20 Tanks From Kasseldown - Portfolio, 1946
- Thread starter cirerita
- Start date
cirerita
Founding member
This is interesting. How come Groff's is listed in Krumhansl and Stodolsky's is not? Did K. miss Stodolsky's?
It's listed in Water Row Books Catalogue #64 and priced $195: "Xerox reprint of the broadside story originally issued by Black Sun Press [...] One of 25 numbered copies (total edition) signed by Bukowski [...] Very scarce."
no tanks
Uh... I've just done my civic duty and informed the editors that
the actual title is... "20 Tanks...", not "20 THANKS...." I'll be
interested to see if I receive a tank you note from them.
Uh... I've just done my civic duty and informed the editors that
the actual title is... "20 Tanks...", not "20 THANKS...." I'll be
interested to see if I receive a tank you note from them.
bospress.net
www.bospress.net
Hi,
This is because Red just bootlegged this with Buk's permission. It is not a Primary "A" item any more than "My First Fax Poem " is a primary item. Red did a few of these limited edition Buk items for himself and good customers, but they are in effect, ephemeral reprints.
Bill
chronic
old and in the way
Since Bukowski participated in this, "bootleg" would probably be the wrong word. "One-off reprint" would probably be a better description.
It would actually be a nice little item if it weren't so poorly produced. At the time that Red and Bukowski did this, Twenty Tanks had not yet been reprinted anywhere as far as I know.
It would actually be a nice little item if it weren't so poorly produced. At the time that Red and Bukowski did this, Twenty Tanks had not yet been reprinted anywhere as far as I know.
cirerita
Founding member
Richard Peabody reprinted it in 1981 in one of his cool, slick books.
Is a sanctioned bootleg a bootleg?
chronic
old and in the way
But since Bukowski was in on it from the start, and it was his work, I think bootleg is the wrong word.
I wasn't aware of that. Red's reprint would have been right around '85.
Father Luke
Founding member
cirerita said:
Yeah.
Pearl Jam, and the Grateful Dead, sanctioned
bootlegs all the time. Hank Three also. . .
I see it happen in music all the time.
chronic
old and in the way
You have a point (sort of). In music, when a band like the Grateful Dead or Pearl Jam say it's okay for fans to record and distribute their concerts, the term bootleg takes on a different meaning. While the recordings may have been done without the express permission of the band, the band does tacitly approve of them. However, they never say that it's okay to sell them.
If someone were to make a copy of one of these band's official releases and then sell them, that would be a bootleg in the traditional sense and you can be sure that the band(s) would not be okay with that.
Bootleg usually means to copy something without explicit or tacit permission and then sell it, so since 20 Tanks was a copy of someone's work (in terms of copying the original layout), but was done with permission of the author, I guess that it's sort of a half-bootleg. Had Red done this without any permission, then yeah, it would be a bootleg.
If someone were to make a copy of one of these band's official releases and then sell them, that would be a bootleg in the traditional sense and you can be sure that the band(s) would not be okay with that.
Bootleg usually means to copy something without explicit or tacit permission and then sell it, so since 20 Tanks was a copy of someone's work (in terms of copying the original layout), but was done with permission of the author, I guess that it's sort of a half-bootleg. Had Red done this without any permission, then yeah, it would be a bootleg.
Father Luke
Founding member
On June 25, 2004, Hank Williams III gave his OK for archive.org inclusion:
"I give all bootleggers permission to upload my shows .....Hank Williams III"
http://www.archive.org/details/HankWilliamsIII
"I give all bootleggers permission to upload my shows .....Hank Williams III"
http://www.archive.org/details/HankWilliamsIII
bospress.net
www.bospress.net
In this case, if Red xeroxed another publishers layout, he would also technically need permission from that publisher too. Buk owned the words, but the published would have owned the layout and design...
Bill
bospress.net
www.bospress.net
And it is very possible that the publisher knew of what Red did and gave permission. Either way, it is a xeroxed and signed release. I'm a completest, but have never had a desire to own this "release".
Bill
Bill
Springsteen also encouraged bootleggers during the 70s/early 80s.
I have a bootleg, where he even states through the mic: "Are any bootleggers out there? Roll your tape!" and then plays a song that wasn't on LP then.
Still these were bootlegs, since they were done by people from the audience and the record company didn't give permission.
Anyway, a bootleg is usually a recording made by the bootlegger on his own.
a copy of an existing work is a different thing. It's a copy.
so i don't see the term 'bootleg' matching here.
Which says zero about the legal status or collectible value of the item, of course.
I have a bootleg, where he even states through the mic: "Are any bootleggers out there? Roll your tape!" and then plays a song that wasn't on LP then.
Still these were bootlegs, since they were done by people from the audience and the record company didn't give permission.
Anyway, a bootleg is usually a recording made by the bootlegger on his own.
a copy of an existing work is a different thing. It's a copy.
so i don't see the term 'bootleg' matching here.
Which says zero about the legal status or collectible value of the item, of course.
