01.03.2013 Views

sources - Nottingham eTheses - The University of Nottingham

sources - Nottingham eTheses - The University of Nottingham

sources - Nottingham eTheses - The University of Nottingham

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

[<strong>of</strong>ten]. 28 Neither <strong>of</strong> these however, found their way into the published versions <strong>of</strong><br />

Janáček’s score (KPU in 1908, UE in 1917/18), or indeed even into ŠFS and ŠVS.<br />

Dates entered at the end <strong>of</strong> the libretto give some idea <strong>of</strong> its brief lifespan as<br />

performance material as used by prompters. <strong>The</strong> end <strong>of</strong> Act 3 is signed and dated (26<br />

October 1903) by the copyist, Kostka. 29 In chronological order, prompters’ dates are<br />

as follows: on the inside back cover in pencil is the annotation: 11/5. 1904 Č.[eské]<br />

Budějovice Koudelky (i.e. the prompter Koudelka); in pencil underneath Kostka’s date<br />

on page 55: 7/2 1905 | J Novotný and the comment Chudák Čenský byl nemocen [poor<br />

Čenský was ill]; and on the otherwise blank page 56: V Moravské Ostravě, 25/9 06<br />

Háček. Although this suggests that LB was used as prompter’s copy from 1904 to<br />

1906, three dates from autumn 1906 entered into ŠVS by the same ‘Háček’ (including<br />

25 September) seem to indicate that by then it was ŠVS, with the 1906 cuts marked in,<br />

that was being used for this purpose. LB was thus probably used by the prompter for<br />

all performances <strong>of</strong> Jenůfa in 1904 and the single performance (7 February) in 1905.<br />

Notwithstanding some inaccuracies and anomalies noted by Štědroň in his<br />

description <strong>of</strong> this source, LB’s usually very precise indication <strong>of</strong> word- and phrase-<br />

repetition <strong>of</strong>fers great help in reconstructing the 1904 vocal parts, as discussed below.<br />

Although Štědroň’s discussion <strong>of</strong> LB at times seems to imply that Janáček revised this<br />

source in creating the 1907/8 version <strong>of</strong> Jenůfa, it is clear both from an examination <strong>of</strong><br />

the manuscript and from the wider context <strong>of</strong> Štědroň’s remarks that he was referring<br />

to the text (in the ‘abstract’ sense) embodied in LB rather than to the manuscript<br />

itself. 30 With the exception <strong>of</strong> the dates relating to composition, etc., added later by<br />

Janáček himself on the manuscript’s preliminary pages, all the annotations relate to<br />

28 LB, 27.<br />

29 LB, 55.<br />

30 See especially Štědroň 1966b, 516 and ZGJ, 81.<br />

41

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!