Content deleted Content added
m →Constanze's srategic preservation of Mozart's unfinished manuscripts: corrected paragraphing for legibility |
|||
Line 58:
:"In the 1790s Constanze Mozart made a fateful decision about her late husband's musical manuscripts: those containing sketches or drafts of unrealized works would be kept for possible completion by others, while those containing sketches or drafts of completed works could be discarded."
This description is consistent with what the [[Constanze_Mozart#After_Mozart.27s_death|article on Constanze]] has to say, with due citation, about her role in promoting Mozart's work after his death (and for that matter with Mozart's own apparent view of unfinished works as assets to be completed only when an "occasion" [read: payment] presented itself). Without this context, Constanze's "destruction" seems simply stupid or wanton. I think the following could help avoid the mistaken inference (if not implication):
:"Mozart's widow [[Constanze Mozart|Constanze]] preserved manuscripts of his incomplete works, while discarding those of works already fully realized.<ref name="Solomon 1995, 310">Solomon 1995, 310</ref> About 320 sketches and drafts survive, covering about 10 percent of the composer's work.<ref name="Solomon 1995, 310"/>"
Assuming Solomon does not misstate the facts, I have left the citations undisturbed without checking whether the first one is apposite. I have done my best not to lengthen the sentence unduly, or make it argumentative, while adhering to verifiable assertions. Finally, I propose the alteration for review and discussion rather than making it myself because it is clear that the article is well edited and curated. As a nonspecialist, I did not wish to barge in and create distraction or controversy.
Best to all,
| |||