One could have doubts whether the grace note at the beginning of the R.H. part should be taken into account while complementing the incomplete, sketch notation of this bar in FCs. The first half of this bar is signalised as a repetition of bar 28, like 7 preceding bars, corresponding to bars 21-27. However, unlike in those bars, in the discussed place Chopin did not leave empty space but wrote two crotchet stems in the R.H. part, corresponding to the c2-a2 and b
1-g2 crotchets. The absence of a signalised grace note could be considered a cue that it should not be included here. According to us, such a strict interpretation would be wrong:
- if Chopin wanted to make a change with respect to bar 28, he would have written this fragment more accurately, as he did in the 2nd half of this bar, as well as in other similar situations, e.g. in bar 6 or 16;
- Chopin would use simplified, incomplete cues to indicate the text in longer, briefly marked fragments even in fair-copies – cf. e.g. the Polonaise in E minor, Op. 26 No. 2, bar 105 and 153 (of course, with FCs being a sketch, the level of incompleteness is greater than in a fair-copy). Therefore, the described crotchet stems were probably supposed to make it easier to navigate through a text that was meant to be repeated.
Taking into account the above, in the content transcription (version "edited text") we provide a grace note.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Interpretations within context; Source & stylistic information
notation: Shorthand & other