James Reel advises me that corrections to a reviewer shouldn’t really cause any trouble for future reviews. I’m guessing he’s correct with most reviewers, so I will take his advice if someone credits me for a solo that a sub played. (Subs can use clipped reviews too! We all use them in bios and I use mine for my colleges as well, as I get reviewed there every so many years. I need to let them know I’m still playing and managing to do okay.)

I’m still not sure about the review that said I played English horn very well in a particular symphonic work that has never had, and will never have and English horn solo in it, though. That one is a little different. It really points out the reviewer’s lack of knowledge. To think he was certain he heard English horn, or saw me there (since I was given a solo bow on the Borodin I’m assuming he’d recognize me, especially since the second oboist was male!) when I was home relaxing is really very, very odd. And a little bit scary. This is a person who is supposed to be qualified to review? He can’t hear the difference between an English horn and whatever instrument he did actually hear? But he’s telling people if a concert was good. Hmmm.

And I’m not sure about correcting someone who said I played a very nice English horn solo when what he was referring to (because he specified the very part of the opera) was really baritone horn … well … that might just embarrass a person, you know? And backfire. On me. And while I’m very willing to admit my foibles, weaknesses and major idiotic actions, I’m not willing to shoot myself in the foot.

(And no, I’m not worried about blogging this here. I think I’m being vague enough, and the first example I gave was written up on something that very few people (if any) read besides yours truly. But of course I suppose I could pay for it later if I’m wrong!)
—–