|
|
|
|
It cannot be excluded that the difference in the size of notes used to write down Cadenza follows the difference in notation between [A1] and [A2]. This supposition seems to be in accordance with a passage from Chopin’s letter to Julian Fontana from 6th of October 1841: “I send you the Prelude written in bigger [c]haracter for Schlesinger and in smaller for Mechetti.” According to us, it is very unlikely. Cadenza constitutes only a small fraction (ca. 10%) of the whole and a possible difference in the size of notes would not be visible to an extent in which it would be possible to refer to it in such a general manner. Chopin’s idea should rather be referred to the notation of the whole piece and relate to the fact that the later fair scores (written on the basis of the already finished versions) generally make an impression of being written down with “smaller character” due to a more diligent, equal and devoid of any corrections writing.
Theoretically, one could imagine that after having completed [A1], Chopin was not satisfied with the graphic image of Cadenza written down with normal-sized notes, so when he was writing [A2], he wrote it with small notes. Then, having both possibilities in front of his eyes, he could easily unify the notation by adding in one of the copies for the engraver a comment requiring printing this fragment in small, or on the contrary, normal notes. Therefore, the supposition that both FE1 and GE transfer an accurate image of “their” autograph, requires to admit that Chopin could not decide which form of notation would be more suitable to him.
According to us, it is much more likely that Cadenza was written down in small notes from the beginning – in both autographs – yet the engraver of FE simply did not realise that.
category imprint: Differences between sources
issues: Inaccuracies in FE
notation: Shorthand & other
Back to note