Who's on First?

In Canberra, Australia, the Sydney Symphony Orchestra played to a packed house. The concert program listed Sibelius' Symphony No. 2, to be followed by Tchaikovsky. But, because of a last-minute switch in conductors, there was an unannounced change in the schedule: Tchaikovsky's Fifth Symphony became the major work, followed by Berlioz' Hungarian March. Sibelius--whose disciplined power is poles apart from the romantic extravagance of Tchaikovsky--was off the program entirely.

Next morning, readers of the Canberra Times were startled to see Critic Peter Bailey's review of Sibelius' Symphony No. 2 ("The themes are catching and developed with simplicity and beauty . . . from the serious minor cadences of the opening Allegro we move to the lovely waltz-time theme of the Andante . . ."). Bailey carpingly dismissed the Berlioz work ("It seemed an anticlimax to have to listen to an encore by Tchaikovsky").

As letters poured in, the Times quickly conceded that its critic had followed the program notes more closely than the music, published Bailey's contrite apology blaming his boner on "confusion of mind and lapse of memory."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.