mUltimate Chopin

Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Authentic corrections of FE

b. 131-132

composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

Slur in bars 132-133 in AF

Longer slur in bars 132-133 in FE

Slur in bars 131-133 in GE

Slur in bar 132 in EE

Our alternative suggestion
..

Just like in b. 39-42, in the main text we give the slur of AF, which emphasises the a1-b1 step under b. 132-133 as the ending of the tenor voice. This slur – not entirely clear – was initially interpreted in FE as a slur combining the d1-a1 crotchets. This version is preserved in EE, whereas in FE Chopin prolonged this erroneous slur to a version tantamount to the longer slur of GE. According to us, this ad hoc correction does not have to mean that the composer definitely abandoned the slur of AF; in turn, it suggests that Chopin, to the very end, did not consider any of them to be final. The slur of GE, indicating the actual articulation of the L.H. part, may be then considered an equal variant. Taking into account Chopin's hesitation, as an alternative version we also suggest combining the relevant indications of both versions into one slur.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Inaccurate slurs in A , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 133-138

composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

Slurs in AF, literal reading

Slurs in AF, contextual interpretation

Slurs in FE

Slurs in GE

Slurs in EE
..

Two or three slurs that originate from the previous bar are continued differently due to the different placement of the slurs concerning the inner voices as well as due to the change of the function of one of the slurs of AF – the slur that began in b. 131 as an alto voice slur and led between this voice and the higher placed soprano voice minims (in our transcription placed under the alto voice) already concerns the entire R.H. part from the 2nd quaver in b. 133.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 140

composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

e-a in AI, AF, GE & EE

e-c1 in FE
..

In the main text we give the sixth of FE, introduced by Chopin in the last stage of proofreading instead of a fourth, present in the remaining sources. One can see traces of a correction in the copies of FE.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Accompaniment changes , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 145-147

composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

No slurs in AI

2 slurs in AF & GE

2 slurs in FE

Slur in bar 147 in EE
..

The longer slur of FE may result from Chopin's proofreading, which is indicated by its absence in EE. Even if this was the case, according to us, it does not have to mean that Chopin wanted to change the concordant slurring of AF and GE, since the composer could have encompassed with a slur the entire phrase without noticing the slur in b. 147, which was moved under the stave in FE (it also cannot be ruled out that the engraver of FE misinterpreted this detail in the Chopinesque proof entry).
The missing slurs in AI are most probably an oversight – see b. 141-143.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 148-152

composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

No slurs in AI

5 slurs in AF (→FE) & GE

3 slurs in b. 148 & 151-152 in EE
..

AI is devoid of slurs in these bars, which is most probably Chopin's inadvertence – see b. 141-143. The missing slurs in b. 149-150 in EE is a mistake of the engraver of FE (corrected in the finished FE) or EE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in EE , Authentic corrections of FE