editing mahler 10 unfinished business

Editing Mahler 10: Unfinished BusinessAuthor(s): Frans BouwmanSource: The Musical Times, Vol. 142, No. 1877 (Winter, 2001), pp. 43-51Published by: Musical Times Publications Ltd.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1004576Accessed: 28/07/2010 14:52

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mtpl.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Musical Times Publications Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to TheMusical Times.

http://www.jstor.org

Editing Mahler 10

Unfinished business FRANS BOUWMAN surveys the publication history of Mahler's Tenth Symphony, and outlines a plan for a new user-friendly edition faithful to the surviving material

IX FULLY-FLEDGED performing versions of the draft of Gustav Mahler's unfinished Tenth Symphony are now available. An old question remains, however: how much of

it is authentically Mahler? This question cannot be answered easily, for at present there is no complete, scholarly, chronologically ordered, annotated and user-friendly edition of the source material, which unequivocally records the extent to which Mahler completed his Tenth Symphony. Such a reference text is dearly needed, in order to offer an insight into the chronology of Mahler's notation, to help clarify the development of Mah- ler's own ideas and, thus, to provide a scholarly basis for choices. In this article, I outline a plan for such a reference text. This reference text would consist of transcriptions of all the autographs, and a critical apparatus, which will be the subject of a forthcoming dissertation.

The continued interest in the Tenth Ever since Gustav Mahler's death in 1911, there has been a lively interest in his Tenth Symphony. Arnold Schonberg argued in a speech delivered in 1912:1 'It seems that the Ninth is a limit. He who wants to go beyond it must pass away. It seems as if something might be imparted to us which we ought not yet to know, for which we are not ready.' Initially, Mahler's wife, Alma, guarded the manuscript as her personal trophy. A few years after Mahler's death, there were rumours of performances of the symphony in South America. Only after twelve years did Alma decide to have the manuscripts published in facsimile form.2 After trying in vain to persuade Willem Mengel- berg, she 'forced'3 Ernst Krenek, her prospective son-in-law, to complete the symphony. He con- sented grudgingly to a slight editing of the material into a performing version of the two movements which were almost complete: the Adagio and 'Purgatorio'. The other three movements, the two Scherzos and the Finale, had been left in a preliminary state, and he considered any work on them as 'guesswork pure and simple'.4 Both the facsimile edition and the transcriptions of the Adagio and 'Purgatorio' by Krenek attracted con-

siderable interest. The latter passed through the hands of Franz Schalk, Willem Mengelberg and Alexander Zemlinsky, each of whom added their own bits and conducted the two movements at short intervals in Vienna, Amsterdam and Prague in the last three months of 1924. Otto Jokl, a pupil of Alban Berg, edited the first printed score of the Adagio and 'Purgatorio' in 1951. Jokl based his reading on the conductor's scores, without knowledge of the authorship of the additions - mostly by Zemlinsky - to Krenek's transcription. This first printed edition by Jokl was heavily criticised by Erwin Ratz, who, in turn, edited a critical edition of the Adagio, purged of all additions, in 1964.

Despite the many reservations which have been aired about the ethics of completing an unfinished work of art, many people have not been able to resist the challenge posed by the Tenth. This has given rise to a whole suite of performing versions. After the Second World War, a number of performing versions of the entire symphony came to light:5

Clinton Carpenter produced six editions between 1949 and 1966 and made even further revisions in the 1990s. In Carpenter's score, Mahler's voice is often stifled by additions.

Joe Wheeler, who died in 1977, produced four editions between 1953 and 1965. In 1998, Robert Olson, Remo Mazzetti and the present author purged the fourth version of many mistakes. Wheeler sometimes chose unusual tempi.

Hans Wollschlager made an edition, which he still possesses, in 1959. Under the influ- ence of Erwin Ratz, he came to the conclusion that an unfinished masterwork should not be touched and publicly withdrew his edition.

Deryck Cooke drew up preparatory editions in 1960 and 1964. With the assistance of Berthold Goldschmidt and Colin and David Matthews, a printed score saw the light of

Notes 1. Arnold Schonberg: 'Prager Rede: "Banalitat und Genie"' (1912), in Gertrud Schonberg, ed.: Gustav Mahler (Tubingen: Rainer Wunderlich & Leins, 1966), pp. 11-58. Also in English in Dika Newlin, ed.: Style and idea (London: Williams & Norgate, 1951), pp.7-36. 2. Gustav Mahler X. Symphonie: Faksimile nach der Handschrift (Vienna, & Munich: Paul Zsolnay, 1924). 3. Mrs Herta Blaukopf mentioned to me that she discussed the matter with Mr Krenek whilst at her house: 'Krenek got red in the face and said: "she [Alma] forced me".'

4. Letter from Krenek (1986), in Paul Op de Coul, ed.: Fragment or completion?: Proceedings of the Mahler X Symposium, Utrecht 1986 (Den Haag: Nijgh & Van Ditmar, 1991), p.237. 5. Mahler sold all his rights to Universal Edition in 1910, and all early performances of the Adagio and 'Purgatorio' were through Universal. Schirmer, however,

THE MUSICAL TIMES / WINTER 2001 43

claim that Alma Mahler sold all the rights of the Tenth Symphony to AMP - their predecessor - in 1951. Subsequent editions are therefore automatically linked to Schirmer. The makers of the revised Wheeler edition dispute Schirmer's claim. The Barshai edition is being published by Universal.

6. Frans Bouwman: Gustav Mahler (1860-1911), Tenth Symphony (1910): bibliography of primary and secondary sources (The Hague, 1996). From the Deryck Cooke et al. score: there are two recordings of the 1964 edition: Ormandy and Martinon. From the 1976 edition: Morris, Rattle, Levine, Chailly, Inbal, Sanderling and Martinon. From the 1989 edition (slightly reworked by Colin and David Matthews): Wigglesworth and Rattle. Chailly's performance with the KCO will not be recorded. For the other editions, Mazzetti's was recorded on two CDs, Carpenter, on one CD and the revised Wheeler edition also on two. A CD of the Barshai edition was recorded by the JDP in Berlin, September 2001.

7. See, for example, Marius Flothuis: 'Durfen und konnen wir ein unvollstandig uberliefertes Werk erganzen?', in Paul Op de Coul, ed.: op.cit., p.25. 8. Gunther Brosche: 'Gustav Mahlers

day in 1976. Cooke died shortly after its publication, but the Matthews brothers published a new edition, with minimal changes, which appeared in 1989. Simon Rattle and Kurt Sanderling often performed the Cooke edition, again with their own additions.

Remo Mazzetti prepared his edition in 1985. His philological decisions largely coincide with those of the Cooke edition. Revisions to the Wheeler edition persuaded Mazzetti to revise his own version in 1997.

Rudolf Barshai combines knowledge of orchestration with skill as a Mahler conductor. He studied all the previous editions that I provided for him. His edition was recorded at the end of September 2001 in Berlin by the Junge Deutsche Philharmonie.

Giuseppe Mazzuca & Nicola Samale premiered their edition on 22 September 2001 in Perugia, Italy, with the Vienna Symphony Orchestra conducted by Martin Sieghart. They are known for their performing version of the Finale of Bruckner's Ninth Symphony. They were supposedly aware only of Cooke's edition and the manuscript. Yet listening to their edition suggests the likelihood of their knowing other editions.

This impressive list demonstrates a continued interest in the Tenth, which is reinforced by a stream of publications on the subject and many CDs.6

A LTHOUGH the autographs form a hori- zontally uninterrupted whole of about

1945 measures, the need for the inter- vention of an editor - the filling in of

harmony, counterpoint and instrumentation, es- pecially in both Scherzos and Finale - is substan- tial. Indeed, some claim that they are listening to a new composition based on Mahler's sketches.7 (This is the core objection to completing an unfinished work of art.)

It is still not easy to go back to the source for those interested in knowing how much of what is presented is authentically Mahler, how much is interpretation, and how much is addition. There are two reasons for this difficulty: the complex fortunes of the autograph pages, which have not yet been traced fully, and the ambiguities in the manuscript material. The two facsimile editions were only published in a limited number and are therefore not easily accessible, and Mahler's drafts in these editions are divided over several folders and are not understandable without effort.

For his earlier symphonies Mahler used a sketch- book, but none has been found for the Tenth and

it is not known whether he ever used one. He worked on the Tenth during a very strained period of his life, not only professionally but pri- vately. Most of the work was done in the summer of 1910 against the background of the discovery that his wife was having an affair. How much these circumstances affected Mahler's mood can be felt from the writings of a personal nature in the drafts of the last three movements.

The fortunes of the manuscript In 1938 Alma, with her third husband, Franz Wer- fel, fled Vienna to escape the Nazis, taking with her, among many other manuscripts, that of the Tenth. Later, she sometimes gave sketch pages away to friends. After her death in 1964, the autograph did not go entirely to her daughter Anna, but part was claimed by the Rose family. In 1967, forty- five previously unpublished pages, among them the composition sketch of the Scherzo in F#, appeared in a second facsimile edition. A further five facsimile pages appeared at the beginning of the Cooke edition published in 1976 (and 1989). Parts of the manuscript turned up at auctions in 1989 and 1991.8 Currently, most of the autographs reside in the Austrian National Library (ONB) and twelve pages (of which six were unknown to me) are in the Bavarian State Library. Among these are the 'missing' pages 6 & 7 of the short score of the Adagio, hitherto unpublished, a pre-draft page I and VI of the short score of the Adagio (contain- ing Mahler's draft for a counterpoint for bars 161-64), and the first draft of the end of 'Pur- gatorio', as well as the first draft of the beginning of the fourth movement. Three pages are in the Pierpont Morgan Library in New York. A number of stray pages may, however, still be kept in libraries or private collections.

The materials that are known to consist of the composition are composition-sketches (CS) (or, in Reilly's terminology, draft short scores), short scores (SS) and some orchestral drafts (OD).9 Mahler usually used two to four staves for the CS. This is the first attempt at continuous music; page continuity is sometimes lacking, and counterpoint and harmony are rudimentary. The next step was the SS. Here the piece is worked out again, this time mainly on four, and sometimes five staves. Page continuity is usually intact, harmony and counterpoint are further developed, and sparse hints at instrumentation are given. Inserts or deletions can alter the horizontal structure of the CS and SS. The next step is the OD, the first attempt at an orchestrated full score, with the correct notation for transposing instruments.

Different generations of sketches show a pur- poseful method in the composition. Nevertheless, there are differences that could lead to various con- clusions. A reduced and, therefore, non-annotated graph shows all the generations of sketches for the


abbreviations

RF Ricke facsimile with Ratz's numbering CS composition sketch I insert SS short score OD orchestral draft

Adagio (measure nrs. 1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270275

1 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I i

Cooke I OXit I I I 58 79 Insert loose page

i i I I i 11111 I

I I

Ss, II I I I On Andante Adagio Andante come prima

Adagio

Scherzo in F 1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 lo 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 410 420 430 440 450 460 470 480 490 500 510 520 530

CS'.--.

OD Trio C drr I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I . I I I I I I I

Purgatorio 1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170

CS I I SSI 1 ODi

Scherzo in e/d 1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 410 420 430 440 450 460 470 480 490 500 510 520 530 540 550 560 570 580 590

' I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I 0 I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I tI I I I I Ii I I I I I I I I II

Finale 1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400

C4

Ex. 1: Graph of all the known drafts for the entire symphony, excluding the two pre-draft short score pages for the Adagio (I and IV) and the pre-draft short score page I for the fourth move: (? 2000 Frans Bouwman, The Hague; graphics by Worth Music Consultancy & Production, Amsterdam)

ment

RH 38 RF1oos ae RF6 Ml

Cs oose PagB1 4

I I I I

I I I I I ?

BRIEF NOTES FOR CONTRIBUTORS The Musical Times is a quarterly journal that considers for publication articles on a wide variety of musical subjects. Submitted manuscripts, which must represent the author's final thoughts, may be of up to 6000 words in length, and for the purposes of assessment need not conform to MT house style, though a suitable standard of written English and of presentation is expected. Acceptance of an article is conditional upon the author's being able to provide all illustrative material (for example: scores, glossy positives, tiff/eps/jpg files) and, prior to publication, having obtained permission for reproduction of all copyright items, making any necessary payments incurred thereby, and providing accurate captions for the purposes of acknowledgment. It is regretted that submitted manuscripts cannot be returned to authors. Accepted articles must be supplied by e-mail or on disc in Mac or PC format, and all editorial decisions are final.

We are currently considering articles for inclusion in the Summer 2002 and Autumn 2002 issues. If you wish us to consider your article for either of these issues, please e-mail it to [email protected], fax it to 01273 723829, or send it to Antony Bye, 7 Brunswick Mews, Hove, East Sussex, BN3 1HD. We shall acknowledge its receipt and endeavour to reach a decision as soon as possible.

Zehnte Symphonie wieder vereinigt!', in Nachrichten zur Mahler Forschung 26 ((Vienna, 1991), p.3. 9. To facilitate the future use of the proposed transcription, key words are necessary. I realise that these cannot always cover the exact status of a manuscript page, and it will remain necessary to elaborate on those pages which have an unclear status within the composition. Professor Reilly's nine stages of composition tried to avoid key words. (ER Reilly: 'Die Erfassung der musikalischen Quellen', in Nachrichten zur Mahler Forschung 2 (Vienna, 1977).

entire symphony (ex.1). What is striking is the abundance of material for the Adagio and the pau- city of material for the conclusion of 'Purgatorio' and most of the Finale.

Ambiguities in the manuscript material Another reason why it is so difficult to distin- guish between Mahler's own work and interpretations and additions lies in the ambiguities oc- curring in the manuscript material, which is essen- tially a draft for personal use. In many places there are proposed deletions, alterations and additions, etc., the meaning of which is not always fully clear. All the editors have had to make decisions as to what they judged them to mean. Let us consider some of the 'errors' Mahler made:

1. Mahler often did not bother to write accidentals Ex.2 shows three variants of bars 182-84 of the Adagio: Ricke Facsimile = RF 13, RF 14 and the OD. When Mahler wrote in the enharmonic dominant Db of the tonic F#, it was obvious to him that the six sharps were temporarily out of order and five flats valid, and unnecessary to write naturals to cancel six sharps. In bar 182, is the third beat of the second violins an F, an Fb, or a Gb? RF 13 has an F with a natural sign, but with an augmented triad F-A-Ct. RF 14, as well

as the recently unearthed but inaccessible short score (not reproduced), has an F without any accidental, making it an improbable F#. The ink stain behind RF 14 may have had a Gb written. The OD has an F with an unclear accidental, probably an Fb. This confusion resulted in a variety of editorial decisions: Erwin Ratz chose GK, Ernst Krenek - and all those who used his transcription - chose F0. Cooke and Mazzetti chose Fk. The last chord of bar 183 is equally puzzling in RF 13: AK-D-GK-C; in RF 14: E (#?)-GK-AC-C (?); in OD: EN-G-AK-C~. Editor Ratz has D; all others Eb. The short score page (unpublished) proves Ratz wrong: Ek-GK-Ak-C.

2. Mahler sometimes copied material mindlessly As a result, the orchestral draft may not always be superior to the short score or composition sketch. In ex.3, one may wonder if the changes in bars 170-71 of the Adagio are, as Cooke puts it, 'a conscious improve- ment or a slip in copying?'. Apart from the OD there is the now available SS (not reproduced) and RF 12. Both pages show a second voice going from stave 3 (with an implied G clef) to stave 4 (with an implied F clef). One bar later, this voice returns


Ex.2: 'Implied accidentals' in Adagio, bars 182-83 in RF 13, RF 14 and OD.

i -........... 4

]f' Z:: : Y . i_..,................ ,,? !?1 ?/^ ,.:, .i..........

! ~

_ ^ .

" . j p " 1 . f x . 9

s ..-. X:e ............ ;C: i,i -7......;

if Q xtf | i:

rI

-

.....

- - ~ . . .. .....

+ I -

.

O ' - ...

.. -.-. -..- ... It

Ex.3: Inattentive copying?: Adagio, bars 170-71, in RF 12 (above) and OD (below).

to the third stave (with the implied G clef). Cooke wrote: 'It would seem that, when copying SS from RF 12 or copying OD from SS, Mahler misunderstood his original intention here and wrote the part in the G clef for Vln 2'. Cooke was the first editor who decided to interpret the notes of the second voice RF 12 and SS for Violin 2 as correct. In RF 12, bars 170 and the first two notes of bar 171, the notes are undoubtedly meant to be in the F clef. The short score page is an exact

copy of RF 12. The question is, did Mahler consciously intend to change this, or was it indeed a slip in copying? Are the clashes between F and F# in bar 170, and between A and A# one bar later, indeed 'ineffective', as Cooke claimed, or are they to be preferred to the second voice in the F clef, that Barshai, as well as Mazzuca & Samale, considered empty? The tendency to automatically accept the last draft is the raison d'etre for a comprehensive diplomatic survey of all the drafts.

10. Berg's notes are in the ONB.

11. A sentence of Mahler's letter of resignation to the Court Opera on 7 December 1907.

THE MUSICAL TIMES / WINTER 2001

.......... 5 44^,

-

fi I . ,.-" . . ., "- - -

i fF -'i:*f-r ?:: I ^;- ;r

*--i

47

- ----? z

_::: .e .-J J;---

i r---

dir r r ? ? - : :[;ill. . :;l;i :.-:.;:.::::1 I_ --- :-:::::P-:l:::l r:-; -- ;? - :: :-:;----??t ;? I

f 4, ,

I

. 4. . i L- % e

in 1 t--: |r- - -y Is:- f ! i

"

Ex.4a: Which register is meant?: composition sketch or pre-draft short score RF 6

Ex.4b: Which register is meant?: composition sketch or pre-draft short score 'New' page

I;

Ex.4c: Which register is meant?: draft short score RF 7

F f 0 ;T :f f:0000fi :t:0 tt 00:0050;i;tyti;0 ;0 ft0 TV~~~~~~ ~~ am i 0iti, _ _ ir . 11 i 0

...J. e _ +.. . , fI,I

Ex.4d: Which register is meant?: short score = (Particell)

f ;.; 'S< ; _. -

Ex4: : i rge: : mat

i t t

Ex.4e: Which register is meant?: OD = (Partitur Entwurf)


7i

I -

I

v : 7 S X w i

B 4 itP-iL i'S tc M

i5' -^4

48

,? t i P'i

z I a ??

:g3: -U, ,,J _ 5 1 -; . - 1zl -_ 9B ^ > 2i-

,i:)5 1j ..:: :~?,~,Jl, 7- .i..

4 X.7:x . -0O > 3 t9wO . ff

if,;

5 3

': 0 tA A :@ S A :0 ;0 :; C l:::;f:X : ::l::::;:t:::;:. /: ::: :: 1 ^ Q::0: ::0: :0 0

i:: i m Si :^ :: Ff ti; : fF: ;i ; 00

Ex.S: 'Purgatorio', last four bars

3.Mahler vacillated between options In ex.4, the SS of bars 19-21 of the Adagio, the high register is stipulated, and an 8va bassa is added. Mahler later removed the latter. In three earlier drafts (RF 7, RF 6 and a still unpublished 'new' page) the lower register is indicated. The change in bar 19 of the OD, as Mahler noted above the first violin line, already occurs in RF 7a and on the 'new' page. This page shows no fewer than five variants for this measure. All the old Krenek- based editions choose the higher register; Ratz, Cooke, Mazzetti and Barshai choose the lower one.

In exx.4a-e the interpretations of the notes by subsequent editors are shown, as these interpretations provide a full picture of the issues involved. Let us now contemplate three 'errors' these editors might commit:

1. The editor copied Mahler's last draft, without looking at his previous drafts The above examples illustrate this.

2. The editor copied from previous editors without checking Mahler's manuscript Examples of this are numerous.

3. Clues in the manuscript ignored by previous editors In the second to last bar of 'Purgatorio', Mahler wrote a chord BK-E-G plus an accent. Although Cooke wrote this chord in his diplomatic transcription, he does not mention it in his notes or use it in his performing version. This chord is an addition to the chord from bar 168 tied to bar 169. Barshai and Mazzuca & Samele use it in their editions (ex.5).

Correcting three editions The present author was a proofreader for the Maz- zetti, the revised Wheeler and the Barshai editions. His corrections to Mazzetti and Wheeler pertained mainly to errors in a copyist's hand-written or com-

puter transcription of the editor's score and to errors in the editor's score itself. In his six years of communication with Maestro Barshai, the em- phasis has lain on how to interpret Mahler's autograph and, more particularly, whether Mahler's short score or orchestral draft represented Mahler's (presumed) ultimate choice and whether he should comply or contravene the manuscript interpretation by Cooke et al. The majority of choices - albeit sometimes after long vacillation - tallied with those by the Cooke team and are therefore not noticable. In the following examples Barshai chose to deviate.

1. Disagreement Four examples out of many: bars 170-71 of the Adagio (ex.3). Barshai (as well as Mazzuca and others) read the second voice in the G clef as in OD. I agree here with Cooke et al. that Mahler made a mistake in copying. In bar 74 of the Adagio, the Matthews brothers read the first note in the bass as a C#, as in all previous drafts, (for the first time so played by Chailly and his KCO), not as B in the OD (forming a dimished triad in root position) and which Barshai retains. Similarly I fail to agree with Barshai's El in bar 95 of 'Purgatorio', repeated in bar 83 of Finale. The manuscript seems to suggest Ek. Finally I disagree with Barshai's leading-note Et instead of tonic F# in bar 390 of the Finale. The analoguous bar in the Bb draft reads the tonic Bk.

2. Agreement Maestro Barshai agreed to include the BL-E-G chord (ex.5) of the second to last bar of 'Purgatorio' (so did Mazzuca & Samale), and to prefer earlier readings, as in bar 67 of the Adagio, last two quavers in horn: B-B# concert pitch, as in the short score and two earlier drafts (so did Erwin Ratz in his edition of the Adagio); in bar 145 of the F# Scherzo Cooke gives a low D, whereas Barshai agrees to F, as is more likely, reading all the drafts. In one instance, in bar 101 of Adagio he adopts


H:s

4: ::

j F:it | (::: h

i

49

z 1. .-i - ..

!.9., .-- . ... R D X g,

_~~~~~~~

III. Satz Purgatorio

.ISS; L J_i D r r 7 rL r l~rt , C7 r" r- .7 .r r . rL :

s-s~;~~F p f F RF38i

Sord?

Pc.i

P.E.ai H .er

Sord <

Nicht zu schnell

ee 7 e t o 7 pe 'o x V f r 7 r 7 7 F f r

^2 t1 2 5 z 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Allegretto moderato Ncht zu schnell

p if 1 7 , j , , | b 7 j^?^

/ 1 7 'aTr7^ 7

2 3 4 6 9 10 11 12

pp PFrrrtr>rr~V ef F e

i " BPP P I - ~

r r ,~r; ~c_Lr f r r r r r r ? x xx x f 3 4 Li ; ;4

Ex.6: A diplomatic transcription of the opening of the third movement, 'Purgatorio': composition sketch or draft short score RF 38i; short score i = (Particell); OD = (Partitur Entwurf)

*

I

I

-, -- k- . i r -- t

3 5 6 s 9 10 11 12 1 2 4

vll , i A 1 1 - - -. .~ - A A -

Fl.

Ob

Cl.

1 3 4 5 6 7 s 9 10 11 12

Mahler's OD, whereas all editions copy the passing note A (concert pitch) from the SS. Alban Berg's notes support this: 'wouldn't this reading be possible, or something like it! That would be also thematically applicable and the parallel octave in cello would be avoided'.10 In bar 194 of the Adagio, the Bass tuba has a low note with many ledger lines. Barshai opts for a low Eb. This results in a 6/4 chord that occurs also in bar 181. To make this example even more ambivalent I could add that the newly unearthed SS page does not seem to support 6/4 chord assumption.

The need for a transcription of all the autographs At present there is no complete, scholarly (through deduction), chronologically ordered, annotated and user-friendly edition of the source material that unequivocally records the extent to which Gustav Mahler completed his Tenth Symphony. The present author has therefore embarked on a project to fill this gap, with the objective of providing an insight into the chronology of Mahler's notation and to provide a scholarly basis for choices that any future editors will have to make. This transcription, de- void of additions that do not originate from Mahler himself, is intended as a key reference work for the music scholar, conductor, aspiring editor and Mahler devotee. Ex.6, the beginning of the third movement, shows the diplomatic transcription of the drafts in chronological order. The performing edition by Cooke et al. tried, in the first two movements, to differentiate between Mahler and the editor by using either bold or small print, and presented a diplomatic transcription of the last three movements beneath the score. Inevitably missing in the Cooke score are the earlier drafts: these would show the full compositional process and the dis- crepancies between the drafts.

The steps for the transcriptions of the prospective edition The steps for the transcriptions of the prospective edition would be twofold:

1. A description of all the Mahler Tenth sources in sequential order is followed by a neat transcription of all autographs, including all obvious or apparent errors and ambiguities. This transcription will be typeset, and will constitute the diplomatic transcription. Each ambiguity and each problem, whether or not a solution may be possible, will be discussed in detail.

These critical notes will be printed in a supplementary booklet, as part of a dissertation. A survey of how previous editors read certain ambiguities may be included, provided that it serves only to clarify Mahler's autograph.

2. Annotations of the diplomatic transcription must serve to remove errors and ambiguities. The result, in printed form, will comprise the amended transcription. The objective is a 'state-of-the-art' transcription of Mahler's last draft, purged of all errors and ambiguities, supplemented by relevant information from earlier drafts. Clefs and key signatures will be added. This phase does not constitute a performing version of the draft, let alone a completion, but a justified transcription of the unfinished manuscript.

A spin-off of these transcriptions could entail a survey and critical review of the relevant amend- ments and suggestions by previous editors. How did they fill up obvious gaps to make the manuscript practicable?

It is too early to tell whether such a survey might lead to a scholarly edition in which all the relevant additions would be appended to the amended transcription, indicated by means of a colour code. Even in such an edition, nothing could be asserted with finality, and any claim to the 'ultimate completion' would be ludicrous. Yet it would critically evaluate the wisdom or otherwise of editors in a hitherto unprecedented way

Conclusion 'Instead of a whole, finished as I dreamt, I leave piecework, the incomplete: as is man's destiny.'1 These words also apply to the unfinished Tenth. Instead of a completed Tenth, as he dreamt, Mah- ler left piecework. We can never be certain when, and in what order, Mahler composed the work; what was written before the marital crisis, and what afterwards (and we will never know whether the crisis itself actually deserves the impor- tance attributed to it12); and, most importantly, how a completed Tenth may have sounded in a clear moment in the master's mind. However, the above proposed transcriptions with their critical apparatus may help to evaluate more closely and accurately how unfinished the sketches for Mah- ler's Tenth really are. They help us to move away from too generally-worded judgments, be it for or against a performing version for Mahler's unfinished Tenth Symphony

12. See Jorg Rothkamm: 'Unbekannte Briefe der Komponistin [Alma Mahler] zur Revision Ihrer Werke im Jahre 1910', in Die Musikforschung 53/4 (2000), pp.432-45. Here Rothkamm claims that the four descending notes that form the core of the outcries in 'Purgatorio' are directly influenced by Mahler's corrections of Alma's songs, at the time of the composition of the symphony. These four notes are also written on the verso side of page viii (first setting) of the short score of the Adagio. The very first chord (in RF 39) of the fourth movement can also be found in one of Alma's songs.

Examples are reproduced by kind permission of Zsolnay and Ricke publishers.

Pianist and musicologist Frans Bouwman has been involved with Mahler's Tenth since the early 1970s. He has produced two piano reductions (by Cooke and Mazzetti), assisted in the Mahler 10 symposium in Utrecht in 1986 (where he performed the Mazzetti two- piano version), has written an annotated bibliography, and has proof-read the Mazzetti, the new Wheeler and the Barshai editions.

BACK ISSUES of The Musical Times are still available at ?6 each. Please turn to page 61 for further details.


Article Contentsp. 43p. 44p. 45p. 46p. 47p. 48p. 49p. 50p. 51

Issue Table of ContentsThe Musical Times, Vol. 142, No. 1877 (Winter, 2001), pp. 1-80Volume Information [pp. 70-80]Front Matter [pp. 1-61]Guest Editorial: Beyond Britten [pp. 2-3]LettersMastering the Present [pp. 3-4]No Compromise [p. 4]Double Trouble [p. 4]

News [p. 5]In MemoriamIsaac Stern [p. 6]Jeanne Loriod [p. 8]Ernest Warburton [p. 8]

Chopin in Performance: Perahia's Musical Dialogue [pp. 9-13+15]From the Diary of a Music Analyst: Puffett's Progress [pp. 16-26]Britten's 'Lyrics and Ballads of Thomas Hardy': Sad Tales for Winter [pp. 27-33]Generic Fusion in the 'Sinfonia Sacra': Redeeming Rubbra [pp. 34-42]Editing Mahler 10: Unfinished Business [pp. 43-51]Kurtzman on Holman: Write to Reply [pp. 52-60]Book ReviewsReview: Altered States [pp. 62-63]Review: Typically Withit [pp. 63-64]Review: Period Piece [pp. 64-65]Review: News and Views [pp. 65-66]Review: So near, so Far [pp. 66-67]Review: Mystic Moments [pp. 67-68]Review: UK Gold [pp. 68-69]Books Received [p. 69]

From the Musical Times 100 Years Ago

editing mahler 10 unfinished business

Documents