Many editors of Chopin's works, from earlier to most recent – e.g. Karol Mikuli, Hermann Scholtz (19th c.), Ludwik Bronarski (main editor of the edition endorsed by Paderewski – 20th c.), Norbert Müllemann (21st c.) – divide these 3 bars into two groups, which they approach differently:
- In b. 103-104, the rests having been replaced with chords is considered the engraver's mistake. However, looking at the transparent notation of A, it is difficult to imagine how one could have committed such a mistake twice – both halves of the bar differ clearly; moreover, there is not a single bar in which such two pairs of chords would be present.
- The change in b. 105 is generally considered Chopinesque proofreading.
As far as sources are concerned, such an approach is utterly unfounded – even if we assumed that Chopin had already seen the printed (by mistake) chords in b. 103-104 while proofreading FE1, not only did he not reintroduce rests there, but also added a chord in b. 105 as well, or, if the alleged mistake had taken place in b. 105 too, he accepted it by adding an arpeggio and combining the L.H. chord stem with a1 on the top stave. In other words, associating the proofread version of b. 105 with the original one of b. 103-104 requires us to admit that Chopin proofread b. 105 but did not notice that the engraver accidentally introduced very similar changes right next to this place, i.e. in b. 103-104.
Taking into account the above, in the main text, in all three bars, we give the version of FE (→GE,EE) with chords instead of rests, most probably proofread by Chopin.
category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations
issues: Accompaniment changes, Authentic corrections of FE
notation: Pitch
Back to note