Issues : Uncertain slur continuation
|
b. 25-26
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 8, Prelude in F♯ minor
..
In A the slurring, somewhat similar to the previous pair of bars, is unclear – the slur in b. 25, at the end of the line, suggests a continuation, which, however, is contradicted by the slur in b. 26, which begins only just over the 3rd demisemiquaver in the bar. Chopin corrected the slur in b. 26 by combining in the middle of the bar the initially written two slurs. Had he wanted to combine this slur with the previous one, he might have also corrected its beginning; consequently, we consider the fact of leaving the undoubtedly inaccurate beginning of the slur uncorrected to be an argument for divided slurs, which we give in the main text. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness |
||||||||
|
b. 25-26
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 11, Prelude in B major
..
In A the ending of the slur in b. 25 (at the end of the line) very suggestively points to continuation, which is, however, not confirmed by the slur in b. 26. Both FC (→GE) and FE (→EE) reproduced those inconsistent slurs as one continuous slur. According to us, musically speaking, it would be more convincing to divide the slurs, since b. 21-25 constitute a coherent whole, kept in one register and melodically and harmonically complete: category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness |
||||||||
|
b. 25-27
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 11, Prelude in B major
..
As with the R.H. part, the issue concerning continuation of the L.H. slur is unclear in A due to the transition to a new line – the slur in b. 25 (at the end of the line) may suggest continuation, yet not due to its length, but due to the absence of the final curve; however, the slur in b. 26 does not confirm it. Due to the reasons discussed in the indicated note on the R.H. slur, we assume divided slurs to be more likely, and this is the version we suggest in the main text. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Embracing slurs , Errors of FC , Uncertain slur continuation |
||||||||
|
b. 25-28
|
composition: Op. 30, Mazurka in D♭ major
..
The slurring of the first phrase in this section is inaccurate or erroneous both in FC and FE. It concerns particularly FC, in which, when interpreted literally, the slurs are unclear and almost certainly incomplete. The slurring of FE can be easily guessed, as a result of which a corrected version of this slurring is already present in EE; in this situation, it is the version we give in the main text. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Errors of FC , Inaccuracies in FC , Uncertain slur continuation |
||||||||
|
b. 27-28
|
composition: Op. 10 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
In A the slur embraces only the last semiquaver in bar 27 and the chord ending the phrase in bar 28. In FE (→GE), probably due to Chopin's proofreading, the slur is over the 2nd half of bar 27. In EE the slur was extended to the beginning of bar 28, which we consider to be the most accurate global interpretation of the composer's intention, including the ideas of the slur of both A and FE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections of FE , Uncertain slur continuation |
, whereas the last two bars – sonically separated (lower register) – complement the entire Prelude. If we were to adopt such an interpretation, we would have to assume that the ending of the slur in b. 25 is inaccurate, which is only seemingly impossible – cf. the similarly elongated, certainly inaccurate ending of the slur in b. 27.
