The absence of the slurs in [A2] (→CJ,CK) was almost certainly not intended by Chopin. According to us, upon seeing the slur over b. 1-2 (marking the range of the text that is to be repeated), Chopin might not have noticed the missing slurs or even forgone writing them in order to avoid an excessive number of markings, which would obfuscate the text – according to Kolberg, this autograph was very densely written "in small handwriting on a quarter letter size sheet". As far as the notation of A1 is concerned, we consider the missing slur over the motif in the middle of b. 3 to be an inaccuracy resulting from the working nature of this manuscript, prepared for private use, or simply an oversight. After all, it is likely that Chopin did not envision differentiating between b. 1-2 and 3-4, since the other existing differences – the missing tie of c
1 in b. 3-4 and one-part notation of the last three R.H. chords – can be explained by oversights and inaccuracy. Except for the last-mentioned difference, which does not influence the sound, we believe that the notation of these two-bar sections should be standardised:
- in the main text we give the slurs written in A1 along with the slur in b. 3, and this is the version we recommend also when choosing the text of A1;
- we consider the addition of the tie of c1 in b. 3-4 to the text of A1 to be acceptable.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions
notation: Slurs
