|
|
|
|
|
Contextual interpretation of slurs in A |
|
|
|
|
|
Our suggestion |
A single, short slur in bar 41 must be considered in A as an inaccuracy of notation – there is no continuation of the slur from the previous bar; there is also no reason to single out particularly this pair of semiquavers. According to us, it is a result of an unfinished change of slurring – at the beginning Chopin wrote in A four slurs 2 semiquavers each, starting from the second one in bar 41 and then, at the time of writing the octave sign, three out of these slurs were included in the line determining the range of the octave sign. However, he did not finish the correction, leaving the first slur unchanged and not entering the target slurring. Taking into account the structure of figurations and a few examples of extending the slurs in this Etude (e.g. in bars 2, 3, 21), we assume that Chopin most probably wanted to lead the slur from bar 40 until the beginning of bar 42. The arbitrarily added slurs of EE also draw attention, similar to the original slurs of A. Cf. the slur in the L.H.
In AI there are no slurs in bar 41. However, we do not consider lack of this and many other performance indications on this page as an equal version of a given fragment, as the autograph is of a clearly working nature. In particular, when AI is not mentioned in the content of the note, it means that the discussed indication does not appear in it.
See b. 38-40
Compare the passage in the sources»
category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions
issues: EE revisions, Inaccurate slurs in A, Errors in GE
notation: Slurs