Klarinet Archive - Posting 000323.txt from 2004/07

From: "dnleeson" <dnleeson@-----.net>
Subj: [kl] Sue Raycroft, Nancy Buckman, and the subtitle of K. 361/370a
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 09:54:19 -0400

Nothing could make me happier than the fact that Nancy Buckman
has discovered the beauty of the great wind serenade of Mozart.
But when the matter of the spelling of the subtitle came up,
Nancy stepped in mud stating that whatever knowledge she has came
from the Kalmus edition of the score.

It is not that the Kalmus edition is bad, it's just wrong in so
many respects that it cannot be used by a serious musicial to
know anything about that wonderful piece. The score was published
around the 1940s when the second world war enable Kalmus to copy
things under German copyright. The war effectively nullified that
copyright. But the score that Kalmus used to copy was printed in
1875 and was itself based on the first edition printed in 1803.
So that is what you have when you play the Kalmus edition. Just
to give you an idea of how flawed it it, there are close to 1000
changes in the placement or intensity of dynamics alone, 65
erroneous notes, about 6 errors in rhythm, and countless changes
in the phrasings and articulations.

The editions of Broude, Musica Rara, and Breitkopf & Hartel are
no better because they are all copies of the 1875 edition. Why
they are erroneous is a long story.

But there is the matter of the subtitle. Sue is quite correct,
and Nancy cannot use the fact that "Gran Partita" is the way it
is published in the Kalmus edition as authority for anything.
The matter of the spelling of that subtitle has become such a
pain in the neck that I wrote a short piece on why it should be
"Gran Partitta" and I send it to anyone who argues the issue.
Here it is.

=================================================================
====

The Subtitle of K. 361/370a: Gran Partitta or Gran Partita?

It is uncomfortable to stand up while everyone else is sitting
down, but the subtitle of the Serenade in B-flat for 13
instruments (not 13 wind instruments), K. 361/370a is, or should
be, spelled "Gran Partitta."

Until the publication in 1912 of a technical article about K. 361
by Fritz Volbach in the "Neue Musikzeitung," no subtitle of any
kind had been used for the B-flat Serenade for 13 instruments;
i.e., it had never been referred to as the "Gran Partita" in any
literature up to that time. The work was occasionally spoken of
as Mozart's "Great Serenade for wind instruments" but such action
was casual. Volbach's paper was published following his
examination, in 1911, of the manuscript, then in the possession
of Princess Marie von Erbach Schonberg, Princess of Battenberg,
and it was also the first technical examination of the holograph
since its went underground in 1803.

The manuscript was purchased from Mozart's widow by Johann Anton
André in 1798/99 and was given away by him as a gift in 1803 to
the Archduke Ludwig I of Hessen-Darmstadt. There is no evidence
that anyone except the six people who owned it during that 109
year period saw it. During this hiatus, no one knew that there
was a specific subtitle written on the top center of the first
page. Volbach's decision to print the first page as part of his
article resulted in a technical problem because the subtitle was
written in red crayon and had to be retouched to make it
readable. So in Volbach's article, it appears to read "Gran
Partita." However, that is not what is written on the manuscript.
Instead the exact text is "Gran Partitta."

That subtitle is not in Mozart's hand, and, as can be established
by its physical placement on the page, its presence can be
documented to a date between 1798/99 and the date when the
manuscript was bound, something that is believed to have taken
place immediately prior to its being given away by André in 1803.
At the time of that binding, the edges of the paper were cut and
gilded, as much for protection as for adornment. There, at the
very edge of the top of the page, a place that would have been a
poor choice to write anything after the paper was edged, are the
word's "Gran Partitta."

There is no question that the word should have been "Partita" and
that whoever wrote it between 1798/99 and 1803 simply did not
know how to spell it. But this is a secondary consideration. It
is a fact that it reads as stated.

The subtitle has nothing to do with Mozart and is only used
because of its presence, in retouched form, in the 1909 Volbach
article. If then the conceit for using it depends entirely on
its presence on the first page of the manuscript, it should be
spelled exactly as it appears in that location, misspelling
notwithstanding.

Actually, there is a far better solution than presenting this
subtitle at all. Don't use one. But since the editors of the
Neue Mozart Ausgabe decided to continue the use of this totally
irrelevant subtitle, then it should be spelled the way it appears
on the holograph.

Dan Leeson
DNLeeson@-----.net

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is a service of Woodwind.Org, Inc. http://www.woodwind.org