cresc. - -, stretto, in A, literal reading |
|
cresc. - -, stretto, in FC |
|
cresc. - - , , stretto in GE |
|
cresc. - -, stretto, in A, contextual interpretation |
The verbal indications contained in these bars pose editorial problems, since certain elements of notation of A can be considered to be inaccurately written:
- No dashes marking the range of cresc. in the 2nd half of b. 60 – it seems more natural for them having been led to the culminant mark at the beginning of b. 61. This is how it was reproduced by Fontana in FC (→GE).
- Placing over the R.H. part – it seems obvious that this indication concerns the entire sound volume. Its position over the top stave could have been a result of lack of space between the staves. All editions moved that indication between the staves.
- The moment stretto should begin – the dashes marking its range show that it concerns the three-bar descending phrase led in quavers. Performing almost twice as short values at the end of b. 60 (not to mention the demisemiquaver) in a similarly accelerated tempo seems to be unnatural, both pianistically and stylistically. Chopin could have started writing the indication earlier in order to avoid it touching the L.H. slur or the R.H. beam (cf., e.g. the position of sempre in b. 66). As it seems, this is how Fontana interpreted it in FC.
In the main text we suggest a compromise solution taking into account some of the above reservations while keeping the position of stretto within the area in which it is written in A. The literally interpreted notation of A and FC may be considered equal variants. We also regard the version of GE as acceptable – it logically combines cresc. - - with , which has to be guessed in the Chopinesque notation. In turn, the changes visible in FE (→EE), i.e. moving stretto and replacing with , are inauthentic and distort Chopin's intention to a certain extent.
category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions
issues: Errors in FE, Inaccuracies in FE, GE revisions, FE revisions, Inaccuracies in FC
notation: Verbal indications
Back to note