(Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt IV

  b. 343

		f1(2) in A, literal reading
		f1(2) in GE (→FE,EE,IE)
		f1(2), our suggestion
		f1(2), our alternative suggestion

In A there is only a  to the middle note (a¹) of the 1st R.H. chord, which makes us consider the outermost notes f¹-f². The correctness of this version is supported by the trace of a correction before the bottom note of the chord visible in A. The range of the erasure suggests that it was a cautionary  to f¹ that was removed, which Chopin eventually considered superfluous (a possible removal of a  would also confirm f¹ as a later decision). If it was actually an accidental that was removed, it would mean that Chopin checked the notation of this chord and that there is no reason to question it. On the other hand, a direct change of mode into the minor one is mostly found in Chopin's pieces as a tool supporting modulation, which is not the case here, as the following progression perfectly combines both with a D minor and a D major chord. In addition, the version featuring f¹-f², resulting in a D chord, seems a more powerful and natural conclusion to bars 341-342 (or even 337-342) due to the cadences consolidating this chord at the beginning of bar 341, 342 and precisely 343. One can also consider other arguments:

• The sharp to the last quaver in the bar (f²) seems an argument in favour of a D minor chord – the accidental would not be necessary if f² were already in the 1st chord. After all, one can find a number of places in which Chopin would unnecessarily repeat accidentals at the end of a bar, e.g. in bar 115 or 134.
• The comparison with analogous bar 164, 168 and 347 is also not enough to resolve this issue. In all these places we are dealing with minor chords, which suggests that it is also in the discussed bar that Chopin could have envisioned a minor chord. On the other hand, each of these bars features a chord present also in the 2 preceding bars, which, in the discussed case, would point to the key of D.

To sum up, both versions are potentially authentic and stylistically possible. The analysis of the notation is an argument for f¹⁽²⁾, whereas the analysis of the structure and the harmonic course – for f¹⁽²⁾. In the main text we follow the stylistic arguments, suggesting the version of the editions, written as an editorial complement to the A notation. As an alternative solution, we provide the text written in A, adding cautionary naturals.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A, GE revisions

notation: Pitch

Go to the music