Stravinsky On A Saturday Night At 7:18 P.M. (1 Viewer)

Pogue Mahone

Officials say drugs may have played a part
I have owned this one for quite a while, but someone must have posted it on here first:

I know a lot of people question the true value of a manuscript. My ex-wife (who I'm still very good friends with) gave it to me as a present.

A couple of questions:
1) What do you think is more valuable: a published or unpublished manuscript?

2) Even though it was never published, do the rights belong to the Buk estate?

In answer to your questions:

1) I think that unpublished is more valuable. My opinion only, but I'd rather own a poem that no one else has.
2) The Bukowski estate owns rights to everything that he wrote published or unpublished. It makes no difference. Copyright, i believe is life of the author plus 70 years.

I second Bill's opinion on unpublished, though the prices the manuscripts fetch don't seem to agree with us. I haven't seen a considerable premium paid for unpublished manuscripts over the years.

I would also say that the carbons (or the originals when you can get them) have more inherent value than the xeroxes or computer print outs, but again, the market usually begs to differ.

I'm not sure what you mean by "a lot of people question the true value of a manuscript," but manuscript prices have certainly been all over the map, and what they sell for seems more a matter of timing than quality (however you define that).
[...] I think that unpublished is more valuable. [...]
Except when they're classics.
Imagine having the manuscript of 'The Crunch' or 'One for the Shoeshine man'! (the only [as far as I know] manuscript, that MM kept is 'The Shoelace' - annother immortal classic.) And I'd bet that 'Dinosauria We' would see top prices, even though it's only computer-printout.
All the manuscripts for the posthumously published poems would certainly be valuable, from a research standpoint. So to speak.

Users who are viewing this thread