|Genre Categories||; ;|
|Work Title||Symphony No.10|
|Alternative. Title||X. Symphonie (unfinished)|
|Key||F-sharp minor / F-sharp major|
|Year/Date of CompositionY/D of Comp.||1910|
|First Performance.||1924-10-12 in Vienna (movements 1 and 3)
1960-12-19 in London (5 movements, with incomplete realisations of II, IV, and V by Deryck Cooke)
1964-08-13 in London, Royal Albert Hall, Proms (complete, in Cooke’s 1st performing edition)
|First Publication.||1924 - Vienna: Paul Zsolnay Verlag (ed. Richard Specht)
1951 - New York: Associated (ed. Otto Jokl)
1967 - Munich: Internationale Gustav Mahler Gesellschaft (edited Erwin Ratz)
|Copyright Information||Most likely public domain in the USA, despite publication date.|
|Average DurationAvg. Duration||75 minutes|
|Composer Time PeriodComp. Period||Romantic|
|Piece Style||Early 20th century|
(The surviving orchestration does not specify a English horn, bass clarinet, bass drum, cymbals, and triangle, although Mahler regularly used these instruments in his other symphonies)
|External Links||Wikipedia article|
This work is unfinished by the composer
F♯ minor seems more accurate. Order of movements debatable and debated; the above is the order used by Deryck Cooke and some (but not all) others who have published/performed completions of the symphony, but no final order for all 5 movements was definitely specified by the composer in the sketches/packaging thereof, and different orderings have been argued for. - Schissel
Grove has F♯ minor/F♯ major for this symphony, so both (or neither) seems more accurate. There is not really that much of a debate about the order of movements – this is a ‘false controversy’ you have flagged. These are the actual movement headings on the final versions of the five movements:
N.B. Not “Andante – Adagio”. The Andante only perseveres for the first 15 bars of the movement and is clearly only a ‘local tempo’ marking, since Mahler didn’t regard it as characterising the entire movement. The short score draft (BSB Mus.mss.22744) bears only the heading, “Adagio”, as also does the collection of earlier drafts and sketches (ÖNB Mus.Hs.41000/6)
2. Scherzo – Finale
N.B. The manuscript bifolio of the cover/title page was half cut away, probably by Alma to censor a personal utterance by Mahler. At the upbeat to bar 126 of the short score Mahler marks ‘da capo’, indicating an implied repeat followed by 17 bars of coda; the implied repeat adds another 26 bars for a total of 170 bars.
II Finale 4 3 2. Satz 1. Scherzo (I. Satz)
Der Teufel tanzt es mit mir
[further comments, unrelated to order of music, etc.]
N.B. two versions of the fifth movement were drafted in short score; the first ending would have finished in B♭ major, 384 bars (the rejected folios are in ÖNB Mus.Hs.41000/9); instead Mahler deleted a passage of 8 bars after bar 298, replacing it with a longer transition, and revising the last part of the movement to finish the work in F♯ major, 400 bars. There are also issues of structural cuts in the 580 bars of movement IV, with some editions conflating bars together or cutting bars entirely (or adding bars to maintain parity between different sections with similar music).
The main conclusions that can be reached on the basis of Mahler’s numbering is that it is mostly consistent and represents Mahler’s last known intentions. While it is interesting that movement 4 was earlier considered in different order, and possibly 2 and 4 as potential finale movements, there is no real ambiguity about their rightful placement, especially as Mahler made many erasures on the cover page of movement 4 and left only the roman numeral ‘IV’ and the sobriquet (‘The devil dances with me’). Movements 2 and 3 also bear arabic numerals that concur with the roman numbering.
The only real remaining ambiguity of any significance is that Mahler did not erase the word ‘Finale’ on the partitur draft for movement 2, but even that movement title could be variously interpreted as meaning either ‘a Scherzo with the character of a Finale’, or ‘a Scherzo ending in the fashion of a Finale’, or ‘a Scherzo designed to lead into a Finale’ – none of which would mean it is literally the final movement of the work.
Obviously we cannot have a ‘final order’ for an unfinished work, as there are precedents for Mahler changing the order of internal movements after publication and performance (both II & VI). The best expectation is that the materials were left behind in a consistent fashion, which we find is in fact the case: there are five distinct movements each bearing a successive roman number in Mahler’s hand, with the last being given the title of ‘Finale’. That’s as clear as possible in the circumstances, and those who perform the symphony in alternate orderings are experimenting with the tinkering that Mahler obviously went through himself – but importantly, those erasures on the heading of movement IV carry double weight: they represent structural ideas that Mahler most definitely contemplated, but ultimately rejected. Philip @ © talk 18:55, 15 December 2013 (EST) [with minor subsequent revisions]