• If you start a thread here you have permission to edit the thread and your posts indefinitely. So if the status of your sale or auction changes, please come back and update the thread.

Letter with art... (1 Viewer)

With things like that, condition - who cares. If I had $1500 lying on the table here I'd buy it. Find something else he typed in 1964...it's going to cost you. I have one 1964 letter here (also to the Webbs) and it's the oldest piece of his typing that I have. The old stuff is getting hard to come by. I think that letter is worth every penny.
 
I like his funny remarks about Frances poetry group "...talking about nothing at great lenght." - he-he.
It's out of my reach - moneywise. Well, at least we get to read it...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is a great early letter, with a nice painting. I imagine a professional paper restorer could remove or minimize the tape residue and staining, as well as mend the tears, and it would be worth the expense.

Question for whoever might know: in his early paintings such as this, what kind of paint did Bukowski use? It almost looks too opaque to be watercolor, although it may be. Possibly casein or poster paint or acrylics?
 
I think a lot of that color is marker, actually (page 2 especially).

But as for paint, it's unlikely that he used cheap drugstore poster paint. Remember, he did work at Graphic Arts Center for some time, and had the art classes at LA City College, so he knew about materials.

I've seen what I'm sure is oil, watercolor and markers, and for the less expensive, thicker paints, I would assume he went with acrylic. But that's only speculation based on what most painters or painting students do when they don't want to spring for expensive paint (or can't wait for oil to dry).
 
mjp said:
But as for paint, it's unlikely that he used cheap drugstore poster paint. Remember, he did work at Graphic Arts Center for some time, and had the art classes at LA City College, so he knew about materials.

Good point. I didn't think about markers. That might explain the bold, unmixed colors in some of his paintings. In a scan, you can't always tell how thick the paint is. I had assumed some of that rich color must be thicker paints like acrylic, poster paint or casein, but markers might give the same effect in a scan. I figured he wouldn't use oils on paper.
 
I didn't think acrylics were widely available in the early 60s, but did some checking on Google and found they started being used in art materials in the 1950s. I was an art minor in college in the mid 60s and remember hearing about them circa 1967, but I guess that was just my ignorance at the time, and Buk may have used them in the early 1960s (not to suggest he used them on this letter). Maybe it's geeky, but I think a chronological study of his art materials and techniques would be interesting, and might help collectors evaluate items for possible forgery.

I see the letter didn't meet the reserve. If I had deep pockets, I'd be all over that thing, regardless of the condition. It's classic.
 
I see the letter didn't sell,
The reserve wasn't met.
I was thinking about bidding $1750 the last minute,
But saw that Cupcakes was the highest bidder and I'd feel guilty.:(

But then I thought, hell, I'll get over the guilt:D
It was then that I thought Scott might get upset :mad: over my ideal to work-for-him-until-I've-paid-him-off idea.:)

(Yes, feeling a little whimsical.... must be it's August!)
 
I guess I'm kind of blind to condition (unless I'm the seller, then I pay attention). You more experienced Buk collectors might be able to tell me: did the condition alone keep this letter from selling? Given the great content, the interesting art, the date, the length, I'd imagine a letter like this should be worth a couple grand, maybe three? But it's torn in half. Would a collector not want it just because of the damage (which may be repairable)? I'd be curious to hear opinions on the value with and without the damage.
 
I think the letter market is just soft. Letters and poem manuscripts don't go for as much as they did for a while there.

As for condition, in manuscripts it would seem to be less important than books or some other non-unique item. You can't own the "best copy" of that letter. It is what it is.

I don't know if I would even restore it. Maybe have it mounted on acid free linen or something to stabilize it. It looks good kind of fucked up. But what do I know.
 
mjp said:
It looks good kind of fucked up. But what do I know.

True. Kind of like your battle-scarred AT TERROR STREET AND AGONY WAY. The yellowed tape does give it some extra character. But you know an archivist would want that tape gone.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top