i know it's semi-rare and all, but it still seems weird that a little postcard (chilled green) is worth $25 (or more, depending on how the auction goes). that's my last copy of it - at one point i had ten or so, all of which i found in a mylar envelope stuffed between a bunch of books at serendipity books. i think it's a cool little item, but the poem isn't my favorite, and it falls into the "things i look at once every two years and so should probably sell" pile.
i'm kind of annoyed that the best item i'm currently selling (the celine/tardi book) has two views and no watchers. that's the best book in the lot, i swear! there's no way i'd sell it if i didn't already have a copy.
Like I said somewhere else around here today, there's little logic in the prices of Bukowski stuff. To me, anyway.
Maybe I'm crazy though. I would place a higher value on paperback NYG signed in 1969 than on a lettered BSP hardcover Last Night of the Earth Poems (that's signed on a blank piece of paper that was tipped in during binding). But you could probably buy five of the 1970 NYGs for less than the lettered hardcover.
That might be a bad example, but you get my drift. Why is Crucifix cheaper than those lettered BSP hardcovers? I mean, I know why lettered copies are justified or rationalized as being more expensive, but a letter or a number written on what is otherwise the same page...it's idiotic that one is more valuable than the other. $500 for different spine cloth.
I'm not saying buying them is idiotic. There's clearly added value there if you sell it later. But the fact that there is added value depending on whether Barbara Martin wrote a letter or a number with her red Flair pen - that's what's idiotic. To me.
Jesus, I've derailed my own post. Where are the moderators when you need them?