sources - Nottingham eTheses - The University of Nottingham
sources - Nottingham eTheses - The University of Nottingham sources - Nottingham eTheses - The University of Nottingham
orchestra (see CHAPTER 3, §3.3.4). As such, they are of considerable interest in the context of the gradual emergence of Janáček’s conception of speech-melody and its influence on his vocal music in particular. In the publicity material for the Jenůfa première, Janáček made much of this new development in his music, but its at best only partial realisation goes some way to explaining the rather dismissive, if not outright hostile reaction of the Prague critics to the Brno première. 2.4 Notes to the reconstruction Any edition that goes beyond the mere reproduction of an existing manuscript or printed source inevitably contains anomalies, whether acknowledged therein or not. Departures from the original sources, be they in the form not only of unwittingly introduced new errors but also of corrections, editorial suggestions, completions, or choices between competing readings, even when made for the soundest possible reasons, entail to some extent a remove from the historically transmitted text. This edition is no exception. Dürr’s 1969 edition of Jenůfa, whilst it did not pretend to embody a chronologically specific ‘version’ of the opera as such, preserved Kovařovic’s retouchings, as well as supplementing them with further alterations by later conductors. 49 However, at the same time Dürr restored the Kostelnička’s Act 1 solo ‘Aji on byl zlatohřivý’, even though it had been cut from the opera by Janáček himself by 1906 (and demonstrably so, from Dürr’s vantage point, by 1908). Mackerras and Tyrrell, using the plates of UE 1969 as the basis for their edition of the ‘Brno version 1908’, retained this passage in UE 1996/2000 whilst at the same time acknowledging its 49 See Dürr 1968 and Dürr’s Preface to UE 1969. 57
anomalous status there. 50 A further anomaly in UE 1996/2000 is its designated version label (‘Brněnská verze 1908’), for it not only incorporates changes made by Janáček up to 1915, but in so doing presents a text that was never actually heard in Brno (where the last performance of Jenůfa before the adoption of the Kovařovic version was in March 1913). In the present edition there are two main conscious anomalies. The first is in Act 1 Scene 4 (the appearance of Števa and the recruits): the lack of original stage band parts from the première and the thoroughness of revisions to ŠFS together mean that the possibility of reconstructing the onstage music in its 1904 version with any certainty is remote indeed. Rather than attempt a hypothetical reconstruction based on very little available evidence, the 1908 version of this music has been used here. A more far-reaching difficulty concerns the vocal lines throughout the opera, as outlined above (§2.3). The lack of a firmly verifiable source from 1904 other than LB means that, whilst the different layers are for the most part discernible (albeit often with difficulty), the particular layer of vocal revision used in the present edition at any given point is sometimes unavoidably conjectural. Every attempt has been made to judge each case within its context; in those instances where reference to LB is not able to decide the issue, a general preference for the earlier version of a given passage has been tempered by a close comparison with any surrounding revisions to the orchestral texture, as well as to other, verifiable revisions to the vocal lines themselves. An overriding consideration has been to present as clearly as possible the text of Jenůfa as performed in 1904 whilst incorporating any necessary corrections. For this edition — the first entirely new setting of the opera’s full score in any version for almost forty years — a decision was taken early on to revert throughout to Janáček’s 50 See above, fn. 47. 58
- Page 27 and 28: surviving sketch-leaf (SK) is anyth
- Page 29 and 30: and effort, both physical and emoti
- Page 31 and 32: performed in January 1904. In addit
- Page 33 and 34: most of the critics there were form
- Page 35 and 36: 1.5 Later revisions and publication
- Page 37 and 38: Jenůfa for Prague towards the end
- Page 39 and 40: That situation changed, however, wh
- Page 41 and 42: CHAPTER 2: SOURCES AND RECONSTRUCTI
- Page 43 and 44: folio suggests that this brief sket
- Page 45 and 46: ŠFS into line with the Kovařovic
- Page 47 and 48: Fig. 2.2 ŠFS I 203v, detail, rotat
- Page 49 and 50: or other details (erased or otherwi
- Page 51 and 52: Fig. 2.5 ŠVS II 53r (II/vi/126-43)
- Page 53 and 54: list is amended by Janáček, with
- Page 55 and 56: Fig. 2.6 OP violin 1: detail from A
- Page 57 and 58: 1904 bn 2 [OP] OPx title page and
- Page 59 and 60: On the facing page (the recto of th
- Page 61 and 62: Fig. 2.9 LB, 55: end of Act 3, show
- Page 63 and 64: issues of practical, pre-revision u
- Page 65 and 66: Jenůfa in 1913, providing a ‘sna
- Page 67 and 68: 2.2 Determining the 1904 version fr
- Page 69 and 70: Štědroň 1968b Tyrrell 1996 / Tyr
- Page 71 and 72: two ensembles in Act 1, ‘A vy, mu
- Page 73 and 74: een cut before the première. 46 Th
- Page 75 and 76: and 2 in unison (in the context of
- Page 77: nature of the changes, which can th
- Page 81 and 82: Ex. 2.4b However much more practica
- Page 83 and 84: score. Playing standards have impro
- Page 85 and 86: Such instances have been tacitly co
- Page 87 and 88: Ex. 2.7 Articulation and phrasing E
- Page 89 and 90: Instrumentation In line with Univer
- Page 91 and 92: trombone 3 part, and in both ŠFS a
- Page 93 and 94: Act 1. On the basis of all availabl
- Page 95 and 96: development of twentieth-century op
- Page 97 and 98: 3.1 The Urfassung and the pre-premi
- Page 99 and 100: seems also to reflect an original c
- Page 101 and 102: could speculate that the change of
- Page 103 and 104: accompaniment evaporates completely
- Page 105 and 106: This radical pre-première revision
- Page 107 and 108: corresponds to the present figs 122
- Page 109 and 110: more specific cuts, the first of tw
- Page 111 and 112: with the same words, but also agree
- Page 113 and 114: and 16b in APPENDIX IV) to Laca’s
- Page 115 and 116: y Laca’s ‘Chci, Jenůfka’ —
- Page 117 and 118: Other extensive cuts made at this s
- Page 119 and 120: Ex. 3.12 3.3.2 Textural alterations
- Page 121 and 122: Ex. 3.13b This revision is similar
- Page 123 and 124: Ex. 3.16 Sinfonietta VI/18 (1926),
- Page 125 and 126: Ex. 3.19 Other instances of motivic
- Page 127 and 128: In 1908 Janáček delays the appear
anomalous status there. 50 A further anomaly in UE 1996/2000 is its designated version<br />
label (‘Brněnská verze 1908’), for it not only incorporates changes made by Janáček<br />
up to 1915, but in so doing presents a text that was never actually heard in Brno<br />
(where the last performance <strong>of</strong> Jenůfa before the adoption <strong>of</strong> the Kovařovic version<br />
was in March 1913).<br />
In the present edition there are two main conscious anomalies. <strong>The</strong> first is in<br />
Act 1 Scene 4 (the appearance <strong>of</strong> Števa and the recruits): the lack <strong>of</strong> original stage<br />
band parts from the première and the thoroughness <strong>of</strong> revisions to ŠFS together mean<br />
that the possibility <strong>of</strong> reconstructing the onstage music in its 1904 version with any<br />
certainty is remote indeed. Rather than attempt a hypothetical reconstruction based on<br />
very little available evidence, the 1908 version <strong>of</strong> this music has been used here.<br />
A more far-reaching difficulty concerns the vocal lines throughout the opera,<br />
as outlined above (§2.3). <strong>The</strong> lack <strong>of</strong> a firmly verifiable source from 1904 other than<br />
LB means that, whilst the different layers are for the most part discernible (albeit <strong>of</strong>ten<br />
with difficulty), the particular layer <strong>of</strong> vocal revision used in the present edition at any<br />
given point is sometimes unavoidably conjectural. Every attempt has been made to<br />
judge each case within its context; in those instances where reference to LB is not able<br />
to decide the issue, a general preference for the earlier version <strong>of</strong> a given passage has<br />
been tempered by a close comparison with any surrounding revisions to the orchestral<br />
texture, as well as to other, verifiable revisions to the vocal lines themselves.<br />
An overriding consideration has been to present as clearly as possible the text<br />
<strong>of</strong> Jenůfa as performed in 1904 whilst incorporating any necessary corrections. For<br />
this edition — the first entirely new setting <strong>of</strong> the opera’s full score in any version for<br />
almost forty years — a decision was taken early on to revert throughout to Janáček’s<br />
50 See above, fn. 47.<br />
58
Change language