What you think?
- Thread starter BilkoJoe
- Start date
Hi Joe. Looks dodgy - but I'll take a chance for £20 :D
What colour is the cloth spine? It should be dark red for the numbered signed edition, blue with flecks of grey and orange for the illustrated edition.
What colour is the cloth spine? It should be dark red for the numbered signed edition, blue with flecks of grey and orange for the illustrated edition.
bospress.net
www.bospress.net
Yeah. The sig looks bad, but the numbers look right. If the cloth is the right color and everything else looks right, I would just chalk it up to Buk signing his name a bit different.
Lucklily there are so many little issues that BSP made available to check these for authenticity. Comparing the numbers in red to a known example would also help certify it. Number 89 should be nearly the same writing as your example, for instance.
Bill
Lucklily there are so many little issues that BSP made available to check these for authenticity. Comparing the numbers in red to a known example would also help certify it. Number 89 should be nearly the same writing as your example, for instance.
Bill
planahea
RIP
BilkoJoe,
You may to check out this URL for price comparison purposes.
http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=682141386&searchurl=sortby%3D1%26tn%3DDangling%2Bin%2Bthe%2BTournefortia%26x%3D0%26y%3D0
Bill
You may to check out this URL for price comparison purposes.
http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=682141386&searchurl=sortby%3D1%26tn%3DDangling%2Bin%2Bthe%2BTournefortia%26x%3D0%26y%3D0
Bill
Signature is a bit of a mess, but there are a few characteristics that make it legit in my opinion.
mjp
Founding member
Ouch - that wouldn't ease my mind at all...the "4" in Bilko's is wrong, and the neither the pen or the signature look close compared to the second dangling image...
He could have switched pens, sure. But I don't know, man. The numerals in Bilko's look like they were written by a European. And I do not remember a lot of examples of Bukowski underlining his signature.
Of course if the binding and colophon are correct, what can you say. It's probably right. Sure looks weird though.
He could have switched pens, sure. But I don't know, man. The numerals in Bilko's look like they were written by a European. And I do not remember a lot of examples of Bukowski underlining his signature.
Of course if the binding and colophon are correct, what can you say. It's probably right. Sure looks weird though.
Valid point about the underline, mjp. As for changing his pen, I'm assuming you mean for the signature, as Buk never numbered them himself (this is not for you, mjp, but for others on this site who may not know this); Barbara Martin or someone else at BSPress typically did that, if I recall correctly. Also, Dangling... was one example where at least some of the numbering was obviously done by someone other than the usual person, and the numerals show a wide variety of styles. I have copy 313, and I have no doubts to its veracity, but the numerals look nothing like usual.
A thread I posted a while back about this issue is here:
https://bukowskiforum.com/showthread.php?t=2657
Although the photo is no longer there (and I don't have access to a scanner right now), the issue of the numerals on Dangling... is discussed.
bospress.net
www.bospress.net
Hi,
Not wishing to cast any doubt on anyone, but there is one case scenario that is always possible:
I have at least two BSP hardcovers here that are wrong. what I mean is that they used the wrong color spine. One is a copy of Barfly from BSP. The cloth indicates that it is a signed edition, but it is not signed. I bought it and have treated it as a trade edition, variant. I forget what the other one is, but I have seen the NYGs come out once in a while unsigned in Hardcover, pre 1994, when all hardcover NYGs should have been signed. My point being that someone could get a hold of one of these books and could forge the signature and number. That would then create a signed edition that would look perfect in every way, except for the signature and number. The colophon would read right. The title page would be in color and the cloth strip would be right.
I'm not accusing anyone of anything. I know that BilkoJoe is a good guy. I just hope that it is real and that no one passed off a fishy copy to him.
Black Sparrow made it nearly impossible to get a bad first edition, signed copy. There are not many wrong cloth strips out ther, but there are enough that the signature has to be right and you cannot always 100%, without fail rely on the other first issue points to certify the authenticity.
Sorry to be a downer.
Bill
BilkoJoe
Founding member
planahea
RIP
You are correct Bill. I have several unsigned limited editions that are supposed to be signed. Not only from BSP, but from several other publishers as well. You are right again in that I also treat them as variants of trade editions. I've often wondered if I should note "unsigned" on the colophon page to avoid problems in the future.
On second thought, I wonder if some or all were sent to me as "salesman's samples" by publishers, they certainly were intended for my personal use, and it would be legitimate to mark them as Presentation Copies. In other words, they were complimentary. What's the take on that idea from others.
On second thought, I wonder if some or all were sent to me as "salesman's samples" by publishers, they certainly were intended for my personal use, and it would be legitimate to mark them as Presentation Copies. In other words, they were complimentary. What's the take on that idea from others.
I'll still take a punt on Joe's Dangling for $52.50 :D
Bill W, I see your point about avoiding future problems, but I would against marking an unmarked book, if that makes sense. Its a tough issue, but buyer beware huh?
Bill W, I see your point about avoiding future problems, but I would against marking an unmarked book, if that makes sense. Its a tough issue, but buyer beware huh?
chronic
old and in the way
I would suggest that you don't mark them at all, unless you want to instantly lower their value fairly substantially.
the closest thing i could find on the net(#92, no photo). i suppose you could contact the bookseller and see if they could email a pic or describe it to ya....
Dangling in the Tournefortia
Bukowski, Charles.
[30 Day Returns Policy]
Bookseller:
Burke's Book Store
(Memphis, TN, U.S.A.)
Bookseller Rating: Book Price:
US$ 300.00
[Convert Currency]
Quantity: 1 Shipping:
[Rates & Speeds]
About the Book Bookseller & Payment Information
Description: Very minor shelfwear to bottom edge, tight and crisp. A bright, lovely copy. Protected by glassine wrapper which shows only minor rubbing. #92 of 350. Bookseller Inventory # 020625
Bukowski, Charles.
[30 Day Returns Policy]
Bookseller:
Burke's Book Store
(Memphis, TN, U.S.A.)
Bookseller Rating: Book Price:
US$ 300.00
[Convert Currency]
Quantity: 1 Shipping:
[Rates & Speeds]
About the Book Bookseller & Payment Information
Description: Very minor shelfwear to bottom edge, tight and crisp. A bright, lovely copy. Protected by glassine wrapper which shows only minor rubbing. #92 of 350. Bookseller Inventory # 020625
mjp
Founding member
Well, not knowing exactly the logistics of their signing system, I would think Bukowski signed first, then they were numbered. Otherwise, somehow ruining a numbered page would create a hole in the sequence that then has to be numbered after the fact (and sent back for a signature?).
If I was doing it I would send the author xxx + 20 to sign, just so I was sure I would have enough usable pages, then do the numbering last. Which would mean the sequence of numbers may not be the sequence they were signed in.
But again, I don't know how they did it at BSP.
If I was doing it I would send the author xxx + 20 to sign, just so I was sure I would have enough usable pages, then do the numbering last. Which would mean the sequence of numbers may not be the sequence they were signed in.
But again, I don't know how they did it at BSP.
My copy is #313, but signed in a fine-point black pen as well (like the original poster's); but the sig is quite different. And the red-penned #313 is very uncharacteristic (very unlike the original poster's). But, this has been hashed out here; however, does it need to be re-visited? I feel good about the sig, but the numbering has always bothered me.
Seems to be a bit of uncertainty here. I'll try to scan and post it tomorrow or as soon as I can.
Seems to be a bit of uncertainty here. I'll try to scan and post it tomorrow or as soon as I can.
chronic
old and in the way
I'm sure you're right that they sent him unnumbered pages to sign and numbered them after they were returned, but the numbering was likely done in sequence and probably in one (maybe two) sittings.
I've seen numbering like this in BSP books and don't really find it questionable at all. Quite possibly as the numbering went on and the hand doing it grew tired, a lot of the flourishes were dropped in the interest of just getting it done.
My opinion (for what it's worth) is that this is a legit signed and numbered issue.
mjp
Founding member
It would be difficult to fake a signed hardcover due to all the other tell-tale signs, so I'm inclined to agree that it's legit. But if it was me buying it I would want to see other BSP 9's written in that characteristically Euro-style before I felt confident about it. And again, the underlined signature is also uncharacteristic. But that's just me from a buyer's point of view. If I owned it I would be defending it as genuine! ;)
