Path\u00e9tique<\/strong> op. 13: If only it were always this easy! This name can be traced back to the original edition of the sonata as published by Hoffmeister in Vienna in autumn 1799: \u201cGrande Sonate path\u00e9tique\u201d. Beethoven most certainly approved it (even if we do not have any handwritten evidence to this end) because he supervised publication in Vienna. With its passion, its inner turmoil but also its characteristic representation of the dramatic elevation this masterpiece lives up to its epithet in every sense.<\/p>\n Original edition of Sonata op. 13<\/p><\/div>\n Funeral March Sonata<\/strong> op. 26: Even though Beethoven only gave the entire sonata the title \u201cGran Sonata\u201d, the supplement for the 3rd movement of the sonata \u201cMarcia funebre sulla morte d\u2019un Eroe\u201d (Funeral march on the death of a hero) that was included in the original edition of 1802 would not have been published without his approval. Thirteen years later, he made an orchestral setting of this movement for the incidental music to the play \u201cEleonore Prohaska\u201d, noting down the title \u201cFuneral march\u201d in the manuscript.<\/p>\n Funeral March in Eleonore Prohaska WoO 96<\/p><\/div>\n Les Adieux<\/strong> op. 81a: This is the first more challenging case. In October 1811 the publisher Breitkopf & H\u00e4rtel sent Beethoven copies of the original edition with the German title: \u201cLebewohl, Abwesenheit und Wiedersehn. [Farewell, Absence and Return.] | Sonate f\u00fcr das Pianoforte\u201d and the French title: \u201cLes Adieux, l\u2019Absence et le Retour | Sonate | Pour le Pianoforte\u201d. It was \u201cLes Adieux\u201d of all things that Beethoven bitterly complained about, writing: \u201cI have just received the Lebe wohl etc and I see that you really have other copies with a French title. Why so? \u201cLebewohl\u201d is something quite different to \u201cles Adieux\u201d; the first is said from the heart to a single person, the other to a whole assembly, to whole cities\u201d (letter of 9 October 1811).\n<\/p>\n The reason why this subtle difference in meaning was so important to Beethoven becomes clear upon examining the manuscripts. The sonata explicitly referred to events in the life of the dedicatee, the Archduke Rudolph. Movement I: \u201cThe Farewell | Vienna, on 4th May 1809 | on the departure of his Imperial Highness | the revered Archduke | Rudolph\u201d, movements II and III: \u201cVienna 1810 on 30th January | written on the arrival | of his Imperial Highness the revered Archduke Rudolph\u201d. The fact that today we refer to the sonata as \u201cLes Adieux\u201d would not have gone down well with the composer. (The whole issue is much more complex than I have been able to describe in this short space \u2013 it is worthy of its own blog entry!)<\/p>\n Original edition of Sonata op. 81a<\/p><\/div>\n Two easy sonatas<\/strong> op. 49 and Sonatina <\/strong>op. 79: That the titles \u201cSonatine\u201d and \u201cleichte Sonate\u201d (easy sonata) were used in a very similar manner by Beethoven is shown by the sources: The original edition of the Sonatas op. 49 bears the title \u201cDeux Sonates faciles\u201d, the autograph of the first sonata, on the other hand, has the heading \u201cSonatine\u201d. The Sonatine op. 79 also contains a variant regarding the title, the German original edition says \u201cSonatine\u201d, whereas the English one (together with the Sonata op. 78) bears the title \u201cTwo Sonatas\u201c, even Beethoven\u2019s autograph has the simple title \u201cSonata\u201d. Nevertheless the gradations \u201cSonataine\u201d and \u201cleichte Sonate\u201d are without a doubt to be considered as being supplements provided by the composer himself and thus our usage is legitimate.<\/p>\n Original edition of Sonatas op. 49<\/p><\/div>\n Original edition of Sonatina op. 79<\/p><\/div>\n Grande Sonate<\/strong> op. 7: Another more challenging, actually extremely challenging matter. The Sonata op. 7 is Beethoven\u2019s first sonata to bear the addition \u201cGrande\u201d in the French title of the original edition. Unlike the 3 Sonatas op. 2, this sonata was published individually, not as part of a group of works. Yet this is also the case with the Sonatas op. 13, 22, 26, 28, 53 and 106, which were also all described as being \u201cgreat\u201d sonatas, both in the original editions as well as in the manuscripts, where they still survive.<\/p>\n Thus it is misleading to only give the Sonata op. 7 this epithet. And we have to ask ourselves whether the \u201cgreat\u201d could not be applied to the Sonatas op. 2 no. 3, op. 10 no. 3 and op. 57 (Appassionata!) in equal measure. Particularly in the case of the latter, we might have expected to find this addition, yet it is not to be found in the autograph.<\/p>\n To put it another way: Does the word \u201cgrande\u201d really tell us something about the importance and significance of the work? Is it not perhaps another attribute often used by a composer or a publisher in order to sell more copies? Should we really only use it for the Sonata op. 7? (It is reassuring to know that this epithet has not been to assert itself universally.)<\/p>\n Original edition of Sonata op. 7<\/p><\/div>\n Hammerklavier Sonata <\/strong>op. 106: Yes, this title is also \u201cgenuine\u201d. But this does not make it any less problematic. \u201cSonate f\u00fcr das Hammer-Klavier\u201d is the title already given to the Piano Sonata op. 101 that preceded it chronologically; it was also give to the Sonatas op. 109 and op. 110 that follow Opus 106.<\/p>\n This addition can be traced back to Beethoven, who prior to publication of the Sonata op. 101 wanted to compel his publisher S. A. Steiner to include a German term in the title alongside the usual Italian \u201cPiano-Forte\u201d. In January 1817 he sent Steiner a draft for the title, writing: \u201cthe title must first be presented to a language expert.<\/u> H\u00e4mmer-Klawier [thus referred to in his draft for the title page] is surely German, besides the invention [of the instrument] is also German, give credit where credit is due\u201d. A little later he once again requested that they consult an expert, as to whether \u201cHammer or H\u00e4mmer Klavier or even H\u00e4mmer-Fl\u00fcgel\u201d might be the correct name. They were even to discuss the term \u201cTasten Fl\u00fcgel\u201d before finally reaching the following conclusion: \u201cAfter our own consideration and after consulting our Conseil we resolve and have resolved that from henceforth on all of our works for which the title is in German, instead of piano-Forte the word Hammerklavier will be used\u201d (letter of 23 January 1817). <\/p>\n Original edition of Sonata op. 106<\/p><\/div>\n Mind you this discussion took place for the publication of the Sonata op. 101 and had as its sole aim to find a German term for the Italian name for the instrument. The fact that we call Opus 106 \u201cHammerklavier Sonata\u201d, which was issued almost three years later, has other reasons that have associative and symbolic roots. Strength, work, energy, activity, vigour, power, determination and intensity \u2013 we associate all of these qualities with the hammer and the person that wields it. And they are also without a doubt true of Beethoven\u2019s most epic creation for the piano, the \u201cHammerklavier Sonata\u201d.<\/p>\n So much for the \u201cauthentic\u201d epithets for Beethoven\u2019s piano sonatas in part 1 of this blog entry. In September I\u2019ll be looking at the popular titles that did not emanate from the composer. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" It’s so much easier to say \u201cThe Tempest\u201d, \u201cPath\u00e9tique\u201d and … Continue reading ![\"Original](\"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/de\/files\/2018\/06\/op13.png\")
<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a>