Issues : Inaccurate slurs in A
|
b. 5-6
|
composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione
..
In the main text we give the slur of CK (→CB), which is unquestionable in terms of image and music. According to us, it can also be considered an interpretation of the possibly inaccurate slurs of A1 and CJ. The slurring of A1 is generally rather of draft nature – careless and mostly short slurs appear only occasionally. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Inaccuracies in JC , Revisions in EL |
|||||||||||||||||
|
b. 7
|
composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione
..
The significant difference between the slurs of CJ and CK suggests that one of them is probably inaccurate (or both). In the main text we adopt the slur of CJ, which is a natural continuation of the slur in b. 5-6. In our interpretation, the slur of CK encompasses the entire 2nd half of the bar. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccurate slurs in A |
|||||||||||||||||
|
b. 15
|
composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione
..
The slurs of the sources, encompassing neither melodically nor rhythmically distinctive fragments of the scale, are probably inaccurate. This conclusion is confirmed by the slur of CK, encompassing the 4th beat of the bar, in analogous b. 48, and this is the slur we suggest in the main text as a contextual interpretation of the source slurs. Nevertheless, encompassing with a slur the final fragment of a figuration only seems to be illogical, regardless of its actual range. According to us, it is likely that the articulation of this sequence is defined by two indications present in this bar both in A1 and [A2] (→CJ,CK) – con forza at the beginning and the slur at the end. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Inaccuracies in JC , Inaccuracies in CK |
|||||||||||||||||
|
b. 20
|
composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione
..
The slurs in A1 and CK are placed negligently, and – particularly in the case of CK – there may be a doubt whether it was not a longer slur that was meant by Chopin. According to us, there are three musically justified versions – literal interpretation of A1, bar-long slur of CB and the intermediate version we suggest. The latter is a compromise between the shorter slurs of A1 and [A2] (→CK) and the most natural slur of CB, as far as the articulation is concerned. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccurate slurs in A |
|||||||||||||||||
|
b. 21-24
|
composition: WN 37, Lento con gran espressione
..
In the fragment (b. 21-32) that starts here we can encounter a few L.H. slurs marked in a draft manner in A1 – two slurs in b. 22 and one in b. 24. It is only the latter that encompasses an entire four-quaver figure; however, it seems that both earlier ones, although much shorter, bear the same meaning. According to us, Chopin wrote these slurs only just the second time, since the first time (b. 21 and 23) he focused on writing new accompaniment figures correctly. There is no doubt that all bars are to be performed similarly, which leads to our alternative suggestion to add slurs. Since [A] (→CJ,CK) does not feature any slurs in these bars, in the main text we suggest repeating the indication legato, used in b. 6-7, instead. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Balakirev's revisions |
-c
