Letter 1304 - Revision history

Brett: Text replacement - "notorious" to "infamous"

2025-09-24T13:53:54Z

Text replacement - "notorious" to "infamous"

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:53, 24 September 2025
Line 27:		Line 27:

	\|Translated text={{right\|''[[Kamenka]]''<br/>3 October}}		\|Translated text={{right\|''[[Kamenka]]''<br/>3 October}}
	Dear [[Pyotr Jurgenson\|Petrusha]]! Tomorrow morning I'm sending you the [[Suite No. 1\|suite]] and "[[Onegin]]". There are quite a few misprints in the suite. There's nothing as frustrating as doing the proofs without the original manuscript. As a consequence of the abridgement, i.e. the omission of non-playing instruments, in several instances I was stumped, and had to rack my memory. The fact is that with this method of engraving scores, it's essential to write very carefully above the lines which instruments are playing. This hasn't always been done, or not done clearly enough. Furthermore, there are obvious muddles, e.g. first the ''flute'' and then the ''oboe'' play on one and the same line. ''[[Messer]]'' has corrected very little. In general, I now have a very definite understanding of [[Messer]]. This is a very conscientious and good-natured young man, who can only be entrusted with ''rough work''. For example, after correcting the score I can now trust him completely with proofreading the parts and checking them against the score. But nothing more. I cannot entrust him with any substantive work: ''he is too mediocre and too ignorant''. His corrections are quite often worse than the engraving, i.e. he understands that something is a mistake, but not what it ought to be. Sometimes he imagines errors where there are none at all. His proofs of "''[[Onegin]]''" are done well, and yet here he encounters ''apparent'' errors at every step, which I had to set right again. He found very many inaccuracies, very many irregularities, and for this I'm grateful to him. As for the ~~notorious~~ ''rest'' corrections, this is, in my opinion, utter nonsense. Do as you wish, and if it won't take long, perhaps you could torment the engravers by having them perpetually change		Dear [[Pyotr Jurgenson\|Petrusha]]! Tomorrow morning I'm sending you the [[Suite No. 1\|suite]] and "[[Onegin]]". There are quite a few misprints in the suite. There's nothing as frustrating as doing the proofs without the original manuscript. As a consequence of the abridgement, i.e. the omission of non-playing instruments, in several instances I was stumped, and had to rack my memory. The fact is that with this method of engraving scores, it's essential to write very carefully above the lines which instruments are playing. This hasn't always been done, or not done clearly enough. Furthermore, there are obvious muddles, e.g. first the ''flute'' and then the ''oboe'' play on one and the same line. ''[[Messer]]'' has corrected very little. In general, I now have a very definite understanding of [[Messer]]. This is a very conscientious and good-natured young man, who can only be entrusted with ''rough work''. For example, after correcting the score I can now trust him completely with proofreading the parts and checking them against the score. But nothing more. I cannot entrust him with any substantive work: ''he is too mediocre and too ignorant''. His corrections are quite often worse than the engraving, i.e. he understands that something is a mistake, but not what it ought to be. Sometimes he imagines errors where there are none at all. His proofs of "''[[Onegin]]''" are done well, and yet here he encounters ''apparent'' errors at every step, which I had to set right again. He found very many inaccuracies, very many irregularities, and for this I'm grateful to him. As for the infamous ''rest'' corrections, this is, in my opinion, utter nonsense. Do as you wish, and if it won't take long, perhaps you could torment the engravers by having them perpetually change
	{{centre\|[[File:1304 ex1.jpg\|80px]] to [[File:1304 ex2.jpg\|80px]]}}		{{centre\|[[File:1304 ex1.jpg\|80px]] to [[File:1304 ex2.jpg\|80px]]}}
	— but, in my opinion, this is a wholly unnecessary indulgence. Had I not been in such a hurry to send it then, still many more of his corrections would have been thrown out — but time is precious, and I'm sending you "[[Onegin]]" with all the endless alterations of detail that aren't worth mentioning.		— but, in my opinion, this is a wholly unnecessary indulgence. Had I not been in such a hurry to send it then, still many more of his corrections would have been thrown out — but time is precious, and I'm sending you "[[Onegin]]" with all the endless alterations of detail that aren't worth mentioning.

Tony at 12:44, 25 July 2024

2024-07-25T12:44:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:44, 25 July 2024
Line 27:		Line 27:

	\|Translated text={{right\|''[[Kamenka]]''<br/>3 October}}		\|Translated text={{right\|''[[Kamenka]]''<br/>3 October}}
	Dear [[Pyotr Jurgenson\|Petrusha]]! Tomorrow morning I'm sending you the [[Suite No. 1\|suite]] and "[[Onegin]]". There are quite a few misprints in the suite. There's nothing as frustrating as doing the proofs without the original manuscript. As a consequence of the abridgement, i.e. the omission of non-playing instruments, in several instances I was stumped, and had to rack my memory. The fact is that with this method of engraving scores it's essential to write very carefully above the lines which instruments are playing. This hasn't always been done, or not done clearly enough. Furthermore, there are obvious muddles, e.g. first the ''flute'' and then the ''oboe'' play on one and the same line. ''[[Messer]]'' has corrected very little. In general I now have a very definite understanding of [[Messer]]. This is a very conscientious and good-natured young man, who can only be entrusted with ''rough work''. For example, after correcting the score I can now trust him completely with proofreading the parts and checking them against the score. But nothing more. I cannot entrust him with any substantive work: ''he is too mediocre and too ignorant''. His corrections are quite often worse than the engraving, i.e. he understands that something is a mistake, but not what it ought to be. Sometimes he imagines errors where there are none at all. His proofs of "''[[Onegin]]''" are done well, and yet here he encounters ''apparent'' errors at every step, which I had to set right again. He found very many inaccuracies, very many irregularities, and for this I'm grateful to him. As for the notorious ''rest'' corrections, this is, in my opinion, utter nonsense. Do as you wish, and if it won't take long, perhaps you could torment the engravers by having them perpetually change		Dear [[Pyotr Jurgenson\|Petrusha]]! Tomorrow morning I'm sending you the [[Suite No. 1\|suite]] and "[[Onegin]]". There are quite a few misprints in the suite. There's nothing as frustrating as doing the proofs without the original manuscript. As a consequence of the abridgement, i.e. the omission of non-playing instruments, in several instances I was stumped, and had to rack my memory. The fact is that with this method of engraving scores, it's essential to write very carefully above the lines which instruments are playing. This hasn't always been done, or not done clearly enough. Furthermore, there are obvious muddles, e.g. first the ''flute'' and then the ''oboe'' play on one and the same line. ''[[Messer]]'' has corrected very little. In general, I now have a very definite understanding of [[Messer]]. This is a very conscientious and good-natured young man, who can only be entrusted with ''rough work''. For example, after correcting the score I can now trust him completely with proofreading the parts and checking them against the score. But nothing more. I cannot entrust him with any substantive work: ''he is too mediocre and too ignorant''. His corrections are quite often worse than the engraving, i.e. he understands that something is a mistake, but not what it ought to be. Sometimes he imagines errors where there are none at all. His proofs of "''[[Onegin]]''" are done well, and yet here he encounters ''apparent'' errors at every step, which I had to set right again. He found very many inaccuracies, very many irregularities, and for this I'm grateful to him. As for the notorious ''rest'' corrections, this is, in my opinion, utter nonsense. Do as you wish, and if it won't take long, perhaps you could torment the engravers by having them perpetually change
	{{centre\|[[File:1304 ex1.jpg\|80px]] to [[File:1304 ex2.jpg\|80px]]}}		{{centre\|[[File:1304 ex1.jpg\|80px]] to [[File:1304 ex2.jpg\|80px]]}}
	— but, in my opinion, this is a wholly unnecessary indulgence. Had I not been in such a hurry to send it then, still many more of his corrections would have been thrown out — but time is precious, and I'm sending you "[[Onegin]]" with all the endless alterations of detail that aren't worth mentioning.		— but, in my opinion, this is a wholly unnecessary indulgence. Had I not been in such a hurry to send it then, still many more of his corrections would have been thrown out — but time is precious, and I'm sending you "[[Onegin]]" with all the endless alterations of detail that aren't worth mentioning.

Brett: 1 revision imported

2022-07-12T12:19:49Z

1 revision imported

← Older revision	Revision as of 13:19, 12 July 2022
(No difference)

Brett at 21:42, 30 December 2020

2020-12-30T21:42:37Z

New page

{{letterhead
|Date=3/15 October 1879
|To=[[Pyotr Jurgenson]]
|Place=[[Kamenka]]
|Language=Russian
|Autograph=[[Klin]] (Russia): {{RUS-KLč}} (a{{sup|3}}, No. 2266)
|Publication={{bib|1938/40|П. И. Чайковский. Переписка с П. И. Юргенсоном ; том 1}} (1938), p. 116–117<br/>{{bib|1963/6|П. И. Чайковский. Полное собрание сочинений ; том VIII}} (1963), p. 379–381
}}
==Text and Translation==
{{Lettertext
|Language=Russian
|Translator=Brett Langston
|Original text={{right|''Каменка''<br/>3 окт[ября]}}
Милый Петруша! Завтра утром высылаю тебе сюиту и «Онегина». В сюите немало опечаток. Ничто так не досадно, как делать корректуру без подлинной рукописи. Вследствие сокращений, т. е. пропуска неиграющих инструментов, в некоторых случаях я становился в тупик, и приходилось напрягать память. Дело в том, что при этой системе гравирования партитур, необходимо очень тщательно надписывать над строчками, какие инструменты что играют. Между тем этого не сделано или недостаточно ясно сделано. Кроме того имеются и очевидные путаницы, т. е. напр[имер] на одной и той же строчке играет сначала ''флейта'', а потом ''гобой''. Мессер исправил очень мало. Вообще теперь об ''Мессере'' я имею очень определённое понятие. Это очень добросовестный и добродушный малый, которому можно поручать только ''чёрную работу''. Напр[имер], по исправлении партитуры я теперь вполне могу доверить ему корректуру голосов и сверку их с партитурой. Но не более. Никакой самостоятельной работы я ему поручить не могу: ''он слишком бездарен и слишком малосведущ''. Очень часто он поправляет так, что делет хуже, чем сделал гравёр, т. е. он понимает, что есть ошибка, а в чем она — не понимает. Иногда же ему мерещатся ошибки там, где их вовсе нет. Его корректура «''Онегина''» сделана хорошо, но именно тут на каждом шагу встречаются ''кажущиеся'' ошибки, которые мне пришлось опять переделать по-старому. Он нашёл очень много не точностей, очень много неправильностей, и за это я ему благодарен. Что касается пресловутой поправки ''пауз'', то это, по-моему, сущий вздор. Делай как хочешь, и если это не отнимает времени, пожалуй, промучь гравёров над бесконечной переделкой
{{centre|[[File:1304 ex1.jpg|80px]] в [[File:1304 ex2.jpg|80px]]}}
— но, по-моему, это совершенно излишняя роскошь. Если б я не торопился поскорей послать, то, вероятно, ещё очень многие его поправки уничтожил бы, — но время дорого, и я отсылаю тебе «Онегина» со всеми бесконечными изменениями таких подробностей, о которых и говорить не стоит.

Завтра я, вероятно, получу ''Divertimento'' и очень скоро отправлю его к тебе исправленным. Затем голоса пусть проверяет Мессер. ''Убедительно прошу тебя не печатать ни партитуры, ни голосов сюиты до тех пор, пока она не будет исполнена''. Пусть Мессер сделает 3 корректуры того и другого, и пусть ''исполнение'' сюиты на репетициях послужит четвертой корректурой. Только после этого исполнения можно будет с достоверностью сказать, что ошибок или несоответствий партитуры с голосами нет. Пожалуйста, голубчик, сделай это, т. е. дай посредством исполнения по печатным партитуре и голосам возможность получить окончательную уверенность в безошибочности издания.

Я был заранее уверен в том, что Лукашевич разыграет роль начальника. Но при этом не следует смущаться. Опера всё-таки, наверное, пойдёт в будущем году, ибо я имею случай добраться до самого Адлерберга и доберусь. Чем скорее Мессер перепишет клавираусцуг, чем скорее партитуру можно будет отправить в Петербург — тем лучше. Я дал слово ''Направнику'', что в ноябре партитура будет в его руках, и мне очень бы хотелось, чтобы на деле так и вышло. Потрудись похлопотать об этом! Пожалуйста, в следующем письме напиши мне, когда предполагается первый ''концерт'' и можно ли надеяться что ''сюита'' будет к тому времени готова!

Я тебя, кажется, не благодарил за наши счёты, коими я отменно доволен. Из оставшихся за тобой 516 рублей потрудись удовлетворять существо женского пола, носящее моё имя. Послал ли ты письмо моё к ней? Это ответ на разные дерзости, которые она писала Анатолию.

Кланяйся ''Мессеру'' и скажи, что за «Онегина» я очень ему благодарен. В конце концов он всё-таки очень много нашёл ошибок, хотя и не крупных. Я наслаждаюсь деревенской жизнью. Будь здоров, и дай тебе Боже всякого благополучии.
{{right|Твой П. Чайковский}}
Сообщи мне, в каком положении работа Мессера над клавираусцугом?

|Translated text={{right|''[[Kamenka]]''<br/>3 October}}
Dear [[Pyotr Jurgenson|Petrusha]]! Tomorrow morning I'm sending you the [[Suite No. 1|suite]] and "[[Onegin]]". There are quite a few misprints in the suite. There's nothing as frustrating as doing the proofs without the original manuscript. As a consequence of the abridgement, i.e. the omission of non-playing instruments, in several instances I was stumped, and had to rack my memory. The fact is that with this method of engraving scores it's essential to write very carefully above the lines which instruments are playing. This hasn't always been done, or not done clearly enough. Furthermore, there are obvious muddles, e.g. first the ''flute'' and then the ''oboe'' play on one and the same line. ''[[Messer]]'' has corrected very little. In general I now have a very definite understanding of [[Messer]]. This is a very conscientious and good-natured young man, who can only be entrusted with ''rough work''. For example, after correcting the score I can now trust him completely with proofreading the parts and checking them against the score. But nothing more. I cannot entrust him with any substantive work: ''he is too mediocre and too ignorant''. His corrections are quite often worse than the engraving, i.e. he understands that something is a mistake, but not what it ought to be. Sometimes he imagines errors where there are none at all. His proofs of "''[[Onegin]]''" are done well, and yet here he encounters ''apparent'' errors at every step, which I had to set right again. He found very many inaccuracies, very many irregularities, and for this I'm grateful to him. As for the notorious ''rest'' corrections, this is, in my opinion, utter nonsense. Do as you wish, and if it won't take long, perhaps you could torment the engravers by having them perpetually change
{{centre|[[File:1304 ex1.jpg|80px]] to [[File:1304 ex2.jpg|80px]]}}
— but, in my opinion, this is a wholly unnecessary indulgence. Had I not been in such a hurry to send it then, still many more of his corrections would have been thrown out — but time is precious, and I'm sending you "[[Onegin]]" with all the endless alterations of detail that aren't worth mentioning.

Tomorrow, I'll probably be receiving the ''Divertimento'' and I'll send it off to you in corrected form very soon. Then let [[Messer]] check the parts. ''I earnestly request you to print neither the score nor the parts of the suite until it has been performed''. Let [[Messer]] do 3 proofs of them both, and let the ''performance'' of the suite at rehearsals serve as the fourth proofing. Only after this performance will it be possible to assuredly say that there are no errors or inconsistencies between the score and the parts. Please do this, golubchik, i.e. use the performance as an opportunity to achieve the utmost confidence that the editions of the score and parts are error-free.

I anticipated that Lukashevich would play the manager's role. But you shouldn't be embarrassed. The opera will still probably run next year, because I had occasion to seek an assurance from [[Adlerberg]] myself. The sooner [[Messer]] copies the piano reduction, and the sooner the score can be sent off to [[Petersburg]] — the better. I gave my word to ''[[Nápravník]]'' that the score will be in his hands in November, and I should very much like this to happen. Kindly take pains to do this! Please, in your next letter to me write when the first ''concert'' is expected, and whether there's any hope that the ''Suite'' will be ready by then!

I seem not to have thanked you for our accounts, with which I'm entirely satisfied. Out of your remaining 516 rubles, kindly endeavour to satisfy the female creature that bears my name. Have you sent my letter to her? This is a response to various impertinences that she wrote to [[Anatoly]].

Give my regards to ''[[Messer]]'' and tell him that I'm most grateful to him for "[[Onegin]]". Ultimately he still found many mistakes, albeit unimportant ones. I'm enjoying country living. Keep well, and God grant you every prosperity.
{{right|Yours P. Tchaikovsky}}
Tell me how much work [[Messer]] has done on the piano reduction?
}}