it catches on eBay (1 Viewer)

[donevaro]

Coming under some rather constrictive financial situations, check out the listing on ebay:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...300181952795&ssPageName=STRK:MESE:IT&ih=020"]

it catches my heart in its hands is in perfect condition with no fading. Bid now or forever lose your chance.

 

[Father Luke]

i can see why they would ask about the broken spine.

anyone know anything about it being among the first batches?

from the auction...

Q: Hi, where is the cork cover, I can't see it in the picture?
A: After some research, I have come to an amateur conclusion that this was
one of the first batches printed between June and September 1963. There are
"erratas" listed on one of the back pages and the wrap cover is Linweave
Spectra (The book is not in front of me currently, but I think it was 395-lb.) I
will clarify this if necessary. What you see is what is there.

 

[mjp]

They used different inks on the covers, but I don't think there are different "batches" of printing. You don't set a page of type and lock it into the press and print a few, then take out the form and wait a few weeks to print more. You get it set up and print your run. Done, move on.

The book was certainly assembled in batches, but every part had to be printed and ready before copy #1 could be put together. I don't think the batch suggestion - as relates to printing any page or part of the book - holds any water.

If someone has specific knowledge otherwise, I will shut up and consider myself enlightened.

 

[ROC]

Curious.
There does not appear to be any cork and it is not because it has not faded (as stated in the auction). But the picture is of the outer jacket (as the inner jacket is white).
The second picture makes it look like there is something wrong with the outer cover but you can't rally tell.

I can't make any sense of this one.
It looks good though.

 

[donevaro]

Thanks for all the education. I'm usually half drunk when I come to my "amateur conclusions."

 

[Father Luke]

Thanks for all the education. I'm usually half drunk when I come to my "amateur conclusions."

taht's the shpirit...

 

[roni]

@donevaro:
do you ship to Germany? at what conditions?

 

[mjp]

The additional pictures help clear things up.

 

[Bukfan]

It looks like the spine has a "rip" almost half it's lenght. And what about the missing cork?

 

[MULLINAX]

Let 'er rip!

The "rip" appears to be a "fold".

 

[donevaro]

I will ship worldwide. I will get costs from the post office and pay 50 percent of it if you win.

It looks like the spine has a "rip" almost half it's lenght. And what about the missing cork?

Cork is apparently missing, according to all the experts. I know nothing of antiquarian book appraisal.

It looks like the spine has a "rip" almost half it's lenght. And what about the missing cork?

No rips anywhere except where noted in the listing. This is nearly perfect.

 

[bospress.net]

Cork is apparently missing, according to all the experts. I know nothing of antiquarian book appraisal.

The cork would have been over the top of the yellow cover and the skeleton would have been printed over it. It seems that the Webbs missed this on your copy. A variation, surely, but really every copy is somewhat a variation caused by the hand binding of the project. As mjp stated, with letterpress, you don't print some and then go back and print more. you set up and print it all. They probably ran out of cork paper and needed to finish printing the covers, so they went without cork.

Still, looks like a nice copy, cork or not.

Bill

 

[donevaro]

Thank you.

 

[mjp]

It would still be interesting to have as a (possibly) unique copy, or one of a small number of variations.

---

The signature date of 10/21/63 caught my eye. Maybe everyone else who has a copy could chime in here with their signature date. I just don't remember seeing one from October before. I've seen them from May, August and December (the December copies seem to be the most elaborate, with the yellow illustrations and written out sayings [amphorisms?] and little poems).

So with this one from October it looks like there were several signings roughly two months apart. I assume Bukowski did these on the raw purple pages in Los Angeles, since he didn't actually meet the Webbs face to face until 1964.

 

[ROC]

Mines 5-19-63

 

[cirerita]

Mine's 8-3-63

 

[bospress.net]

mine had the signature page removed by some sick fuck...

 

[Rekrab]

...[snip]...the raw purple pages in Los Angeles ...

Now that almost sounds like a line from a Bukowski poem.

On the "different issues" speculation. I don't think it's necessarily the case with this copy, but I do seem to remember reading somewhere that with one of the Loujon Press books, there was some damage that happened and some pages that were already printed and stacked, ready for binding, had to be reprinted, so you could have different issues of release if some pages from the first set were assembled and bound, and then the damage happened, and then the second set were printed and bound. No to be argumentative...just thinking out loud. Or maybe I'm all wet.

 

[bospress.net]

Now that almost sounds like a line from a Bukowski poem.

On the "different issues" speculation. I don't think it's necessarily the case with this copy, but I do seem to remember reading somewhere that with one of the Loujon Press books, there was some damage that happened and some pages that were already printed and stacked, ready for binding, had to be reprinted, so you could have different issues of release if some pages from the first set were assembled and bound, and then the damage happened, and then the second set were printed and bound. No to be argumentative...just thinking out loud. Or maybe I'm all wet.

That was Outsider 4/5 when they had the flood and the pages were washed away.

A flood in the desert, mind you,.

Bill

 

[Purple Stickpin]

The additional pictures help clear things up.

It looks like a wonderful piece. The signature looks a bit funky; or am I just not aware of 1963, other than that was the year I was born?

The "Charles" looks OK, but the "Buk" is just a bit off to me. By no means am I accusing anyone of anything. Just wondering...

 

[mjp]

That's consistent with other signatures from It Catches. There's no need to fake it anyway, as they were all signed.

 

[Bukfan]

Both "it catches.." and "Crucifix" was printed on "linweave spectra" paper right? What's "linweave spectra" paper? Is it handmade sheets?

 

[Purple Stickpin]

That's consistent with other signatures from It Catches. There's no need to fake it anyway, as they were all signed.

Well, that's a very good point, mjp. But given the obscure nature of this particular volume, one could wonder if the different cover/presentation might lead to a different signed page. Like I said, it looks almost OK. Perhaps October was a different month for Buk. You know, he was drinking something other than Cutty Sark...or just more of it.

 

[mjp]

Both "it catches.." and "Crucifix" was printed on "linweave spectra" paper right? What's "linweave spectra" paper? Is it handmade sheets?

Not handmade. I don't know what Linweave is, but Spectra is a line of bright colors. Then again, Spectra may not have had the same meaning back then, I dunno.

I say it's not handmade but I don't know that for sure. But having worked with handmade paper, the deckle on the edge of the paper the Webbs used is a little too consistent to be handmade. But again, I don't know that for a fact.

But given the obscure nature of this particular volume, one could wonder if the different cover/presentation might lead to a different signed page.

Never know, the Webbs made so many different versions of this book, and a lot of one-offs (the copy they gave to Bukowski was bound in leather). The signature looked weird to me too, but his signature was different in the 50's and 60's, and he was writing carefully with those metallic pens...

 

[Rekrab]

That was Outsider 4/5 when they had the flood and the pages were washed away.

A flood in the desert, mind you.

Glad to hear that I am remembering it fairly correctly.

All this discussion about the cover being different and the signature looking off on the copy of IT CATCHES, makes me ask: what's to keep a skilled craftsman from recreating an entire rare book? With the high prices on some of Bukowski's early collections, the pay off could be huge. A book as complex as IT CATCHES would be a great deal of work, with difficult to match papers, old typefaces, etc., but some of the early chapbooks might be relatively simple. Printed mimeo or offset on mundane paper stocks, I imagine a con man could make a passable copy cheaply and easily. Then they'd have multiples to sell, each at hundreds of dollars. If this sort of thing hasn't happened, I'm surprised. I think such copies could and would be detected, if examined in person by experts, but if sold in a quiet, non-public way, they could fool many collectors. Has this sort of fraud ever been attempted with a Bukowski book? I know it's happened with other authors. None of this is intended to suggest the book now on eBay is anything but legitimate.

 

[mjp]

It would be easy to knock-off the old chapbooks. I don't know if it's been done, but any printer could easily make convincing copies of most of those early chaps (with the exception of mimeo titles like Confessions of a Man Insane Enough to Live with Beasts). But something like It Catches My Heart In Its Hands...even at the high prices you could get for it, it would be a monumental task to recreate that book. I don't think that anyone who would be interested in a con like that would have the resources (or time) to do it. It would have to be made by hand, just like the original, to pass as authentic. The production costs would be ridiculous, and a sudden influx of lots of brand-new-looking copies would be suspect, to say the least.

If you had the talent and resources to do it, it would be interesting to make a facsimile of It Catches My Heart In Its Hands, plainly mark it as such, and sell it for $149 or something. You might be able to do that. But still, it would be quite an undertaking (and you'd probably lose money).

But as fraud, there's no need to bother with the Webb books when something like Flower, Fist and Bestial Wail sells for considerably more, and would be much, much easier to fake.

 

[Bukfan]

Not handmade. I don't know what Linweave is, but Spectra is a line of bright colors. Then again, Spectra may not have had the same meaning back then, I dunno.

I say it's not handmade but I don't know that for sure. But having worked with handmade paper, the deckle on the edge of the paper the Webbs used is a little too consistent to be handmade. But again, I don't know that for a fact.

Thanks mjp! Yes, it was the deckled edges that made me think that the sheets could be handmade. I guess "Spectra" refers to the first pages, all in different colors, then.
Are both "It catches" and "Crucifix" the exact same size? And do they look the same with the "flaps" and everything (except for the cork, which "Crucifix" don't have)?

 

[MULLINAX]

That was Outsider 4/5 when they had the flood and the pages were washed away.

A flood in the desert, mind you.

"The Webbs were always crying and bitching, looking for handouts and pleading the cause of "ART". Most of their problems were of their own making and moving around all the time didn't make matters any better". A rough paraphrase from somewhere.

I think such copies could and would be detected, if examined in person by experts, but if sold in a quiet, non-public way, they could fool many collectors. Has this sort of fraud ever been attempted with a Bukowski book? I know it's happened with other authors. None of this is intended to suggest the book now on eBay is anything but legitimate.

Someone made a mint by forging hundreds of copies of a tome that documents the dispersal of saliva onto an unwilling young person's visage.

 

[bospress.net]

I dont think that there has ever been a pirated copy of "Charles Bukowski Spit In My Face". He is likely talking about otehr authors. If I am wrong, I need to know though, David...

"The Webbs were always crying and bitching, looking for handouts and pleading the cause of "ART". Most of their problems were of their own making and moving around all the time didn't make matters any better". A rough paraphrase from somewhere.

I think that some of it was real problems that they had (the flood is documented) and some may have been for other reasons.

Still, they did create an art and those around them at the time saw that. Folks like Edwin Blair gladly gave them hard-earned money to see that their vision was seen through, because they saw it as an important vision.

Think of what else they could have done if Lou did not have to sell paintings 8, 10, 12 or 14 hours a day. Sure, she may not have actually sold paintings 14 hours a day, but I would love to have been in a position to have provided enough money to them that they could concentrate on creating and maybe published more.

The cause of "ART" is worthy of support. Those that do not have the vision to themselves create art sometimes are happy to help those that can create.

Bill

 

[MULLINAX]

Man, I would love to be a Patron of The Arts.

ART deserves support, but that's just my opinion. And yours, too.

One could just as easily say that Mexican dishwashers, Guatemalan fruitpickers or Honduran landscapers deserve support, perhaps more than any artist does.

There are too many JANKOS out there pleading for understanding and handouts.

Buk said there's nothing HOLY about art.

A man needs a good bowel movement before he needs another immortal poem.

(Off to the craper...)



I was just kidding about "...Spit In My Face". Please don't have a coronary, anyone.

 

[bospress.net]

I was just kidding about "...Spit In My Face". Please don't have a coronary, anyone.

no problem. It was just the first I had heard about this....

Best,
Bill

 

[MULLINAX]

Hmm. Maybe if...

 

[Rekrab]

I dont think that there has ever been a pirated copy of "Charles Bukowski Spit In My Face". He is likely talking about otehr authors. If I am wrong, I need to know though, David...

Not to my knowledge. That's the first I've heard of it. It would be ironic if I'd been ripped off that way, and here I am speculating on how easy it would be to run a scam like that.

mjp: I agree, IT CATCHES would be more work than it was worth, but FLOWER, FIST & BESTIAL WAIL or other early chapbooks would be simple.

I was just kidding about "...Spit In My Face". Please don't have a coronary, anyone.

Ah...I thought you were serious. Actually, it made me smile. The idea that someone had made more money off the book than I had would be poetic justice of a sort. Payback for sins committed.

 

[donevaro]

Glad to hear that I am remembering it fairly correctly.

All this discussion about the cover being different and the signature looking off on the copy of IT CATCHES, makes me ask: what's to keep a skilled craftsman from recreating an entire rare book? With the high prices on some of Bukowski's early collections, the pay off could be huge. A book as complex as IT CATCHES would be a great deal of work, with difficult to match papers, old typefaces, etc., but some of the early chapbooks might be relatively simple. Printed mimeo or offset on mundane paper stocks, I imagine a con man could make a passable copy cheaply and easily. Then they'd have multiples to sell, each at hundreds of dollars. If this sort of thing hasn't happened, I'm surprised. I think such copies could and would be detected, if examined in person by experts, but if sold in a quiet, non-public way, they could fool many collectors. Has this sort of fraud ever been attempted with a Bukowski book? I know it's happened with other authors. None of this is intended to suggest the book now on eBay is anything but legitimate.

I can assure everyone that the original owner of this book had neither the skill nor the education to know how to reproduce it. In fact, I don't think he had the slightest clue that his dead wife's collection was in the least bit valuable. That's probably why he gave it to me.

Nothing like money for nothing.

 

[MULLINAX]

And you'll be handing over some of your loot to him as a sign of your belated appreciation?

 

[nymark]

Would you? Was that a witty sarcasm? I can't tell. Seriously. Would you pass along some of the profits to the original owner? Clearly, you are under no obligation, but would you do it?

 

[bospress.net]

I would pass a lion's share to the original owner if they were a friend or family. If they were a stranger (why would a stranger give me a book?), then I probably would not. I would like to say that I would always do the morally right thing, but truthfully, it would depend.

That is an honest answer anyway.

BIll

 

[nymark]

I concur. It would all depend on who the original owner was. Honestly, if it were someone I didn't know, I would feel little motivation to send in the cash.

 

[MULLINAX]

Pass it on!

Would you? Was that a witty sarcasm? I can't tell. Seriously. Would you pass along some of the profits to the original owner? Clearly, you are under no obligation, but would you do it?

No sacrcasm intended. Everyone here knows that I'm a pedantic, literal-minded dolt.

Yes, as far as passing along some cash. It would be a "finder's fee" or something like that. He inadvertently did you a favour. You can return the favour and tell us about it. Doesn't have to be more than 15% or so. You know, a "taste", as the boys in Joisey would say.

Then, you can bask in the warm praise that will be showered upon you by Buk.net members!

 

[Rekrab]

I know a dealer who bought a book cheap (say $10), thinking it was worth maybe $100. Then later discovered it was very rare and quickly sold it for $7,000. He contacted the guy he bought it from and gave him an additional $1,000. He's a highly ethical guy, and I thought that showed class. The dealer still made a handsome profit, and the guy he bought it from did okay. Windfall all around.