Klarinet Archive - Posting 001233.txt from 2003/04
From: Tony@-----.uk (Tony Pay)
Subj: [kl] Poulenc Sonata errors
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 17:49:10 -0400
I can't find the post to Klarinet about these errors, so I'll have to
write out the details again.
In 1963 Andre' Boutard made a recording of the Poulenc Sonata, probably
using a photocopy of the composer's original manuscript, in the course
of which he played several notes that differ from the first printed
edition of the work. It is probably the existence of this recording
that has kept the controversy alive.
The facts are that Poulenc originally wrote it as on the recording by
Boutard. But, he revised it for publication just before his own death.
I have in front of me a photocopy of the manuscript in which you can
clearly see the original notes whited out, and the ones in the 1962
edition (and the latest editions) written over the top. No-one but
Poulenc could have done that, and therefore the 1962 edition represents
Poulenc's final thoughts.
Several French players were privy to the pre-publication MS, and were
even playing it before the 'official' first performance, so it's not
surprising that they thought that 'their' version was the correct one,
made a fuss in 1963, and got it changed back, briefly. (The details of
how that 'change back' ever occurred, I don't know. Perhaps someone at
Chesters simply took the French clarinettists' opinions, based upon
their own acquaintance with the original version, at face value, and
acted upon it.)
Then, of course, everyone *else* complained, because they had got
used to the 1962 edition. So a photocopy of Poulenc's MS was given to
Thea King and Georgina Dobree, and they were asked to sort out the
mess, producing the edition of 1973. The new (2000) edition pretty much
follows the 1973 edition, despite Millan Sachania's claim to be much
more scholarly.
(However, I see with approval that he takes phrasing slurs to the second
of two tied notes, which I 'would' approve of, wouldn't I, as:
http://www.sneezy.org/Databases/Logs/1999/07/000178.txt
...makes plain; though I was referring in that instance to Brahms,
Copland and Stravinsky rather than to Poulenc.)
A couple of years ago Alessandro Carbonare put the 'wrong' version of
those bits on his website as 'corrections to the errors in the published
version', having had his ear bent by clarinettist colleagues in Paris.
When I demurred here, he wrote to me, "Well, they are French, and surely
they understand how their music should go?" He also said that they'd
said Poulenc was 'aware of the problem'. I don't know how he managed
that, given that he was dead at the time the piece was published.
I myself think that Poulenc's revisions were for the better -- though
not *that much* for the better. It's difficult to be objective about it
after playing it in the revised version for so long.
The 'corrected' version of the clarinet part is:
First movement:
1 bar before figure 2, bar 18, third beat, eighth note F natural,
3 bars after figure 2, bar 22, C natural,
4 bars after figure 3, bar 30, A natural.
Last movement:
1 bar before figure 4, bar 25, second eighth note Gb.
Tony
--
_________ Tony Pay
|ony:-) 79 Southmoor Rd Tony@-----.uk
| |ay Oxford OX2 6RE http://classicalplus.gmn.com/artists
tel/fax 01865 553339
... What if there were no hypothetical situations?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is supported by Woodwind.Org, http://www.woodwind.org/
