mUltimate Chopin

Op. 22, Polonaise

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in GE

b. 5-6

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

 in FE, literal reading

in GE

 in FE (contextual interpretation→EE)
..

In FE (→GE) the  mark is placed only in b. 6, the first in a new line. However, the manner it was placed suggests that Chopin wanted it to begin earlier, probably similarly to the hairpin in b. 7-8. This is how it was understood in EE and this is the version we give in the main text. In turn, in GE the mark was considered to have been carelessly engraved, thus it was being gradually shortened and its starting point moved towards the 1st quaver in b. 6. 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions

b. 31

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

Long accent in FE

in EE

in GE1
..

The mark, which bears all characteristics of a long accent in FE, was interpreted in the remaining editions as a  hairpin. It is evidenced by the fact that the mark was being extended, which is particularly clear in GE2 (→GE3) and EE; the aim could have been to partially adjust the mark to the longer  mark in the preceding bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions

b. 53-54

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

Short & 3 long accents in FE

4 short accents in GE

4 vertical accents in EE
..

Three accents in b. 54 are slightly longer in FE, moved to the right and inclined, which, according to us, means that a different accent should be applied (with respect to the previous ones). Therefore, in the main text we reproduce them as long accents. The described difference was not considered significant in GE, whereas EE changed these accents to vertical ones. However, since it was also the last accent in b. 53 that was reproduced as vertical in EE, this change most probably was not related to the graphic representation of the accents in FE – arbitrary changes of accents to vertical ones are generally typical of EE – cf. b. 47-50.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE

b. 132

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

Long accent in FE

in GE

No mark in EE
..

A long accent could have been added in the penultimate stage of proofreading of FE; it is indicated by the absence of the mark in EE along with the shift of dim. – see the previous note. In GE the mark was almost certainly erroneously interpreted as a  hairpin.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 153-157

composition: Op. 22, Polonaise

Long accents in FE

in GE

Short accents in both hands in EE
..

FE feature long accents under the last quaver in b. 153, 154 and 156. GE reproduced them as a short  hairpin, reaching the 1st quaver of the next bar, which does not influence its meaning in this case (Chopin would sometimes use such notation in two-note motifs). The notation of EE is inaccurate (the use of short accents) and arbitrary (the marks having been doubled in the L.H. part, probably suggested by the authentic notation on the 2nd quaver of these bars).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE