Grieg, Haugtussa Songs (Mountain Maid)

[steltz]

We have this in two places -- one work page (the page with the full work) is under the English translation, and the work page with the original Norwegian title has what has to be an excerpt, because it is only 1 page long.

However, there's another problem: On this page, the one-page song is called "Spurven". Grove lists a "Sporven" by Grieg, so this may be a misspelling. (I downloaded the file, and it is a misspelling which I've corrected.) However, Grove says it's a piece that was originally in the Haugtussa poem cycle, but not included in op.67. It comes in two versions, one voice and piano, and the other female choir, which is what we have.

I don't know quite how this should be dealt with, but for a start, Grieg's official title seems to have been simply 'Haugtussa, op.67' with no mention of the number nine (in any case, Grove says there are 8 ). I would think that Sporven should be listed as just that, with no reference to Haugtussa in the work page title, although I have explained the source in the comments field.

If this seems to be OK with everybody, should I change the work page titles to "Haugtussa, op.67" for the set of 8, and "Sporven" for the single song?

[Davydov]

The LIbrary of Congress catalog treats Sporven as a separate piece from Op.67, so we should probably do the same and move it to "Sporven, EG 152d (Grieg, Edvard)".

As the "Haugtussa" page will then be empty, maybe deleting it would be the best option, since its existence as a redirect page could cause problems for anyone attempting to upload future files from Op.67.

[steltz]

Next question: on the Grove page, there are 10 songs from Haugtussa poems that weren't included in op.67. Grove puts "inc." after some of them, and in checking the abbreviations, it can mean either "incomplete" or "incorporated". It isn't clear to me which this is (probably incomplete?), but all 10 seem to be under EG 152.

We don't have any of the others, but they might be uploaded in the future. Should they all be on one page, in which case, what to call the page -- they can't be called Haugtussa songs, because the op.67 will have that title. We could put them under "Songs, EG 152" and deal with the fact that they are from the same cycle of poems as the op.67 in the comment field.

[vinteuil]

Well, this also raises the question of whether the four songs omitted from Dichterliebe (some of which were published later in a different opus number!) should be included there...O say perhaps not, but a link might be good...and the same here...

[Davydov]

I 'd say the 'extras' should be counted as individual songs in their own rights, with their own work pages, which is how the Library of Congress have classified them (the compilers of the EG catalogue having taken a different approach) it. Not that the LC are always right, but their practice is followed by libraries worldwide, so it sets an important precedent. Cross-references to and from the main Haugtussa Songs page wouldn't hurt though.

[steltz]

Each one will have the EG 152 work number after it, if that's OK with everybody -- it does seem to be a kind of catch-all number in this case -- with so many incomplete, it doesn't look like they were intended to be performed together. OK I will start moving things!

[steltz]

Next: I've created the new page for Sporven and copied the file there. How do I delete the old page?

[Davydov]

I have two sources that specify "EG 152d" for Sporven, so I've just moved it there, and deleted the old page. Thanks for sorting it out!

[steltz]

Haugtussa op.67 has been created, and file has been moved. The Mountain Maid, op.67 page can now be deleted. Thanks.

[audunsj]

A scan of the manuscript of the Op. 67, can be found here:
http://www.bergen.folkebibl.no/cgi-bin/ ... =forfatter

On this page, the one-page song is called "Spurven". Grove lists a "Sporven" by Grieg, so this may be a misspelling.

"Sporven" is an old spelling of the word "spurven" meaning "The sparrow".

Grieg's official title seems to have been simply 'Haugtussa, op.67' with no mention of the number nine

There are two title pages in the manuscript. The first bears the title:
"Haugtussa" / Sang-Cyklus / af Arne Garborgs Fortælling / Komponist / Edvard Grieg / op 67
("Haugtussa" / Song-cycle / from Arne Garborg's story / composer / Edvard Grieg / op 67)
the second:
Haugtussa / Sange af Arne Garborgs fortælling / Komponist / Edvard Grieg / 11 Juni 1895
(Haugtussa / Songs from Arne Garborg's story / Composer / Edvard Grieg / June 11th 1895 [it is worth to mention that Garborg's poems were first published in May 1895])
Below is a list of the songs containing 12 numbers, whereof the titles of nos. 3 - 6 have been erased.
The first title page also seems to have been added later as it is written of a different type of paper.
For the title on the different printed editions see:
Fog, Dan ( creator), Grinde, Kirsti, Norheim, Øyvind 2008: Edvard Grieg : thematisch-bibliographisches Werkverzeichnis, Litolff's/Peters

on the Grove page, there are 10 songs from Haugtussa poems that weren't included in op.67

The Grieg collection in Bergen, Norway has 12 songs.

We don't have any of the others, but they might be uploaded in the future.

They appear only to have been published in volume 15 of the Grieg Gesamtausgabe in 1991.

I 'd say the 'extras' should be counted as individual songs in their own rights, with their own work pages, which is how the Library of Congress have classified them (the compilers of the EG catalogue having taken a different approach) it. Not that the LC are always right, but their practice is followed by libraries worldwide, so it sets an important precedent. Cross-references to and from the main Haugtussa Songs page wouldn't hurt though.

Do you mean that all the songs not incorporated in the Op. 67, should be given their own individual workpage? I think that it has been common practice to have discarded movements and revisions of symphonies etc. on the same work page as the final versions. Why is this different in this case?

[steltz]

I think the reasoning is that everything under one opus number is on one page, and for whatever reason, Grieg chose not to include the others, and in fact, didn't even finish some of them. At least one other major library has done it that way, so that seemed to back up the decision.

My main objective in moving things to start with was that we had the same song under two different titles on two different pages. At the very least, they needed to be on the same page. The rest was just trying to decide how to deal with the other pieces, should they ever be uploaded.

Should the others ever be uploaded, there would at least be links between the pages.

As to old versus new spellings, if there are differences, we usually try to standardize on what authorities such as Grove Music use. The spelling I changed it to was what was on the title page, which happened to match what was in Grove.

I would appreciate hearing other opinions, though.

[audunsj]

It wasn't meant as criticism, most of what I wrote was just to clearify things I do think however that the songs not included in the Op. 67, but belonging to to EG 152 (they were earlier numbered as 149), should not be separeted from each other as they were intended to be part of the same cycle. This might also help to identify them. How about one work page called "Songs excluded [or whatever you like] from Haugtussa, EG 152"?

About the spelling:
Wouldn't it be practical to include the modern spelling of the title as "Alternative work title"? Most people don't read norwegian, and translators like google's wouldn't be of much help if the modern spelling was'nt included.

About the scores:
I might be able to provide the scores, but I need to investigate some aspects of the norwegian copyright law. The "Åndsverksloven" is rather unclear when dealing with scholarly editions and concerning first prints it might happen that these songs are protected life+70 of the editiors, as the rights to the works in all but three aspects are transferred to them (sic). The Grieg Gesamtausgabe was indeed published in Germany and not in Norway, but if this has anything to say in this case I don't know yet.