Edition·S is supported by The Danish Arts Foundation.
DCM 065
ISBN 978-87-970723-8-7
ISMN 979-0-706839-20-2
Varighed / Duration: 25 min.
Indhold / Contents
Danish Classical Music iv Biografi / Biography vi Forord / Preface viii
Faksimiler / Facsimiles xi
Strygekvartet nr. 1 / String Quartet No. 1
I. Allegro appassionata 13
II. Scherzo. Allegretto giocoso 26
III. Adagio 32
IV. Finale. Vivace 36
Critical Commentary 48
Danish Classical Music
Udgivelsesserien Danish Classical Music (DCM) har til formål at tilgængeliggøre dansk musikalsk kulturarv i pålidelige og gennemarbejdede praktisk-videnskabelige nodeeditioner for musikere og forskere i ind- og udland. Således er ambitionen at overtage stafeten fra Dansk Center for Musikudgivelse, som opererede som et forskningscenter under Det Kgl. Bibliotek, 2009-2019. Centeret udgav praktisk-videnskabelige editioner af høj filologisk kvalitet, og siden lukningen af centeret er denne opgave ikke blevet varetaget – men behovet er ikke blevet mindre.
Mens Dansk Center for Musikudgivelse fungerede som et center med ansate medarbejdere er forholdene for det nye DCM anderledes: Her er tale om selvstændige og individuelt finansierede projekter under DCM-paraplyen. Derfor er der ikke blevet udarbejdet et nyt sæt redaktionelle retningslinjer – i stedet videreføres de retningslinjer, som blev formuleret af Dansk Center for Musikudgivelse. De eneste ændringer fra retningslinjerne er layoutmæssige, og så er der i DCM-udgivelserne tilføjet en kort biografisk introduktion til komponisten.
De redaktionelle retningslinjer sikrer udgivelsernes høje og konsistente editionsfilologiske niveau og grundindstillingen til udgivelsesarbejdet kan sammenfattes i nogle få, centrale punkter.
Om “praktisk-videnskabelige editioner”
Med begrebet “praktisk-videnskabelige editioner” sigtes der til, at udgivelserne skal være praktisk anvendelige for musikere, uden at musikerne nødvendigvis skal forholde sig til redaktørens arbejde og filologiske overvejelser. Derfor er selve nodesiden “ren” og uden fodnoter eller lignende. Samtidig er udgivelserne videnskabelige, idet interesserede læsere kan finde den nødvendige information om det editionsfilologiske arbejde i tekstdele placeret før og efter nodedelen: Før nodedelen bringes en introduktion til værket, dets tilblivelses- og receptionshistorie samt generelle kommentarer til det filologiske arbejde (eksempelvis nogle særlige udfordringer eller valg); efter nodedelen følger en grundig kildebeskrivelse og en oversigt over redaktionelle ændringer, deres begrundelse i kilderne samt information om varianter.
Om redaktørens rolle
Som James Grier skriver i bogen The Critical Editing of Music fra 1996, så er al editionsfilologisk arbejde også et fortolkningsarbejde, ideelt set baseret på grundige, kritiske og historisk forankrede studier af kildematerialet. Idéen om at den videnskabelige edition videregiver den “eneste rigtige” version af værket er en fiktion: Ofte vil redaktører komme frem til varierende udlægninger af et værk, og ofte kan der argumenteres lige godt for den ene læsning som den anden. Det er derfor vigtigt at bevæggrunden for de enkelte valg er tydeliggjort i
Danish Classical Music
The publication series Danish Classical Music (DCM) aims to make Danish musical heritage accessible for musicians and researchers in Denmark and abroad by providing reliable and meticulous practical-scholarly music editions. The ambition is thus to take over the baton from the Danish Centre for Music Publication which operated as a research centre under the Royal Library from 2009 to 2019. The centre published practical-scholarly editions of high philological quality, and since the closure of the centre, this task has not been undertaken – but the need has not diminished.
While the Danish Centre for Music Publication functioned as a centre with dedicated employees, the conditions for the new DCM are different: it comprises of independent projects funded individually under the DCM framework. Therefore, a new set of editorial guidelines has not been developed – instead, the guidelines formulated by the Danish Centre for Music Publication are being sustained. The only changes to the guidelines relate to layout, and in DCM publications a brief biographical introduction of the composer is added.
The editorial guidelines ensure a high and consistent level of philological quality in the publications, and the fundamental editorial approach can be summarized in a few key points.
On “practical-scholarly editions”
The term “practical-scholarly editions” refers to the aim of making the publications practically useful for musicians without requiring them to engage directly with the editor’s work and philological considerations. The sheet music is therefore “clean”, without footnotes or similar additions. At the same time, the publications are scholarly in nature, as interested readers can find the necessary information about the philological work in sections placed before and after the sheet music: Prior to the sheet music, there is an introduction to the work, its genesis and reception history, as well as general comments on the philological work (such as specific challenges or choices). After the sheet music, a thorough description of sources and an overview of editorial changes, their justification based on the sources, and information about variants are presented.
On the role of the editor
As James Grier writes in his book The Critical Editing of Music from 1996, all philological work is also an act of interpretation, ideally based on thorough, critical, and historically grounded studies of the source material. The notion that the scholarly edition presents the “only correct” version of a work is a fiction: Editors often arrive at varying interpretations of a piece, and equally compelling arguments can often be made for different readings. Therefore, it is important to clarify the rationale behind each choice in the overview of editorial revisions.
oversigten over redaktionelle retelser.
I serien undgås såkaldte “eklektiske” editioner, en sammenblanding af forskellige kilder, der kan resultere i en version af værket, der aldrig har eksisteret fra komponistens hånd. Der bestemmes derfor altid en hovedkilde, som editionen er baseret på, mens varianter kan bruges som hjemmel ved retelser af klare fejl.
Om denne udgivelse
Nærværende udgivelse er en del af et indledende projekt på DCM, som fokuserer særligt på danske kvindelige komponister – en gruppe af komponister, hvor behovet for kritisk-videnskabelige og praktisk anvendelige editioner er særlig mærkbart al den stund at meget af deres musik ikke blev udgivet i deres egen levetid og kun sjældent er blevet opført. Det er håbet, at udgivelsen kan være med til at udbrede et overset men vigtigt repertoire i dansk musikkulturarv – både blandt musikere, forskere og andre interesserede.
Udgivelsen er venligt støtet af Augustinus Fonden, hvortil der retes en stor tak.
Thomas Husted Kirkegaard, ph.d.
The series avoids so-called “eclectic” editions, which involve a mixture of different sources and may result in a version of the work that never existed in the composer’s hand. Therefore, a primary source is always determined as the basis for the edition, while variants can be used as evidence for correcting clear errors.
On this publication
The present publication is part of an introductory project within DCM that specifically focuses on Danish women composers – a group of composers for whom the need for scholarly-critical and practically useful editions is particularly pronounced, given that much of their music was not published during their lifetime and has rarely been performed. The hope is that this publication can help disseminate an overlooked yet important repertoire in Danish musical heritage among musicians, researchers, and other interested parties.
The publication is generously supported by the Augustinus Foundation, to whom heartfelt thanks are directed.
Thomas Husted Kirkegaard, Ph.D
Biografi
Nancy Dalberg (1881-1949) blev født Nancy Hansen i 1881 på godset Bødstrup i nærheden af Slagelse. Hendes far, Christian D.A. Hansen (1843-1916), var en særdeles succesfuld forretningsmand, der udviklede produkter til mejeribranchen, og Dalberg voksede derfor op i en familie, hvor der ikke manglede økonomiske ressourcer. I 1882 flytede familien ind på det nyerhvervede gods Mullerup på Sydfyn, hvor Dalberg voksede op.
I 1901, da hun var 17 år gammel, blev hun gift med ingeniørofficeren og portrætmaleren Erik Dalberg (1875-1945). Hun modtog klaverundervisning af én af tidens mest anerkendte klaverlærere, Ove Christiansen (1856-1909), og i 1909-11 studerede hun komposition hos den norske komponist Johan Svendsen (1840-1911). Hun var formentlig også elev af komponisten Fini Henriques (1867-1940) før hun i 1913 blev elev af tidens helt store musiknavn, Carl Nielsen (1865-1931). Igennem tiden udviklede Dalberg og Nielsen et tætere professionelt forhold, og Nielsen dirigerede eller medvirkede som violinist i opførelsen af adskillige af hendes værker. Han bad hende også hjælpe med at instrumentere sine værker Alladin og Fynsk Foraar Dalberg fik opført en række sange i 1911, og hendes første strygekvartet blev opført i hendes hjem – med Carl Nielsen på violin – i 1914, men hendes egentlige offentlige debut som komponist kom i 1915, hvor hun holdt en såkaldt kompositionskoncert i Odd Fellow Palæet, kun med hendes værker på programmet. Hun holdt endnu en kompositionskoncert i 1918 og en tredje i 1922. Ved disse koncerter blev blandt andet hendes strygekvarteter, sange og flere orkesterværker –ikke mindst symfonien – opført. Generelt blev Dalbergs musik modtaget godt, men anmelderne undlod sjældent at kommentere på hendes køn, ofte fordi de var overraskede over, at en kvinde kunne komponere så godt.
I vinterhalvåret 1922-23 havde hun et ophold i Algeriet, fordi hun var plaget af helbredsproblemer, blandt andet gigtsmerter. Her blev hun inspireret af nomadefolkets musik og nedskrev melodier, der siden blev til værket Arabisk Musik fra Sahara. Efter hjemkomsten begyndte hun at komponere en opera over Selma Lägerlöfs (1858-1940) Gösta Berlings Saga, men da Lägerlöf allerede havde givet italienske Riccardo Zandonai (1883-1944) tilladelse til at komponere en opera over denne historie, måte Dalberg opgive det – dog efterlod hun sig sangen Marianna Sinclairs Sang fra dete arbejde.
I 1929 afholdt Dalberg sin ferde og i 1937 sin sidste kompositionskoncert. Stilmæssigt bevægede Dalberg sig fra det senromantiske og ind i det moderne. I hendes musik findes både svungne, romantiske melodier og korte, repetitive motiver. Sidstnævnte træk
Biography
Nancy Dalberg (1881 – 1949) was born Nancy Hansen in 1881 at the estate of Bødstrup near Slagelse. Her father, Christian D.A. Hansen (1843 – 1916), was a highly successful businessman who developed products for the dairy industry, meaning that Dalberg grew up in a family with no lack of financial resources. In 1882, the family moved to the newly acquired estate of Mullerup in South Funen, where Dalberg grew up.
In 1901, at the age of 17, she married the engineering officer and portrait painter Erik Dalberg (1875 – 1945). She received piano lessons from one of the most renowned piano teachers of the time, Ove Christiansen (1856 – 1909), and from 1909 to 1911 studied composition with the Norwegian composer Johan Svendsen (1840 – 1911). She was presumably also a student of the composer Fini Henriques (1867 – 1940) before, in 1913, becoming a student of the most prominent Danish musician of the time, Carl Nielsen (1865 – 1931). Over time, Dalberg and Nielsen developed a closer professional relationship, and Nielsen conducted or participated as a violinist in the performance of several of her works. He also asked her to help orchestrate his works Aladdin and Springtime on Funen.
Dalberg had several of her songs performed in 1911, and her first string quartet was performed at her home – with Carl Nielsen on violin – in 1914, but her true public debut as a composer came in 1915 when she held a so-called composition concert at the Odd Fellow Palace in Copenhagen, with only her works on the programme. She held another composition concert in 1918 and a third in 1922. At these concerts, her string quartets, songs, and several orchestral works – most notably the symphony – were performed. Generally, Dalberg’s music was well received, but critics rarely failed to comment on her gender, often surprised that a woman was able to compose so well.
During the winter of 1922 – 23, she took up residence in Algeria due to health problems, amongst them arthritis. Here, she was inspired by the music of nomadic people and wrote down melodies, which later became the work Arabic Music from the Sahara. Upon her return, she began composing an opera based on Selma Lagerlöf’s (1858 – 1940) Gösta Berling’s Saga, but since Lagerlöf had already granted the Italian composer Riccardo Zandonai (1883 – 1944) permission to compose an opera on this story, Dalberg had to give it up –however the song Marianna Sinclair’s Song remains from this work.
In 1929, Dalberg held her fourth composition concert, and in 1937, her last. Stylistically, Dalberg moved from the late romantic and into the modern. In her music, one finds both sweeping, romantic melodies
blev af samtidens anmeldere ofte kritiseret men kan også høres som en moderne kvalitet i Dalbergs musik.
Thomas Husted Kirkegaard
and short, repetitive motifs. The later feature was often criticized by contemporary critics but can also be heard as a modern quality in Dalberg’s music.
Thomas Husted Kirkegaard
Forord
Den tidligste datering af Nancy Dalbergs første strygekvartet lyder “Maj 1914” og findes på et tidligt og ikke fuldstændigt bevaret stemmesæt. 1 Kvarteten blev opført privat hos Dalberg i december 1914, og blandt musikerne var komponistens lærer, Carl Nielsen, som endnu på dete tidspunkt var kongelig kapelmester. 2 Det foreliggende, renskrevne partitur er dateret 1915, 3 og i forhold til det nævnte stemmesæt er første sats komponeret om (og er blevet betydeligt længere), mens de to midtersatser har bytet plads. Endvidere blev finalen forkortet med i alt 40 takter, en ændring, der først blev gennemført, da et nyt sæt stemmer var blevet udskrevet. 4 Ændringerne må alle være implementeret inden kvartetens reelle uropførelse ved Dalbergs “Kompositions-Aften” den 8. november 1915 i Odd Fellow Palæets Mindre Sal. Koncerten var Dalbergs offentlige debut som komponist og var arrangeret af komponisten med praktisk hjælp fra Carl Nielsen. Her opførtes en række sange, to stykker for cello og klaver samt Scherzo for strygeorkester med Carl Nielsen som dirigent. Programmets første værk var Strygekvartet i D-moll, som blev spillet af en til lejligheden sammensat kvartet med fremtrædende medlemmer af Det Kgl. Kapel: Peder Møller, Sophus Andersen, William Andersen og Louis Jensen.
Det var ikke hverdagskost, at en 34-årig kvindelig komponist debuterede med et fuldt og ambitiøst koncertprogram. Flere københavnske kritikere tog i deres anmeldelser udgangspunkt i dete faktum, men ingen af dem var helt overbevist om, at en “dame” alene kunne løfte en hel aftens program. “Musikhistorien kan ikke opvise en kvindelig Komponist af Betydning. Men maaske vil ogsaa dete Forhold efterhaanden undergaa Forandringer”, noterede Social–Demokraten 5 Det blev ifølge Politikens Axel Kjerulf “en meget lang og ret anstrengende Koncert”. 6 Kjerulf mente, at Nancy Dalberg havde slået et for stort brød op, og at hun havde stået sig bedre ved at vælge et mere beskedent program: “Thi det, der var af godt og dygtigt, druknede i en fortvivlende Masse Ligegyldighed. Man kan vanskeligt en hel Aften sidde og beundre en Dames energiske Skrivefærdighed, og maa trætes unægtelig af disse mange Tilløb, som kun i faa Tilfælde fører til Maalet, endda dete Maal laa et Sted ude i det Blaa – ingen kunde rigtig finde hvor!”. Kjerulf var den absolut mest negative blandt de hele syv københavnske dagbladsanmeldere, som kommenterede koncerten. De fleste anslog en mere imødekommende, om end tidstypisk, tone: “Der er det gode ved Fru Dalberg, at hun er lidet sentimental,
1 Kilde C
2 Se nærmere om privatopførelsen i Lisbeth Ahlgren Jensen, Hilda Sehested og Nancy Dalberg, Danske komponister, bind 4 (København: Multivers, 2019), 112.
3 Kilde A
4 Kilde B
5 Usigneret, Social-Demokraten 8.11.1915.
6 “Ax. K.” (Axel Kjerulf), Politiken 9.11.1915.
Preface
The earliest dating of Nancy Dalberg’s first string quartet is “May 1914” and is found in an early, not completely preserved set of parts. 1 The quartet was performed privately at Dalberg’s residence in December 1914, and among the musicians was the composer’s teacher, Carl Nielsen, who was still the royal conductor at the time. 2 The present, fair-copy of the score is dated 1915 3, and in relation to the above mentioned set of parts, the first movement has been recomposed (and is considerably longer), while the two middle movements have been swapped around. Furthermore, the finale has been shortened by a total of 40 bars, a change that was only implemented after a new set of parts had been written out. 4 The changes must all have been implemented before the quartet’s actual premiere at Dalberg’s “Composition Evening” on 8 November 1915 in the Small Hall of the Odd Fellow Palace. The concert was Dalberg’s public debut as a composer and was arranged by the composer with practical help from Carl Nielsen. Here a series of songs, two pieces for cello and piano, and Scherzo for String Orchestra were performed, the latter with Carl Nielsen as conductor. The first work on the programme was the String Quartet in D minor, which was played by a quartet put together for the occasion with prominent members of the Royal Danish Orchestra: Peder Møller, Sophus Andersen, William Andersen and Louis Jensen.
It was not an common occurrence for a 34-year-old female composer to debut with a full and ambitious concert programme. Several Copenhagen critics took this as a starting point for their reviews, but none of them were entirely convinced that a “lady” alone could carry off an entire evening’s program. “Music history cannot exhibit a female composer of significance. But perhaps this situation will also gradually undergo changes,” noted Social-Demokraten 5 According to Politiken’s Axel Kjerulf, it was “a very long and quite strenuous concert.” 6 Kjerulf believed that Nancy Dalberg had taken on too big a task, and that she would have done better by choosing a more modest programme: “Because what was good and skilful was drowned in a discouraging mass of indifference. One can hardly sit for an entire evening admiring a lady’s energetic writing skills, and one must undeniably tire of these many attempts, which only in a few cases lead to the goal, and even this goal lay somewhere out in the blue – no one could really find where!”. Kjerulf was the most negative of the seven Copenhagen newspaper reviewers present. Most of them adopted a more welcoming,
1 Source C
2 See more about the private performance in Lisbeth Ahlgren Jensen, Hilda Sehested og Nancy Dalberg, Danish Composers, vol. 4 (Copenhagen: Multivers, 2019), 112.
3 Source A.
4 Source B
5 Unsigned, Social-Demokraten 8 Nov. 1915.
6 “Ax. K.” (Axel Kjerulf), Politiken 9 Nov. 1915.
lidet kvindagtig i sin Musik. Hun skriver løs med en behagelig Frejdighed og faar ofte noget ret originalt ud af sine Kompositioner”, læste man i København. 7 En af de få kvinder blandt tidens musikanmeldere, Hedevig Quiding, indledte sin anmeldelse i Folkets Avis således: “Det største Kompliment, man kan give den iaftes […] debuterende unge Nancy Dalberg er, at hun ikke er Spor af kvindagtig i sin Musik. I og for sig kunde ligesaa godt en Mand have skrevet disse Ting”. 8 Hun fortsate: “Alene det, at en Dame kan skrive en Strygekvartet, er en sjældenhed, og den var tilmed helt god.” Og Quiding konkluderer, at det “Alt i alt [var] en Aften, der viser, at en Dame har Mandsmod nok til at skrive løs fra Leveren og vise Evnerne, der blot skal ‘sigtes’ for at blive helt gode.”
Koncertens vægtigste værk var strygekvarteten i d-mol. Komponisten Sophus Andersen skriver i avisen København generelt om de instrumentale værker, at de “udmærkede sig ved deres Humør, deres Dygtighed, og deres Sky for de slagne Landeveje.” 9 Nationaltidende bragte som den eneste avis en indgående omtale af værket, leveret af Gustav Hetsch:
Den Strygekvartet (i d-moll), som hun [Nancy Dalberg] først lod opføre, gav i og for sig Aftenen en lovende Optakt. Indlednings-Allegroen var et kraftigt og livligt Stykke i den nete Kammermusikstil, med prægnante Themaer af en let tilgængelig Karakter, – kun hist og her drejende om i mere søgte og snørklede Vendinger med rigelig Anvendelse af Kromatik; og Allegretoen var et virkelig frisk og glad (“giocoso”) lille Intermezzo, af en Munterhed, der mindede om Fader Haydns Kvarteter. Mindre fast Holdning var der over Adagioen, Prøvestenen paa en Komponists aandelige Modenhed og Alvor! – men ogsaa her spidsede man endnu Øren ved mange vellykkede Enkeltheder; Finalen derimod havde ondt ved at komme i Gang og gik stadig i Staa for tilsidst at løbe ud i Sandet.
Det var kedeligt, denne Kvartet ikke holdt, hvad den til en Begyndelse lovede; thi den var skreven med afgjort Sans for Kammermusikkens særlige Krav og med Evne til at faa det størst mulige Udbyte af de 4 Instrumenters Klang. (Nu spilledes den ogsaa af d’Hrr. Peder Møller, Sophus og William Andersen samt Louis Jensen saaledes, at den fik baade Kulør og Liv!). 10
Kun denne ene opførelse fandt sted i komponistens levetid. Kvarteten kom til at stå i skyggen af de to følgende strygekvartetter, Dalberg skrev: nr. 2 op. 14 i 1922 og nr. 3 op. 20 i 1927. Begge blev opført flere gange i perioden 1922 til 1934. Kvartet nr. 2 blev udgivet i Tyskland omkring 1926, og nr. 3 blev udgivet posthumt
albeit typical, tone: “The good thing about Mrs. Dalberg is that she is not overly sentimental, not particularly feminine in her music. She writes freely with a pleasant freedom and often gets something quite original out of her compositions,” one read in København. 7 One of the few women among the music reviewers of the time, Hedevig Quiding, began her review in Folkets Avis as follows: “The biggest compliment one can give to tonight’s […] debuting young Nancy Dalberg is that there is no trace of the feminine in her music. In and of itself, a man could just as well have written these things.” 8 She continued: “The mere fact that a woman can write a string quartet is a rarity, and it was quite good at that.”
And Quiding concludes that it was “All in all an evening that shows that a woman has enough courage to write freely from the heart and display the abilities that only need to be ‘sifted’ to become quite good.”
The most important work of the concert was the String Quartet in D minor. The composer Sophus Andersen writes in the newspaper København generally about the instrumental works that they “distinguished themselves by their humor, their skill, and their shunning of the beaten track.” 9 Nationaltidende was the only newspaper to carry an in-depth review of the work, provided by Gustav Hetsch:
The string quartet (in D minor), which she [Nancy Dalberg] had performed first, gave, in and of itself, the evening a promising prelude. The introductory Allegro was a strong and lively piece in the neat chamber music style, with expressive themes of an easily accessible character, – only here and there turning into more sought-after and intricate turns with ample use of chromaticism; and the Allegreto was a really fresh and happy (“giocoso”) litle intermezzo, with a cheerfulness reminiscent of Papa Haydn’s quartets. There was less firmness in the Adagio, the touchstone of a composer’s spiritual maturity and seriousness! – but here too one still pricked up one’s ears at many successful details; the Finale, on the other hand, had trouble getting going and kept stalling, finally running out into the sand.
It was a pity that this quartet did not keep the promise of its beginning; for it was written with a definite sense for the special requirements of chamber music and with a sense of geting the greatest possible benefit out of the sound of the four instruments. (Now it was also played by Mr. Peder Møller, Sophus and William Andersen and Louis Jensen, so it gained both color and life!). 10
This single performance was the only one that took place during the composer’s lifetime. The quartet came to be overshadowed by the following two string quar-
7 “S.A.” (Sophus Andersen), København 9 Nov. 1915.
i 1950. Strygekvartet nr. 1 blev første gang publiceret (af Edition·S), da værket i 2018 stod for at skulle indspilles af Nordic String Quartet. 11 Nærværende kritiske udgave erstatter førsteudgaven.
Nodematerialet til værket blev efterladt af komponisten som det forelå i 1915, bl.a. Nancy Dalbergs egenhændige partitur, som udgaven her er baseret på. I forbindelse med forkortelsen af finalesatsen forud for uropførelsen havde Dalberg imidlertid foretaget en beskeden revision af satsens slutning, som ikke fremgår af partituret. Revisionen, som ses i stemmesættet, omfatter ikke nodeændringer, men udelukkende artikulation, først og fremmest i afsnitet t. 124-140, som blev suppleret med flere buer og et par andre detaljer. Udgaven inddrager denne version af slutningen, som faktisk repræsenterer Dalbergs seneste bidrag til værket.
Bendt Viinholt Nielsen
tets that Dalberg wrote: No. 2, Op. 14 in 1922 and No. 3, Op. 20 in 1927. Both were performed several times in the period 1922 to 1934. Quartet No. 2 was published in Germany around 1926, and No. 3 was published posthumously in 1950. String Quartet No. 1 was first published (by Edition·S) when the work was to be recorded by the Nordic String Quartet in 2018. 11 The present critical edition replaces the first edition.
The musical material for the work was left by the composer as it existed in 1915, including Nancy Dalberg’s autograph score, on which this edition is based. In connection with the shortening of the final movement prior to the premiere, Dalberg had, however, made a modest revision of the movement’s ending, which is not apparent from the score. The revision, which can be seen in the set of parts, does not include changes in the music, but relates only to articulation, primarily in the section bars 124–140, which was supplemented with several slurs and a few other details. The edition includes this version of the ending, which actually represents Dalberg’s latest contribution to the work.
11 Nancy Dalberg, The String Quartets, Nordic String Quartet, Dacapo Records SACV 6.220655, 2019.
Bendt Viinholt Nielsen
11 Nancy Dalberg, The String Quartets, Nordic String Quartet, Dacapo Records SACV 6.220655, 2019.
Faksimiler
Facsimiles
Faksimile 1
Sats II, Scherzo, s. 20 (Kilde A), t. 16-35. En lang række buer, dynamiske angivelser og staccatoprikker er i kilde A angivet med blyant, og en del af disse blyantstilføjelser er efterfølgende trukket op med blæk. I den 9. takt på siden (t. 24) har Dalberg først skrevet frasering og staccato med blyant, dernæst trukket angivelserne op med blæk samtidig med, at hun har justeret artikulationen – men har dog overset cellostemmen. Mange af blyantsindikationerne, som alle er gyldige, er i dag næsten ulæselige.
Facsimile 1
Movement II, Scherzo, p. 20 (Source A), bars 16 – 35. A long series of slurs, dynamic indications and staccato dots are indicated in pencil in source A, and some of these pencil additions have subsequently been overwritten in ink. In the 9th bar of the page (b. 24), Dalberg has first written the phrasing and staccato in pencil, then overwritten the indications in ink, while also adjusting the articulation – but has overlooked the cello part. Many of the pencil indications, all of which are valid, are now almost illegible.
Faksimile 2
Sats III, Adagio, s. 13 (Kilde A), t. 1-15. Første side af Adagio-satsen bærer også præg af en blanding af buer og ‘hårnåle’ skrevet med blyant og med blæk. Nogle af blyantsangivelserne kan næsten ikke læses længere. Ikke desto mindre er partituret den bedste og mest komplete kilde til værket. Støtte til læsningen af partiturets detaljer kan man i nogen grad finde i de foreliggende stemmematerialer (kilde B og C), som dog ikke har autoritativ kildeværdi og kun kan tjene til vejledning.
Facsimile 2
Movement III, Adagio, p. 13 (Source A), bars 1 – 15. The first page of the Adagio movement is also marked by a mixture of slurs and ‘hairpins’ writen both in pencil and in ink. Some of the pencil notations are now almost illegible. Nevertheless, the score is the best and most complete source for the work. Help with deciphering the details of the score can to some extent be found in the available parts (sources B and C), which, however, have no authoritative source value and can only serve as a guide.
Nancy Dalberg (1881-1949)
Adagio
Critical commentary
Description of sources
A Score (autograph)
B Parts (transcript)
C Early set of parts (autograph, incomplete)
A Score (autograph)
DK–Kk, Royal Danish Library (Music Collection). Nancy Dalbergs samling (MAms 6195; mu 0108.2000).
No title page. Title on binding (pasted–on label): “1915 / Strygekvartet No. 1 / af / Nancy Dalberg”.
34.5 × 25.5 cm. 25 leaves with 48 pages of writing (47 pages of music); pagination: [1], 2 – 17, 1 blank page, 19 (number crossed over), 20 – 25, 26 (no music), 13 (number crossed over), 14–17, 18 (no music), 27 (number crossed over), 28 – 44.
Autograph fair copy in ink bound in hard cover with a title label. Additions and corrections in ink and pencil (autograph).
Paper types: Movements 1, 2, 4: 16 staves (without manufacturer’s name); movement III (pp. 13 – 17): B. & H. Nr. 3. E. / 8.10.
In movement IV, the following revision was made: p. 32: last accolade (3 bb.) is covered with a blank piece of music paper
p. 38: the two lower accolades (6 bb.) are pasted over with a blank piece of music paper
p. 39: the two top accolades (6 bb.) are pasted over with a blank piece of music paper
p. 41: the lower part of the page is covered by piece of paper with 4 new bars pp. 42 – 44: 3 pages (pasted in) replace the original 2 pages, pp. 42 – 43 (glued together); on p. 43, 3 bars are crossed over.
The manuscript bears witness to a revision that includes an exchange of movements II and III, and a shortening of movement IV.
B Parts (transcript)
DK–Kk, Royal Danish Library (Music Collection). Nancy Dalbergs samling (MAms 6195; mu 0108.2000).
Title (on each of the four parts): “[…] Strygekvartet. No 1. / af / Nancy Dalberg.” [“No. 1” in pencil]
34.5 × 25.5 cm.
Violin 1: 9 leaves with 17 pages of writing: (unnumbered title page), 2 – 17.
Violin 2: 9 leaves with 17 pages of writing: (unnumbered title page), 2 – 17.
Viola: 9 leaves with 17 pages of writing: (unnumbered title page), 2 – 17.
Cello: 7 leaves with 14 pages of writing: (unnumbered title page), 2 – 14. Transcript in ink (unsigned); movement IV revised i autograph; some additions in autograph (ink and pencil); musicians’ annotations in pencil.
Paper type: 12 staves (without manufacturer’s name).
The revision of movement IV corresponds to the revision made in the score (A).
C Early set of parts (autograph, incomplete)
DK–Kk, Royal Danish Library (Music Collection). Nancy Dalbergs samling (MAms 6195; mu 0108.2000).
Title page 1: “Stryge Kvartet / af / Nancy Dalberg. / Maj 1914.”
Title page 2: “Stryge Kvartet / af / Nancy Dalberg.”
34.5 × 26 cm. The parts comprise 4 + 3 + 3 + 3 unnumbered leaves.
Autograph in ink with a few pencilled corrections.
Paper type: 16 staves (without manufacturer’s name).
Movement I is incomplete. In violin 1, 25 bars of the ending are preserved, while in the other parts, only 3 – 18 bars are preserved. The music is not corresponding to the version in the score (A). A shortening of movement IV similar to the one
made in the score (A) is marked with pencil. The Adagio and the Scherzo are movements II – III.
Evaluation of the sources
Source A is the only extant score, which however presents a number of editorial challenges. Initially, the composer seems to have concentrated on writing down the music (the notes) in ink, with very limited inclusions of tempo indications, dynamics and articulation. Subsequently, Dalberg completed the score with dynamic marks and hairpins, staccato and marcato indications as well as other details, all of which were inserted in pencil. In a following phase, a large part of these indications were drawn up in ink, but the selection of what was drawn up and what was not seems random and lacking clear purpose. Consequently, parts of the score consist of pencil indications, many of which now appear weak and almost illegible.
It is typical for the manuscript that slurs, staccato, marcato, etc. are notated unevenly when it comes to repeated motifs and phrases. An example is movement II bb. 7 – 8 compared to bb. 77 – 78. Here, the composer has indicated different ways of performance, leaving their interpretation to musicians. Finally, it is characteristic of Dalberg’s notation that slurs are irregularly distributed and often have unclear beginning and end points, making an unambiguous reading rather difficult.
The set of parts, source C, represents an early version with another first movement (of which only the final bars have survived). Although the set is based on the score (A) and is in autograph, it appears, compared to the score (A), with a large number of variants and deficiencies in terms of articulation and dynamics. The missing details indicate that the score was supplied with further markings after the writing out of these parts. The new set of parts, source B, is a professionally produced transcript based on the score (A) and most likely also on the old set (C) as regards movements II, III and IV. But also these four parts contain variants that bear a certain touch of chance, both in relation to the old set (C) and the score (A). The new set of parts is, however, more in line with the score, not least because the composer, whose handwriting is evident in many places, added a number of missing details in ink or pencil. Pencil markings were also inserted by musicians. Overall, in the two sets of parts, there is a confusing number of variants, which cannot be relativized in the context of a critical publication. The fixed point of reference is the score, source A. Of particular importance, however, is the revision of movement IV made by Dalberg in the new set of parts (B), which involved the insertion of new autograph pages at the end of this movement. The revision does not include note changes, but deals with articulation only. In the passage b. 124 to b. 140, Dalberg took the opportunity to supplement and adjust the very sparse phrasing that characterizes this passage in the score (A). In reality, it is a new version of this passage and thus the composer’s latest contribution to the work.
Commentary on the edition
The edition is based on the score, source A, and respects all additions and corrections, as it is assumed that these are in the composer’s own handwriting. If there are discrepancies between details in pencil and ink, the ink version is followed. As the edition wishes to present the work in the form the composer has most recently arrived at, Dalberg’s revision of the end of movement IV from b. 117 and out is included in accordance with source B. Apart from this inclusion, the two set of parts, B and C, only serve as reference tools without independent source authority when reading unclear and irregularly indicated details in the score (A).
Some guiding accidentals have been added without documentation. Adjustments of unequally placed indications of expression and dynamics are undertaken without comment.
Editorial emendations
MOVEMENT I
Bar Part
15 – 16
vl.2
Comment
slur added by analogy with vla. and vcl.
33 vl.2 vla agitato added by analogy with vl.1 (b. 32)
43 vl.1 notes 6 – 10: slur added by analogy with notes 1 – 5 and b. 43
51 vl.1 note 1: marc. added by analogy with b. 209 vcl. cresc. added by analogy with vla.
60 – accelerando emended to poco accelerando by analogy with b. 218 (and in accordance with B in which ND made this correction)
65 vl.1
notes 3 – 4: marc. added by analogy with vla. and b. 223 vla. note 1: marc. added by analogy with vl.1
66 vl.1 notes 2 – 4: marc. added by analogy with vla.
67 vl.1 note 2: marc. added by analogy with vla.
70 vl.2. note 2: marc. added by analogy with b. 228
72 vl.2 harmony 1: marc. added by analogy with vl.1 and vla.
75 vl.1. notes 5 – 8: slur added by analogy with notes 1 – 4 and vl.2 vl.2 calando added by analogy with vl.1 and b. 233
96 vla. notes 2 – 4: slur added by analogy with vl.1 and vcl.
101 vl.2 appassionata added by analogy with vl.1
143 vcl. notes 2 – 4: marc. added by analogy with bb. 140 – 142 and vla.
144 vcl. note 4: marc. added by analogy with vl.1 and vla.
145 vcl. notes 1 – 4: marc. added by analogy with vl.1, vla. and bb. 140 – 142
147 vla. vcl. note 1: sf omitted by analogy with vl.1 and vl.2 (in vl.1, sf is crossed over, in vl.2 no sf is indicated; f added in b. 146 in pencil seems to replace sf in b. 147)
vla. note 1: marc. omitted as a consequence of the emendation mentioned above; the starting point of the slur emended from note 2 to note 1 by analogy with vl.1
171 vl.2 f added by analogy with vl.1 and b. 5
180 vcl. dim. added by analogy with the other instruments
vl.2 vla vcl. arco added by analogy with b.28
195 vl.2 vla c d added by analogy with b. 197 and b. 37
207 vla. vcl. slur at the end of the bar added by analogy with b. 49
208 vl.1
notes 1 – 8: two slurs notes 1 – 4 and 5 – 8 emended to 1 slur by analogy with vl.2, vla. and b. 50
210 vl.1 notes 1 – 8: two slurs notes 1 – 4 and 5 – 8 emended to one slur by analogy with vl.2 (cf. comment to b. 208)
vla. slur added by analogy with b. 55 and b. 216
218 vla. slur added by analogy with b. 60 and b. 216 vcl. slur added by analogy with b. 60
219 vla. slur added by analogy with bb. 214, 215, 217 and b. 61
220 vla. slur added by analogy with bb. 216, 218 and b. 62
222 vl.2 note 1: marc. added by analogy with vl.1 and b. 64
223 vla. note 1: marc. added by analogy with vl.1
224, 225 vl.1 vla. notes 2–4: marc. added by analogy with b. 223, b. 66 (vla.), b. 67 (vla.) and b. 67 (vl.1 notes 3–4)
227 vl.1 vl.2 vla. notes 3–4: marc. added by analogy with b. 69
228 vl.1 vl.2 vla note 1: 3–4: marc. added by analogy with b. 70
230 tuti 2 last notes: marc. added by analogy with b. 72
231 vl.2 note (harmony) 1: marc. added by analogy with vl.1, vla. and vcl. and b. 73
232 vl.1 marc. added by analogy with b. 231 and b. 74
239 vla. vcl. arco added by analogy with vl.2 and b. 28
260 vla.
note 6: n before g1 added (note 2, g#1, is an auxiliary tone)
vcl. note 6: n before g added (note 2, g# , is an auxiliary tone)
260, 261 vla. vcl. c d added by analogy with bb. 262 – 265
261 vla.
note 4: superfluous n before g1 omitted (cf. comment to b. 260) vcl. note 4: superfluous n before g omitted (cf. comment to b. 260)
MOVEMENT II
Bar Part
6
11
vl.2
vl.2
Comment
note 4: stacc. omitted by analogy with b. 35 and vla. bb. 15 and 36
notes 1 – 2: slur added by analogy with b. 10 and vl.1 b. 10
15 vcl. last note: stacc. added by analogy with vl.1 b. 4, vl.2 b.5 and vla. b. 14
17 vcl. last note: slur ending at b. 18 note 4 added by analogy with vl.1 bb. 6 – 7, vl.2 bb. 7–8 and vla. bb. 16 – 17
18 vcl. note 4: stacc. added by analogy with vla. b. 17
20 vcl.
22 vcl.
notes 5 – 6: stacc. and slur added by analogy with vl.1 b. 7, vl.2 b.8 and vla. b. 17
notes 1 – 2: slur omitted by analogy with notes 3 – 4, 5 – 6 and the other instruments
notes 1 – 6: stacc. added by analogy with the other instruments (almost illegible slurs and stacc. in pencil are suppressed; in vl.1 and 2, originally written slurs were erased and replaced by stacc.)
23 vcl. notes 1 – 3; stacc. added by analogy with the other instruments (an almost illegible slur and stacc. at note 3 in pencil are suppressed; in vl.1, originally written slur was erased and replaced by stacc.)
24 vcl. notes 1 – 6: stacc. and slur added by analogy with the other instruments (almost illegible slurs and stacc. dots in pencil are suppressed)
29 vla. note 5: stacc. added by analogy with b. 28, vl.1
34 vl.1 note 5: stacc. added by analogy with b. 35, vla.
36 vl.1 notes 1 – 2: slur added by analogy with b. 6 and vla. bb. 16 and 37
46 vcl. notes 3 – 6: slur and stacc. added by analogy with vl.1. b.33 and vla. b. 34
47 vl.2 notes 5 – 6: an almost illegible slur suppressed by analogy with b. 40, vl.1 b. 35 and vcl. b. 48
65 vl.2 vla note 2: marc. added by analogy with vl.1 and vcl.
67 vl.2 vla. vcl. note 2: marc. added by analogy with bb. 66 and 68
84 vcl. slur notes 3 – 6 emended to slur notes 3 – 4 by analogy with vla. (b. 83)
86 vla.
87 vcl.
c d added by analogy with b. 16, vl.1 b. 76 and vl.2 b. 77
c d added by analogy with b. 17, vl.1. b. 76 and vl.2 b. 77
90 vcl. notes 1 – 2: slur omitted by analogy with the other instruments
96 vla. p emended from b. 97 note 1 to b. 96 note 1 by analogy with b. 26
106 vl.1 note 2: stacc. added by analogy with b. 76 and vla. b. 107
112 vcl.
notes 1 – 2: slur added by analogy with vl.2 b. 113
115 vl.1 vla. m added by analogy with b. 45
120 vl.2 slur added by analogy with vla. and vcl.
vl.2 note 2: marc. added by analogy with vla. and vcl.
123 vl.2
MOVEMENT III
note 2: marc. added by analogy with vla. and vcl.
Bar Part Comment
3 vl.2
note 3: beginning of slur emended from note 2 to note 3 by analogy with vl.1
10 vl.1 vl.2 notes 3 – 4: p and slur added by analogy with upbeat to b. 1
11 tutti d added by analogy with b. 10
30 vla. note 3: n before e added by analogy with the a minor harmony at this place
54 vl.2
note 1: slur emended from note 3 to note 1 by analogy with vl.1
59 – a tempo added as a consequence of rit. in b. 57
58 vl.2 d added by analogy with vl.1, vla and vcl.
64 vla.
c added by analogy with the other instruments
65 vl.1 vl.2 notes 2 – 4: slur added by analogy with b. 7
73
MOVEMENT IV
vl.2 end point of slur emended from note 2 to note 3 by analogy with b. 3 and vl.1 b. 72
Bar Part Comment
78
vl.1
p added by analogy with the other instruments
vl.2 d added by analogy with vl.1 and vcl.
90 vl.1 c under the rest r omitted (unmotivated)
91 vl.1
note 13: marc. added by analogy with the other instruments
116 vla. dim. added by analogy with vl.1 and vl.2 (and in accordance with B)
117 – 151 tutti in this section, the revision made by ND in B is followed, cf. the below comments
117, 118
vl.1
notes 1, 5: stacc. added in accordance with B
119, 120 vl.1 note 1: stacc. added in accordance with B
121 vla. note 3: superfluous guiding n omitted
123
vl.1 slur emended from note 9 to b. 124 note 1 to notes 8 – 10 in accordance with B notes 8 – 10: dolce added in accordance with B
124 vl.1 espr. molto added in accordance with B vla. notes 1 – 3: slur added in accordance with B
vcl. notes 1 – 2: slur added in accordance with B
125 vl.2 slur from note 2 to b. 126 note 1 added in accordance with B
vcl. notes 1 – 3: slur added in accordance with B
127 vcl. notes 1 – 3: slur added in accordance with B
128 vl.1 slur notes 3 – 4 emended to slur notes 3 – 5 in accordance with B
vcl. slur from note 1 to b. 129 note 1 added in accordance with B
129 vl.1 slurs notes 1 – 3 and 4 – 6 emended to one slur notes 2 – 6 in accordance with B last note: stacc. added in accordance with B
130 vl.1 vl.2 vcl slurs added in accordance with B
131 vl.1 end point of slur emended from last note to b.132 note 1 in accordance with B
vl.2 notes 1 – 2: slur added in accordance with B
vcl. notes 4 – 5: slur added in accordance with B
132 vl.1 slurs notes 1 – 3 and 4 – 5 emended to one slur from note 2 to b. 133 note 1 in accordance with B
vl.2 two slurs added in accordance with B
133 vl.1 notes 1 – 2: tie omitted in accordance with B
vl.2 slur notes 1 – 2 emended to slur notes 1 – 3 in accordance with B
vcl. slur added in accordance with B
134, 135 vl.1
notes 3 – 4: ten. added in accordance with B
135 vcl. slur added in accordance with B
136 vl.1 note 1: ten. added in accordance with B
notes 1 – 2: tie omitted in accordance with B
136 – 137 vcl. slur added in accordance with B
137 vl.1
notes 1 – 2: slur added in accordance with B vla. espress. and c d added in accordance with B
140 vl.1 vcl p emended to p in accordance with B
145 vl.1
note 3: stacc, added in accordance with B
146 vl.1 node 3: stacc. added by analogy with b. 145
