sources - Nottingham eTheses - The University of Nottingham
sources - Nottingham eTheses - The University of Nottingham
sources - Nottingham eTheses - The University of Nottingham
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