Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
b. 30
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions |
||||||
b. 35-36
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
In A the staccato markings over the semiquavers are evidently represented by dots and clearly differ from, e.g. the wedges at the beginning of b. 35 or b. 39. According to us, the wedges in GE (→FE,EE) were an arbitrary decision of the engraver, who blithely approached the Chopinesque staccato markings on a number of occasions – cf., e.g. b. 10. By contrast, adding marks on the 4th beat of the bar, although without effect on performance – in both cases the marks serve as an example and should be propagated to all semiquavers in these bars – seems to be justified and may have come from Chopin (see also the note on b. 39-40). However, we believe that these two issues can be considered independently, hence in the main text we give dots (after A) in the entire 2nd half of the bar (after GE1). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE , Wedges |
||||||
b. 35-37
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FESB |
||||||
b. 39-40
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
In the main text we include the staccato marks on the 4th beat of the bar, added in GE (→FE,EE,FESB). It is noteworthy that in A Chopin added the staccato indication after eight semiquavers, which suggests that he considered that the 4th beat of b. 39 (and most probably of b. 35 too), identical to the third one, would naturally "inherit" the articulation markings of the preceding one. Therefore, although the authenticity of the very marks is not entirely certain, the authenticity of the articulation they indicate absolutely is. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE |
||||||
b. 39
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
In the main text we keep the hairpin present in A (→GE→EE,FESB). It seems that an oversight of the engraver of FE1 (→FE2) is a more likely explanation for its absence than a possible removal of the mark by Chopin (which he could have done while proofreading FE1). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Authentic corrections of FE |