Review: Prokofiev Cello Sonata Op. 119 (Hans Sikorski 2001 revised edition)
Prokofiev's Cello Sonata, Op. 119 is a masterpiece cellists are lucky to have in our repertoire. It comes from Prokofiev's collaboration with cellist Mstislav Rostropovich. Other cello works of this period include the Sinfonia Concertante, Op. 125, the unfinished Solo Sonata, op. 133, and the unfinished Concertino, Op. 132. The tried and true editions of the Op. 119 Sonata are Peters and IMC. IMC is basically a reprint (photocopy) of the Peters. Both editions include a cello part edited by Rostropovich. This somber, witty, majestic work can be faithfully rendered using one of these 2 editions.
In 2001, Sikorski decided to release a newly engraved "revised" edition. In many cases, revised editions are welcomed, especially when the composer initiates the revision. But in this case, Prokofiev had been dead for almost a half-century. This piece had been codified in standard and composer-approved form since the 1950s. While revisions can be valuable when they clarify sources or correct long-standing errors, this 2001 engraving introduces a number of notational and layout problems that materially affect readability and usability in rehearsal and performance contexts.
Although the edition appears to correct a small number of details in the first movement (e.g., in mm. 100 and 102 of the piano part), these improvements are outweighed by numerous additional discrepancies introduced elsewhere in the score. Several passages also present plausible alternative readings; however, these are not reflected in the performance tradition associated with Rostropovich’s edition, and the cumulative notational and layout issues documented below substantially limit this printing’s reliability as a primary performance text. Typography and layout present additional challenges, particularly in the finale, where the ossia is not clearly differentiated from the primary staff, increasing the likelihood of misreading in performance. There is a place with a wrong key signature in the RH of the piano, as well as out-of-place key signatures in a couple of spots. Given the number of notational and layout issues outlined below, this printing is unlikely to function as a dependable primary performance edition.
Below is a list of things that are present in the Sikorski edition that are not present in the IMC, Peters, and Leeds Music.
CELLO PART
Movement 1
m.27 - sul G (mistake); the Russian edition has this, too - should be sul C
m.58 - > on note 1 – In Russian edition, too
m.100 - "con espressione drammatica" (corrected adjective)
m.199, note 4 - C (mistake) - should be A
m.208 - chords 3 and 4, top note G (mistake), needs to be F#
m.215 - etc. harmonic sign used for thumb (odd notation)
Movement 2
m.28 - different slurring (mistake?)
m.80, note 1 - eighth note (Peters Edition) 2 sixteenths (Sikorski and Russian edition)
m.110 - mf removed
Movement 3
m.29 - tremolo (mistake) – not played by Rostropovich
m.63 - accidental added on a tie (not needed)
m.80 - courtesy p added
m.84, note 2 - D# (mistake) - should be an E
m.156, note 10 - D (mistake) - should be B-flat
m.161, note 8 - F (mistake), needs to be an E-flat
m.214 - beats 3 and 4 slurred (mistake?)
PIANO PART
Movement 1
mm.23-24 - slur (mistake)
mm.59-61 all slurred together (badly placed slur)
mm.101-102 - rhythm fixed (previously wrong in the Russian edition and Peters/IMC)
m.134 - “poco rit.” on first beat - In Russian edition on third beat
Movement 2
m.4 - RH flat accidental missing on both E’s
m. 28, beat 3 - F natural (mistake) - should be F#
m. 31 - LH lower voice must be a D, not an F
m.69 - RH wrong key signature!
Movement 3
m.29 - VLC and RH key signature misplaced
mm. 60-61 - RH has E-flat and F-flat (mistake), needs to be E-double flat and F-natural (thanks Carlos Avila for the tip)
m.94, beat 4 - RH B (mistake, see parallel passage in mm.96 and 98) - should be a C
m.138, beat 1 - RH low D (mistake) - should be C's in octaves
m.192, beat 3 - A-flat (mistake, see parallel passage in m.193) - should be B-flat
m.194, beat 3 - A-flat octave lower
m.200 - the ossia is HUGE and it's on top, making the main text difficult to read
m.206 - RH of ossia, note 2 no E octave (mistake)
m.206 - ossia not lined up with the main text