Although some of the movements of Pergolesi’s Stabat Mater are more lighthearted than the text would suggest, what I’m really referring to is the comedy of errors in dealing with the orchestra parts.
It started a few weeks ago when I was marking up my full score with my preferred articulations, dynamics, bowings, etc., and started to transfer the markings into the parts before mailing them to the players. That’s when I discovered that the second violin part was totally different in the second movement from what appeared in the full score. Not just a not here and there, but completely different. And not just the second movement — almost all the movements were different! Any time the two violins played in unison (which is quite a bit of the time) the editor had invented a new part.
Then it turned out it wasn’t just the second violin. Anytime the viola doubled the continuo (which was pretty often) the editor invented a new part. Those of you who have read my posts before know I’m not very interested in authentic performance or the “composer’s intent” and have no problem with such changes, but (a) these were really bad, with un-Baroque double-stops and awkward voice-leading, and (b) why weren’t they in the full score? It was the same edition (Breitkopf). It would be close to impossible to conduct when players are playing something which isn’t in the full score.
So I fished out some Kalmus parts I had in a file and started transferring my markings to them. Of course they were full of editorial dynamics and slurring and articulations which didn’t agree with my score, but at least the notes were the same, or mostly.
Then we get to the vocal score, which was the G. Schirmer edition. I discovered some of the discrepancies during the rehearsals, such as the augmentation of the final half-dozen bars in the last movement. But others didn’t turn up until the last minute, such as the one-measure cut in the 8th movement and the one-measure substitution later in the same movement, where the editor just replaced a measure of music with something else in the chorus part. At the dress rehearsal, what’s to do besides cut those measures (which were really half-of-one-bar-and-half-of-the-next-bar) in the orchestra? And one movement was in a different time signature (2/2 instead of 4/2).
Sure would have preferred to spend the dress rehearsal working more on music and less on reconciling parts.
Argh. Maybe someone will come out with a decent edition where everything matches. And put it on CPDL.
Image: Pergolesi cartoon by Kim Frost
sabina sneider says
Richard Allen Roe says
Hi John, it was Johann Sebastian Bach, who arranged the
Pergolesi Stabat Mater, with new text (author unknown), and created
the “Motetto a due voci, 3 Stromenti a Cont. di G. B. Pergolese’
(which was written in Bach’s hand on his draft score) sometime
between 1745 and 1747. Bach’s parts were discovered in the 1960s in
the Berlin Staatsbibliothek…typically for Bach, he wrote the
organ part, and a student (in this case his son-in-law JC
Altnickol) wrote out the orchestera parts. The major diffferences
(from Pergolesi) are in the 2nd violin and the viola parts, and
then the differences to account for the different text, and the
Dresden Court style of arranging Italian music, and some more minor
(but significant) changes that are characteristic of Bach’s music
in general..The text is not a German translation of Stabat Mater,
but a new German text, paraphrasing Ps 51, “Tilge, Höchste, meine
Sünde.”
John Howell says
Richard Allen Roe says
Hi Allen, I am guessing you know about the extensive
revisions (restructurings – rewriting) by JSB (BWV 1083). It would
be interesting to see how much of the Breitkopf set is actually the
JSB revisions, just not catalogued (entitled) as such. What a
nightmare. Good luck!
Do you know the film “Jesus of Montreal”? The Pergolesi figures
prominently in that outstanding film.
Ronald Richard Duquette says