As for individual orchestra members, the oboist played with such beauty of tone, he may lose his card in the Oboists’ union. The hornist, however, will keep his card: he suffered a fumble or three.
Um. Explain? If the oboist plays well he shouldn’t be in the “Oboists’ union” (a non-existent group, of course). I just don’t get it. Because I’m slow that way.
The review begins here. It’s not my cuppa tea when it comes to writing style. Part of me wonders if our blogging style has infected the writer. I guess I expect something different—something well written maybe—when it comes to a review for a newspaper.
I read the review. Nordlinger twice refers to a Mozart composition he calls “Eine kleine Nachtmusik”. He even offers us a translation of that title (“A little night music”). Translation is correct enough; only, the title is incorrect. Of course, it’s “Nachmusik” (“…after [dinner] music”), and Nordlinger seems to have confused Mozart with Sondheim — or perhaps Bartok?
If he doesn’t get the title, how the heck can he hear the piece in anything like its true context? Surely the title was spelled correctly in his program notes… doesn’t the man even read?
I think Nordlinger’s other journalism is more political in nature, which would explain both the breezy style and the carelessness with factual substance.
(I can’t wait to see Nordlinger review a performance of “The TacoBell Cannon”)
I never really pay attention to reviewer’s names. I guess I should. I just have a good laugh at some of the things I read.
As to the typo with Nachmusik … I very well might have made the same one, I’m sorry to say. But yes, a reviewer should know better. I’m just an oboe player ….
Okay … I’m back after pondering this for a bit of time. For the life of me, I have never heard it as “nachmusik” nor can I find any information suggesting that it is, Bill. My husband was quite surprised, as well, to hear “nachmusik”.
Could you please provide me with the information? Thanks!