Page: 
Source: 
p. 6, b. 64-74
p. 1, b. 1-18
p. 2, b. 19-28
p. 3, b. 29-40
p. 4, b. 41-52
p. 5, b. 53-63
p. 6, b. 64-74
p. 7, b. 75-80
p. 8, b. 81-97
Main text
Main text
½A - Semi-autograph
A - Autograph of the piano part
Morch - Manuscript of the orchestra part
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE1a - Retouched impression of GE1
GE2 - Second German edition
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FE2 - Corrected impression of FE1
FED - Dubois copy
FEJ - Jędrzejewicz copy
FES - Stirling copy
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE2 - Revised impression of EE1
EE3 - Corrected impression of EE2
Select notes: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Differences
No differences
½A - Semi-autograph
A - Autograph of the piano part
Morch - Manuscript of the orchestra part
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE1a - Retouched impression of GE1
GE2 - Second German edition
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FE2 - Corrected impression of FE1
FED - Dubois copy
FEJ - Jędrzejewicz copy
FES - Stirling copy
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE2 - Revised impression of EE1
EE3 - Corrected impression of EE2
Importance
All
Important
Main
Prezentacja
Select 
copy link PDF Main text


  b. 64

No slurs in A

Slurs in GE1

Slur in FE

Slurs in EE

Idem, R.H. only

Slurs in GE2

Idem, R.H.only

The slurring of the first three beats of the bar constitutes a difficult editorial problem. The absence of signs in A must be considered an inaccuracy – it is the only recitative's fragment that is devoid of slurs. The addition of slurs in GE1 was most probably inspired by Chopin, yet due to the differences between the hands it is hard to assume that they exactly correspond to his intention (a rational attempt at interpreting the intention may be the slurs of GE2). The overlooked slur in the R.H. in FE may also indicate Chopin's proofreading – perhaps its aim was to achieve such slurs as in EE.
The suggested main text is based on an attempt at interpreting Chopin's intention made in EE, including the slurring convention of the R.H. only, which in this section of the recitative prevails in the notation of A (cf. bars 57-61).

If in bar 64 the version with harmonic accompaniment was chosen, the version without slurs or one of the versions with slurs in the R.H. only is to be selected here.

Compare the passage in the sources»

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE, Authentic corrections of GE

notation: Slurs

Missing markers on sources: A, Morch, FE1, FE2, FED, FEJ, FES, GE1, GE1a, GE2, EE1, EE2, EE3