It is difficult to differentiate between short and long accents in this Mazurka. Publishers of Chopin's works often did not differentiate between these marks, interpreting them quite arbitrarily as accents (short) or diminuendoes of different length (
). Therefore, it is reasonable to be cautious when interpreting the FE marks. On the other hand, in his copies, Fontana did not carefully reproduce the notation of the autographs either – cf., e.g. accents in the autograph and the copy of the Scherzo in B
minor, Op. 31 (prepared for print almost at the same time as the Mazurkas), bars 6 and 30, and particularly 19-20. In the main text we provide all accents with the form of long accents, taking into account the following factors:
- the kujawiak-like nature of the Mazurka – in this calmest, melancholy mazurka variant, soft, melodious expressive accents are the counterparts of lively rhythmic accents typical of mazur and oberek;
- the length of the accented notes – at least a dotted crotchet (the accent in bar 24 is placed over a dotted quaver, yet it most probably concerns the entire chord, which also encompasses the sustained crotchet in the inner voices);
- the presence of few unquestionable long accents in the notation – in FC in bars 8, 17, 19 and 27, while in FE in bar 24 (the FC accents in the upbeat and in bar 16 can also be considered long). The majority of the aforementioned FC accents are provided with a form typical of Chopinesque marks, hence it is quite likely that they were added by the very composer.
In GE, all accents in this Mazurka are more or less of the same length, ca. 5 mm. A comparison with the accents in the remaining Mazurkas in this opus reveals that they are in the middle of the entire range of various lengths – from 3 mm (Mazurka in B minor no. 2, bar 4, Mazurka in C
minor no. 4, bars 23, 25, 27 and analog.) to 7 mm (Mazurka in D no. 3, bar 95, Mazurka in C minor no. 4, bars 39, 116, 134-136). According to us, most differences are of an accidental nature and only at times reflect (to a certain extent) the differences in the length of the marks entered into FC. In this situation, taking into account that Chopinesque long accents were not regarded by the then readers as a separate, well-defined mark, we consider the majority of the marks to be short accents, commonly used, and we reproduce only the longest ones as long accents.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources
issues: Long accents
notation: Articulation, Accents, Hairpins