In A1 the ending of the L.H. slur in b. 90 (the last one on the line) is probably inaccurate, which is indicated by a comparison with analogous b. 94. It is possible that Chopin led the slur further to restore the regular curve of the line, which he had had to bend the protrusion down due to the lowest R.H. notes written on the bottom stave. In turn, the slur in b. 91 clearly encompasses the 1st note in the bar, yet it does not suggest continuation from the previous one. Therefore, the version of FE (→EE), in which the slurs over b. 90-91 are combined, must be erroneous. The slurs of A1 in analogous b. 91, 95, 97 and 99 start from the 1st note in b. 91, from the 2nd one in b. 99 and between those notes in the remaining ones. According to us, Chopin could have been gradually changing the concept of those slurs as he was writing; therefore, it is the last one that corresponds to a fully shaped vision of those slurs. It is supported by the slurs (→GE) that each time begin from the 2nd note. However, it is the more literal interpretation that we consider to be the text of A1: in b. 91 and 99 compliant with the notation, while in ambiguous b. 95 and 97 brought into line with the first appearance of that figure in b. 91. If the Mazurka were to be interpreted from the manuscript, this is probably how they would be interpreted after the slurs in b. 89, 91 and 93, which run from the 1st note, which is confirmed by the version of FE (→EE).
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources
issues: Inaccuracies in FE, Inaccurate slurs in A
notation: Slurs
