Unknown Bukowski pictures?

[Rachael]

That will be in my nightmares.

 

[Bukfan]

OMG!:eek:

 

[Black Swan]

Yeah, scaly!

 

[d gray]

cool shot with LK. not sure if it's been around.

 

[willrodgers]

this photo is in Linda King's new book.

 

[d gray]

thanks. i shoulda known it was known...

 

[Ponder]

 

[Rekrab]

Thanks for those, Ponder. I don't think I've seen either. Do you know where and when the shoe leather photo was taken?

 

[Johannes]

Kewl!

Where is the one with the Weissners from?

 

[roni]

[...] Do you know where and when the shoe leather photo was taken?

The back of it states "1964". I looks a bit like being from the same series as these:

My wild guess would be New Orleans.

 

[mjp]

Was he in New Orleans in 1964?

The date on the shoe picture is August of 1964. Marina was born September 7th, which would lead me to believe the pictures were taken in Los Angeles somewhere. I don't recall anything about him travelling just before her birth...?

 

[roni]

Does it say "August"? I only have seen the year.

My vague idea about New Orleans was, that I assume the guy in This picture:

could be Webb and it could be the same photo-shooting.

 

[hank solo]

On the 'shoe' pic it looks like it says Aug 64, printed small on the right of the photo. In your 'Webb' photo, Bukowski has a beard, so not the same day.

 

[Bukfan]

The back of it states "1964". I looks a bit like being from the same series as these:

I don't think I've ever seen those four photos before. Where did you find them, Roni?

 

[Johannes]

I think Bukowski went to visit the Webbs in New Orleans shortly after Marina was born to write and collect the poems for Crucifix?

I remember referring him to this visit in a couple of stories and letters. Can't check now, but it must be in Screams from the Balcony

 

[roni]

[...] Where did you find them

as usual: amongst MM's belongings.

I think Bukowski went to visit the Webbs in New Orleans [...]

This was my first thought too, but our timeline says, that was March 1965.

 

[hank solo]

They could be photos taken to be sent to Webb for inclusion in the Outsider 3 issue. I don't have a copy but I know he sent them photos for that special issue.


Edit - I realise that this would mean that the photos would need to be from 1963, not 64. So maybe not eh.

 

[Rekrab]

Those are great shots, Roni. I love the one where he's firing up a cigar. By MM you mean Michale Montfort, and not Marvin Malone, right? These look like drugstore snapshot prints and not professional photographs, so can we assume MM got them from Bukowski or someone else and didn't take them himself? I'm guessing Montfort didn't get involved with photographing Bukowski until later, the 1970s?

 

[mjp]

They could be photos taken to be sent to Webb for inclusion in the Outsider 3 issue. I don't have a copy but I know he sent them photos for that special issue.

Edit - I realise that this would mean that the photos would need to be from 1963, not 64. So maybe not eh.

That was one of the funniest stories in any of the letters books, the bit about being photographed and getting lost in Pasadena (To Jon Webb - October 15, 1962, Screams From the Balcony).

Nothing in Screams about a photo session in the Summer of 64, so those were probably just posed snapshots done by a friend (or Frances) for a magazine?

 

[roni]

[...] By MM you mean Michael Montfort, and not Marvin Malone, right? [...]

Ab-solutely right.

And, yes, they're not taken by MM, who was first invited to photograph Hank in 1976.

But being a Buk-fanatic, he would take and collect everything he could get his hands on. When you see these pictures in the original, they look like photographs taken from photographs and I guess, that's what they are.

 

[hank solo]

Here's a thought - could the Aug 64 on the front of that photo be an expiry date of the paper or the negative, and the hand written 1964 just be Bukowski's best guess?

 

[mjp]

could the Aug 64 on the front of that photo be an expiry date...

It's the date the film/print was developed (the month/year "timestamp" was very common on snapshot prints in the 60s and 70s -- here in the U.S. anyway). Could have been exposed any time before that.

 

[Purple Stickpin]

Yeah, I remember some photos we took on a family trip in the summer of '72 that somehow didn't get developed until '74 or '75, so, in this case, the date stamp is only relevant if the photos were developed right away.

 

[roni]

it's what the kids call a 'terminus ante quem'.

 

[Rekrab]

Right, mjp. The date on the edge is when they were printed, not an expiration date on the paper. Most places that printed photos for the public did that, but not all, so you don't always see it on old snapshots. You wouldn't ever see a date like that on a photo taken and printed by a pro photographer.

 

[Christopherson]

 

[hank solo]

The Los Angeles High School Yearbook photo is fairly well known as it features on the original cover of his novel 'Ham on Rye'.

Nice subtle plug of your ebay sale tho' :rolleyes:

 

[roni]

Nice subtle plug of your ebay sale tho'

That's funny: there's one seller on ebay now offering it for 150.- (which is reasonable) and another one for 600.- (which is not).
.
.
btw, since we've just received this yearbook from BoS (at a reasonable prize), it'll be on display in our Buk-exhibition in 2014:
http://www.facebook.com/ronibert/posts/479177568802760

 

[Otto jr]

I would love to know if those two Bullfinch sisters on the cover of Ham know that they have been imortalized in american literature.

 

[roni]

[...] those two Bullfinch sisters on the cover [...]

Actually, there's four of them.
Well, four times a half one. Plus a future showmaster.