last three piano sonatas...enigma?

[paulverv]

Originally posted by Peter:
Are you sure about this? It was the copy sent to Schlesinger in 1822 that was lost. However on 3rd june 1823 - Beethoven sent his copyist Schlemmer a list of mistakes for Schlesinger's edition of op. 111. The list was not intended for Schlesinger himself but served as the model for a list of mistakes, of which Schlemmer was to make a fair copy. It was then to be reproduced for the Viennese music dealers.

On June 27th 1823 Beethoven asked Diabelli to return the manuscript of op. 111 which he had sent the day before. He had sent it by mistake instead of the corrected French edition, which he had received from Diabelli. Beethoven is prepared to exchange his manuscript for the French edition although he would like to keep the latter. As the composer was not happy with the Parisian original edition of the piano sonata because it contained so many mistakes, he supported Diabelli's improved and corrected edition.

Since Beethoven took so much trouble over these corrections if he wasn't satisfied with Diabelli's edition why did he allow it to stand? There are no further letters complaining about his edition.

Well, read this letter;

Enquire with the archscoundrel Diabelli, when the French copy of the Sonata in c minor will be printed, so that I receive it for correction, [8] at the same time I have asked for 4 copies for myself, of which one on good paper for the Cardinal,[9] should he, here, behave at his usual worst, then I will personally sing him a bass aria in his dungeon that the Graben will resound with it -- 

your most obedient servant

                                                                             Beethoven

to Hr. v. Schindler"

[Quoted and translated from: Ludwig van Beethoven Briefwechsel Gesamtausgabe, Vol. 5, Letter No. 1665, p. 162-163]

[Original: Berlin, Staatsbibliothek; to [1]: refers to the fast that on the basis of the mentioning of Diabelli's copy of Op. 111, the letter must have been written between June 3 and June 27, 1823;  to [8]: refers to the Diabello copy of Op. 111; to [9]: refers to Letter no. 1661; details taken from p. 162-163].

[paulverv]

Originally posted by Peter:
Are you sure about this? It was the copy sent to Schlesinger in 1822 that was lost. However on 3rd june 1823 - Beethoven sent his copyist Schlemmer a list of mistakes for Schlesinger's edition of op. 111. The list was not intended for Schlesinger himself but served as the model for a list of mistakes, of which Schlemmer was to make a fair copy. It was then to be reproduced for the Viennese music dealers.

On June 27th 1823 Beethoven asked Diabelli to return the manuscript of op. 111 which he had sent the day before. He had sent it by mistake instead of the corrected French edition, which he had received from Diabelli. Beethoven is prepared to exchange his manuscript for the French edition although he would like to keep the latter. As the composer was not happy with the Parisian original edition of the piano sonata because it contained so many mistakes, he supported Diabelli's improved and corrected edition.

Since Beethoven took so much trouble over these corrections if he wasn't satisfied with Diabelli's edition why did he allow it to stand? There are no further letters complaining about his edition.

Well, read this letter;

Enquire with the archscoundrel Diabelli, when the French copy of the Sonata in c minor will be printed, so that I receive it for correction, [8] at the same time I have asked for 4 copies for myself, of which one on good paper for the Cardinal,[9] should he, here, behave at his usual worst, then I will personally sing him a bass aria in his dungeon that the Graben will resound with it -- 

your most obedient servant

                                                                             Beethoven

to Hr. v. Schindler"

[Quoted and translated from: Ludwig van Beethoven Briefwechsel Gesamtausgabe, Vol. 5, Letter No. 1665, p. 162-163]

[Original: Berlin, Staatsbibliothek; to [1]: refers to the fast that on the basis of the mentioning of Diabelli's copy of Op. 111, the letter must have been written between June 3 and June 27, 1823;  to [8]: refers to the Diabello copy of Op. 111; to [9]: refers to Letter no. 1661; details taken from p. 162-163].

[paulverv]

And Check this;

back to "Works by Ludwig van Beethoven" | back to "Pieces for two hands" | back to op. 111

Ludwig van Beethoven, Sonate für Klavier (c-Moll) op. 111, Überprüfte Abschrift

Beethoven-Haus Bonn, Sammlung H. C. Bodmer, HCB Mh 54

Image 19 / 34

Image  display




Things worth knowing
"Destroy the latter immediately"

The Berlin publisher Schlesinger did not destroy this corrected copy for the Piano Sonata op. 111, despite Beethoven?s instruction to do so. Schlesinger did not heed him for a good reason: he probably did not receive another one.
The story of Beethoven?s last major piano sonata and its engraver?s model might have been as follows (the interdependence of the sources has not quite been cleared up):
In 1820 Beethoven had reached an agreement with the Berlin publisher Adolph Martin Schlesinger and sold him his last three Piano Sonatas op. 109, 110 and 111. In January 1822 Beethoven completed the autograph score of the Sonata op. 111 (the first movement is at the Beethoven-Haus, BH 71; the second movement has disappeared without a trace). The composer had a copy of this first autograph score made for the publisher. Beethoven read through this copy (HCB Mh 54), corrected it and sent it to Berlin. However, afterwards he wrote the autograph score out again. In the second movement in particular there were major changes, so that on 20 February 1822 Beethoven wrote the following to Schlesinger in Berlin, ?concerning the last sonata [op. 111] which has now already been sent, I would like to tell you that I am sending you another copy of the last movement with variations with the next post. As so many different things were going on, I only gave the copyist my first version. Yet as sometimes happens parts of it were not finished or not shown correctly. Please do not use this and do not show it to anyone - destroy it as soon as you have received the other copy. On account of my earlier illness some things remained undone, which is why I was under a lot of pressure as can sometimes happen. You will receive this movement at the most eight days later than the sonata itself.?
So another copy was to be made of the second movement in its current version. Five weeks later, on 9 April, Beethoven wrote to Schlesinger to say that this second copy was on its way, "(...) however the new copy of the last movement of the third sonata is only going out with tomorrow's post as I was hindered. Please confirm receipt of this as soon as it arrives and put a mark on the copy so that it cannot be confused with the one you already have. Please destroy the latter immediately." In July Adolph Martin Schlesinger confirmed receipt of Beethoven?s letters. However he did not say that the second copy had arrived. He probably never received the second copy and had to have the work engraved using the first one.
Schlesinger's son Maurice had shortly before settled in Paris as a music publisher. In spring 1822 he had visited his father and been given the copy shown here for publication. In order to get his Paris publishing house off to a good start, Maurice was going to publish the sonata by the famous composer instead of his father. The engraver?s model - the copy shown here - had a uniform appearance and shows no trace of the second movement having been exchanged. Although the movements are separate, not bound together, both of them were done by the copyist Wenzel Rampl - the staff ruling and watermark on the paper is identical. Only the binding (or rather the stitch holes) are different. So Maurice had probably been given the first copy of the sonata on his visit. The copy of the second movement which Beethoven had said was coming possibly never arrived in Berlin.


Library indexing

[Peter]

Your post referring to Schlesinger isn't relevant as I agree with you that edition was full of errors as the corrected copy was lost.

The letter of June 27th 1823 states he supports Diabelli's new and corrected edition.

I'm not saying you are wrong, only that I don't know! Is it not possible to compare the two editions to see if there are differences?

------------------
'Man know thyself'

[This message has been edited by Peter (edited 09-02-2006).]

[paulverv]

Originally posted by Peter:

Your post referring to Schlesinger isn't relevant as I agree with you that edition was full of errors as the corrected copy was lost.

The letter of June 27th 1823 states he supports Diabelli's new and corrected edition.

I'm not saying you are wrong, only that I don't know! Is it not possible to compare the two editions to see if there are differences?

You can compare the two and there are a few differences; as I stated in an earlier post, The 64ths appear on different notes in the two editions.
I would like to find the Clementi edition to compare, but have so far been unsuccessful.

[Peter]

Originally posted by paulverv:
You can compare the two and there are a few differences; as I stated in an earlier post, The 64ths appear on different notes in the two editions.
I would like to find the Clementi edition to compare, but have so far been unsuccessful.

And I presume modern editions are based on the Diabelli not the French edition? Finding the Clementi would be interesting and hopefully possible.

------------------
'Man know thyself'

[This message has been edited by Peter (edited 09-03-2006).]