's work is a bootleg by definition. My definition, anyway.

Is a sanctioned bootleg a bootleg?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top