Instructions

Alternate sections are marked Say and Play. The Say sections are spoken or sung to an improvised tune in a stentorian and condescending manner, as a traffic court judge lecturing a recidivist speeder. Read as though the text makes perfect sense, even though its grammar and meaning may make sudden, unexpected turns.

The Play sections use an ordinary five-line staff with oval note heads () interspersed with diamond () and cross () note heads. Play in a manner that contrasts with the lecturer's attitude. Be mocking or solicitous or calm or resigned or anything else appropriate.

• I've used bar lines set off groups of notes. Groups should be observed by accent, phrasing, pauses or some other way.
• The cross () indicates some non-standard noise, like a multiphonic or a strum behind the bridge or a dropped drumstick or a cheese-grater arpeggio or something else. Use your imagination.
• The diamond () indicates a note that is one semitone (in either direction) different from the preceding note.
• Rhythm, tempo and dynamics are entirely up to the performer. Since no clef is specified, you can pick that as well.

You can play in concert with other performers, who may play other versions of this piece, or other any other materials, composed or improvised. When playing with others, the Say sections should be performed as disruptively as possible, and the Play sections should be played sensitively, with utmost regard to enhancing the performance of the other players.

Score

Say: Yes you did; look at the same moment as the rest of the "Fantasy Variations" sometime, or Reed's "Armenian Dances", or Schmitt's "Dionysiaques". At least I've given a reason to justify the title.

Play:

Say: Sure: look above, and note the absence of any substantiation from you.

Play:

Say: On the contrary, you asked to be convinced.

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that you are.

Play:

Say: About John Doe.

Play:

Say: You've had plenty of time to jump into a discussion about classical music and hurl some insults.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you say "we" don't mention a name?

Play:

Say: We did "Peter and the Wolf" about seven years ago. I'll have to gauge the number of violinists in an orchestra plays a section of music where the strings aren't playing?

Play:

Say: And how is he relevant to this newsgroup?

Play:

Say: To find a troll nor a spammer is involved in the Star of Indiana drum amd bugle corp. Check out the skill of the word.

Play:

Say: Why should I?

Play:

Say: Non sequitur, given that I never said that you can't even make friends with somebody who has yet to identify where it is the same melody over and over, and you turned on me..."

Play:

Say: So, using your reasoning, anyone who reads your postings.

Play:

Say: Sort of like how you ignored the evidence for your behavior to anyone who reads your postings.

Play:

Say: Not when it doesn't identify the alleged non sequitors [sic] that you can't even make friends with somebody who has yet to identify where it is "stupid".

Play:

Say: You said something about irritation, and I said that you regard this as a non-rhetorical question.

Play:

Say: If the previous material was irrelevant, then why did you answer your own question if it wasn't rhetorical? You ask the guy question. Answer it yourself. Sure sounded like rhetoric to me.

Play:

Say: Actually, relatively few pieces have an E-flat clarinet part.

Play:

Say: Clearly you are not a "decent person".

Play:

Say: Monty Python, anyone?

Play:

Say: But you don't want to be "masterworks". I suggest you listen to the statement to which I'm responding were crossposted, such as the Rachmaninoff "Rhapsody", and not as long as the father of serious music for concert band.

Play:

Say: Unfortunately for you, you already missed your golden opportunity to NOT DO THAT!

Play:

Say: So, you're not in a logical response. Obviously it was "good"?

Play:

Say: I'm not the one ignoring the evidence so that an argument can be creative in other ways. Why the distinction?

Play:

Say: No substantiation was provided. Claiming that it's a "piece of drivel". However, all you've been making personal attacks, which is it ironic, it's hypocritical.

Play:

Say: What alleged pontification of mine?

Play:

Say: There is no one "right" length.

Play:

Say: It's not your choice. History has already portrayed you as someone who jumped into a discussion about classical music to launch a personal attack, which is it ironic, it's hypocritical.

Play:

Say: I'm sure that no version of Eliza can argue logically.

Play:

Say: On the contrary, you're the one claiming that the music will be "hypnotically fascinating".

Play: