In:A Comparative History of the Literary Draft in Europe
Edited by Olga Beloborodova and Dirk Van Hulle
[Comparative History of Literatures in European Languages XXXV] 2024
► pp. 496–513
Get fulltext
2.3.4Music
Sketching performance
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.
For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.
Published online: 8 November 2024
https://doi.org/10.1075/chlel.xxxv.35rin
https://doi.org/10.1075/chlel.xxxv.35rin
Abstract
This chapter begins by acknowledging the impossibility of capturing musical thought in notational form
and by highlighting the concomitant provisionality of music scores. It then considers the creative input required of performers
when they bring musical notation “to life” in sound and in time. This leads to a case study on the Polish composer Fryderyk
Chopin, for whom the act of notation posed innumerable difficulties not least because he continually reimagined and revised his
musical ideas. The chapter as a whole thus challenges any assumptions we might have about the identity and stability of the Chopin
work and of music more generally, while also raising thorny questions about the best means of representing music’s creative
history in editions and performances themselves.
References (27)
Cook, Nicholas. 2001. “Between
Process and Product: Music and/as Performance.” Music Theory
Online 7 (2). [URL].
Donin, Nicolas, and François-Xavier Féron. 2012. “Tracking
the Composer’s Cognition in the Course of a Creative Process: Stefano Gervasoni and the Beginning of
Gramigna.” Musicae
Scientiae 16 (3): 262–285.
Eigeldinger, Jean-Jacques. 2014. “Le
Prélude en ut mineur op. 28 no 20 de Chopin: Texte –
genre – interprétation(s).” Revue de
musicologie 100 (1): 67–98.
Grabowski, Christophe (ed.). 2006. Chopin:
Waltzes. The Complete Chopin – A New Critical
Edition. London: Edition Peters.
Grabowski, Christophe, and John Rink. 2010. Annotated
Catalogue of Chopin’s First
Editions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hipkins, Edith J. 1937. How Chopin
Played: From Contemporary Impressions Collected from the Diaries and Notebooks of the Late A. J.
Hipkins. London: Dent.
Kallberg, Jeffrey. 1988. “The
Problem of Repetition and Return in Chopin’s
Mazurkas.” In Chopin
Studies, ed. by Jim Samson, 1–23. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
. 1990. Review
of Ferdinand Gajewski, The Work Sheets to Chopin’s Violoncello Sonata:
A Facsimile.
Notes 46 (3): 801–803.
Lenz, Wilhelm von. 1872. Die
grossen Pianoforte-virtuosen unserer Zeit aus persönlicher Bekanntschaft. Liszt. – Chopin. – Tausig. –
Henselt. Berlin: B. Behr’s Buchhandlung.
Lockwood, Lewis. 1970. “On
Beethoven’s Sketches and Autographs: Some Problems of Definition and
Interpretation.” Acta
Musicologica 42 (1–2): 32–47.
Nowik, Wojciech. 1988. “Fryderyk
Chopin’s Op. 57: From Variantes to
Berceuse.” In Chopin
Studies, ed. by Jim Samson, 25–40. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Payne, Emily, and Floris Schuiling. 2017. “The
Textility of Marking: Performers’ Annotations as Indicators of the Creative Process in
Performance.” Music &
Letters 98 (3): 438–464.
Rink, John. 2013. “Playing
with the Chopin Sources.” In Jan Ekier:
artysta stulecia w darze Chopinowi, ed. by Irena Poniatowska, 171–185. Warsaw: Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina.
. 2017. “Chopin
and Improvisation.” In Chopin and His Musical
World, ed. by Jonathan D. Bellman and Halina Goldberg, 249–270. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Samson, Jim. 1988. “The
Composition-Draft of the Polonaise-Fantasy: The Issue of
Tonality.” In Chopin
Studies, ed. by Jim Samson, 41–58. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sand, George. 1971. Histoire
de ma vie, repr. in Oeuvres
autobiographiques, ed. Georges Lubin. 2 vols. Paris: Gallimard.
Schachter, Carl. 1994. “The
Prelude in E minor Op. 28 No. 4: Autograph Sources and
Interpretation.” In Chopin Studies
2, ed. by John Rink and Jim Samson, 161–182. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schuiling, Floris. 2019. “Notation
Cultures: Towards an Ethnomusicology of Notation.” Journal of the Royal
Musical
Association 144 (2): 429–458.
