|
4 wedges in A, probable interpretation |
|
4 dots in A, possible interpretation |
|
3 wedges & dot in FC |
|
|
|
4 times 2 dots in GE |
It is unclear with which staccato markings Chopin wanted to denote the crotchets in bars 5, 13, 29 and 37 and analog. The table shows markings for the R.H. drawn from three authentic sources; additional dots, which sometimes appear under the L.H. octave, are given under the main series of markings. No marking was denoted with minus.
| A | FC | FE | A | FC | FE | A | FC | FE | A | FC | FE |
| b. 5 | b. 13 | b. 29 | b. 37 |
 | | – |
|  | | |
| | | |
| | – |
| b. 137 | b. 145 | b. 161 | b. 169 |
| | | |
| | – |
| | – |
| | – |
| b. 588 | b. 596 | b. 612 | b. 620 |
| | | – |
| | – | | |
| | |
| | – |
We base our editing on the following observations and assumptions:
- The majority of the wedges of A – except for bar 161 – look as if they were double dots, so that they can be considered bolded dots.
- There is no apparent reason to differentiate between the staccato markings for four crotchets featured in consecutive phrases of each of the three appearances of the theme.
- Markings for the L.H. appear only occasionally, still, in the case of A, their authenticity goes without saying. The dots in FE (in bars 13 and 29) could also be authentic, yet it is more likely that they were added by the engraver or reviser of FE with the aim to covey the double meaning of the dots of A following the change of the layout – FE separated the R.H. and L.H. parts, as a result of which the staccato dots situated under the R.H. crotchets on the upper stave lost their connection to the L.H. crotchets. Had that addition been indicated by Chopin himself, he would have probably also noticed the missing staccato in bars 5 and 37.
In the main text we suggest wedges in the first two appearances of the theme, taking into account the statistical advantage of wedges in both manuscripts, including the unquestionable wedge of A in bar 161, and the second assumption from the above list. However, due to point 1, we suggest an alternative solution with dots. For the third time (bars 588-620), we consider the dots for both hands written in A in bars 588 and 596 to be an expression of Chopin's intention. The change in the manner of marking those crotchets could have been influenced by the change in the preceding bars, in which there are tied minims instead of rests. In bars 612 and 620 the notation with one dot, which is actually equivalent, may be considered to be simplified. The unquestionable use of dots only in this fragment of A is particularly noteworthy.
In the secondary sources, the attention is drawn to the unified markings in GE. The unification is based on a very tenuous source basis: in FC two staccato dots are present only in bar 596. Therefore, the engraver-reviser of GE1 was rather drawn by his belief that the change would clarify the notation.
category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources
issues: Errors in FE, GE revisions, FE revisions, Wedges, Inaccuracies in FC
notation: Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Back to note