mUltimate Chopin

Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Annotations in teaching copies

b. 113

composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II

f2 in FE (→GE,EE)

e2 in FES
..

The change of f2 to e2, written in FES, restoring the regular structure of figurations, may be considered an alternative variant suggestion in relation to the printed version, which could be supported by the lack of a corresponding correction in the remaining pupils' copies. According to us, it is, however, more likely that the change is of a definitive nature or that it is simply a correction of a mistake – the piano performs a figurative background for the theme; in this final section, heading for the coda, this background is based on gently waving passages of a rather schematic structure. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Errors in FE , Annotations in FES

b. 113

composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II

Fingering written into FEH

No fingering in FE (→GE)

Fingering in EE
..

The fingering added in EE by Fontana is adjusted to the probably erroneous version of the 6th semiquaver of the bar (although its application in the version adopted in the main text is naturally possible). This fact most probably proves that it is totally arbitrary. The fingering of both sources, compliant in the ascending part of the passage, suggests changing the hand position marked by the placement of the 1st finger, which was on the a1 note in the previous passage. However, the Chopinesque fingering added to FES in the 2nd half of the bar, where the 1st finger is also on a1, suggests that Chopin meant to preserve this position also in the discussed passage, filling the 1st half of the bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Differences in fingering , Annotations in FEH

b. 114

composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II

Fingering written into FES

No teaching fingering
..

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES

b. 116

composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II

Fingering written into FED

Fingering written into FES, contextual interpretation

Fingering written into FEH

Fingering based on FES & FED

No teaching fingering
..

In the main text, we suggest a compilation of complementary Chopin's entries performed in pencil in FED and FES. J. Stirling probably wanted to enhance with ink the second out of four ones written in her copy, over the g1 note ending the 3rd beat of the bar, which would indicate the fingering scheme of the entire 2nd half of the bar. However, she committed a mistake and wrote it a semiquaver too far, over the first e2 in the 7th triplet (cf. notes in bar 91 and 108).
The entry in FEH defines the same fingering. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FED , Annotations in FES , Annotations in FEH

b. 117

composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II

Fingering written into FEH, probable reading

No teaching fingering
..

The fingering in FEH raises doubts concerning the interpretation of the first digit applying to e3. It seems that it is a '1,' but it would be inconsistent with the fingering of an identical place in bars 120-121 written in this copy – the 1st finger on the last g2 in bar 120 (116) implies another, most probably the 2nd finger on the next note (e3). The second finger on that e3 also follows from the fingerings of the previous bar in other pupils' copies. The discussed doubt and contradictions make us omit this entry in the main text.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Differences in fingering , Annotations in FEH