I don't know why they chose a bootstrap circuit. Maybe a quest for tone? Just want to be different? 
Probably to maximize the gain of the 1st stage.
We could analyze the circuit with/without the bootstrapping to discover what difference there would be.
In a nutshell, the input impedance of the 2nd stage is seen by the output of the first stage as an additional load in parallel with the tone circuit and volume control. That's 3 loads, all in parallel, acting as a load, right along with the plate load resistor. The net effect is to reduce the gain delivered by the 1st stage.
There's a catch: The bootstrapping works by virtue of feedback. You might be used to seeing a cap in the C11 position (which bypasses the biasing resistor, R8). You're likely not used to seeing a cap in the C12 position (bypassing the bootstrap resistor, R15). Bootstrapping works to raise the input impedance, but does so due to feedback across the bootstrap resistor.
Therein lies either the catch, or the coolness of the circuit. With a bypass cap across the bootstrap resistor, the effective feedback is eliminated above the turnover frequency implied by the resistor and cap. So the circuit has a higher input impedance at d.c., but at some frequency, feedback reduces to zero, input impedance drops to 1M (due to R12), and the boosted gain goes away.
Someone check my math, but 3.9k against 2.2uF looks like a -3dB point of ~18Hz to me. Which means this addition does nothing, except maybe add noise. The cap should be much smaller, or the resistor bigger. A bigger resistor would also increase the apparent input impedance, by making the bootstrapping more effective; I'll go out on a limb and, without calculating, say it would probably take a lot more than 3.9k to get reasonably effective bootstrapping.