Dorbin biblio, signed and numbered with art
- Thread starter cirerita
- Start date
mjp
Founding member
I was the second place bidder, so I was just goofing on myself.
I think it was worth more than dermaface got it for (I assume that's him, I don't know for sure). The value of the books with paintings seems to be based primarily on the rarity of the book, with a premium tacked on for art, whatever the art looks like.
I do not look at them that way. To me the quality of the art is the basis of the value. Unless it's Terror Street or Post Office, which are going to cost you as much as a car these days, no matter what the art looks like. So this particular book, even though it's Dorbin, which yes, generally has a lower value, had an interesting painting in it. Very uncharacteristic and unique, and it reminded me of some of my own scribblings, which is why I went after it.
The prices really follow no logic. If they did, Dorbin (with Bukowski signature or art) would be worth more than it is as it is a scarce book. Certainly much more scarce than the later (late 70's/early 80's) hardcovers with paintings. And if you applied logic the quality of the art would have an effect on price, but booksellers are not generally art dealers, so how do they set a price based on the "quality" of the art? Besides, quality is subjective.
But I think most people would rather have this than this.
Free standing art tends to be more expensive than the books because there is much less of it available. And it is a thousand times easier to display. What's the value of a painting really if it is closed up inside a book on your shelf? You can't enjoy it.
yes to all what mjp said!
except:
if somebody is wanting to put it on the wall, it's not too hard to carfully remove it and still have a hardcover first.
so why should an only-painting (of the same size that is) be of more worth than a tipped-in in a HC-first?
besides, as i said, i totally go with you concerning the value depending on the quality of the art. your examples talk!
except:
if somebody is wanting to put it on the wall, it's not too hard to carfully remove it and still have a hardcover first.
so why should an only-painting (of the same size that is) be of more worth than a tipped-in in a HC-first?
besides, as i said, i totally go with you concerning the value depending on the quality of the art. your examples talk!
mjp
Founding member
If I'm not mistaken, a few people fainted when you said "remove it." ;)
I think the book would hold little value on it's own, because there are signs that it is not just a first, but a special first, and if that "special" bit is gone...well, it's going to be very difficult to sell the book should you ever want to.
If you're resourceful and careful you can find ways to display the paintings in the books.
bospress.net
www.bospress.net
LickTheStar
Sad Flower in the Sand
of course I wouldn't do.
mjp
Founding member
No. That's a shadow box. The pages/painting do not touch the UV glass cover. It floats below that. The book is supported from the bottom by a wooden block covered in acid free paper, and the covers are attached to the backing by an elaborately shaped coated wire-thingy that I personally bent to my own specifications. ;)
The book is really under no stress, and I take it out every year or so to check the spine, etc. So far so good. If I thought it was being damaged I wouldn't have it in there. I won't keep it in there forever, but it's been in there for a few years and it's fine.
The book is really under no stress, and I take it out every year or so to check the spine, etc. So far so good. If I thought it was being damaged I wouldn't have it in there. I won't keep it in there forever, but it's been in there for a few years and it's fine.