Mike Kelly, Play Ball, 1889

[baseballart]

I picked this item up in trade a while back (Just think of me as the KC A's to the other party NYY, however)


http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8102/8483533274_a7fa3f674d_c.jpg

[JeremyW]

Great trade. I really like that & don't remember seeing many of them around.

[WillowGrove]

Beautiful. I always wondered if the stories were interesting reading. Gotta be right? I can check but has this book been reprinted? I usually abhor any kind of 'reprint' but for old books which i collect (more in the past than now), I have been starting to seek out reprints so I can handle and read the contents.

I know you have an extensive book collection max- which is your favorite?

and I hope you at least gave up the equivalent of Joe DeMastri - I mean he had a couple good season for the A's at least.

Again - a beauty.

peter

[aquarius31]

Hi Max, that's a great pickup and love to see the woodcut! Are there any other woodcuts in the book itself or back cover?

[ksfarmboy]

I don't collect books but if I did that would be the highest on my want list. Did the dust jacket come in two colors or is that one just aged? Seems the other on I've seen was a sort of green color.

[baseballart]

and I hope you at least gave up the equivalent of Joe DeMastri - I mean he had a couple good season for the A's at least.



I'll miss that Maras guy, but he'll never amount to anything, right??

[barrysloate]

I don't believe this book was ever reprinted. I never read it, because when I had my copy it was too fragile to handle. The book was made from poor quality paper, so very few have survived, and even fewer in nice condition. I remember one circulating that was nearly pristine, but it had a small amount of restoration to it. Despite it all, book collectors consider it a rarity.

[bigtrain]

Here is my copy. Possibly the one you mentioned, Barry. Minor restoration but very well done. Picked this up from REA a few years ago.

[JeremyW]

Must have been a good seller. They jacked the price up 150%.

[barrysloate]

That is the copy Tom. It's a real beauty!

Note, however, that the cover is quite a bit different than the one Max posted. I never knew there were different versions of the cover. Live and learn.

[bigtrain]

I think that mine is 1888. Max's may be a later version.

[bigtrain]

I don't collect books but if I did that would be the highest on my want list. Did the dust jacket come in two colors or is that one just aged? Seems the other on I've seen was a sort of green color.

Not a dust jacket. These were not printed in hardcover as far as I know.

[bigtrain]

Must have been a good seller. They jacked the price up 150%.

That is interesting. Did it go from 10 cents to 25 cents or the other way around?

[barrysloate]

I think that mine is 1888. Max's may be a later version.

Does indeed look like it was first issued in 1888 and reprinted in 1889. Guess it was a popular book.

Whoa, just noticed the price changed in reverse order. Maybe it was a very unpopular book. Perhaps 25 cents was a little too rich for the general public.

[bigtrain]

I don't believe this book was ever reprinted. I never read it, because when I had my copy it was too fragile to handle. The book was made from poor quality paper, so very few have survived, and even fewer in nice condition. I remember one circulating that was nearly pristine, but it had a small amount of restoration to it. Despite it all, book collectors consider it a rarity.

I think I may have seen a McFarland reprint a while ago. Looking for my McFarland catalog. Anyone know if there is one out there?

[baseballart]

Mine is indeed 1889. A blow-out sale of the later edition, indeed.

[bigtrain]

According to an internet inflation calculator, 25 cents would be the equivalent of $6.56 today. That is pretty pricey for a paperback that's maybe 3/16th of an inch thick.

[barrysloate]

Kelly was a huge star, so perhaps the publisher felt justified to charge the lofty sum of a quarter.