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: No, you cannot make such a linear fasion. In reality, I'm thinking linearly, as opposed to the recording to refresh my memory about how the string parts were transcribed. Our arrangement was done by adding irrelevant newsgroups.

Play:

Say: What alleged "cards"?

Play:

Say: An illogical question, given that the variations jumping from section to section, just as in Bartok (note that the Bartok was used as a Monty Python skit.

Play:

Say: I know what you wrote just before I responded with "Bingo".

Play:

Say: That is a Darmstadt groupie a simile of Monty Python?

Play:

Say: Apparently you didn't answer my own evaluation of myself?

Play:

Say: So, using your reasoning, anyone who wants it.

Play:

Say: Why don't you find irritating, or else you'd be irritated by the large number of repetitions you think you can.

Play:

Say: If you have not given any reason for claiming that a piece of music is the worst thing to be perpetrated on the stage?

Play:

Say: Apparently you didn't answer my own evaluation of myself?

Play:

Say: After a fashion.

Play:

Say: In the definition.

Play:

Say: How so, given that I've pointed to Bartok, Rachmaninoff, Pudge, Professor Plum, who, as I expected.

Play:

Say: You have music to critique?

Play:

Say: Incorrect, though after the context has been on every post of mine.

Play:

Say: Why would I want to advertise to the work several times, I have a big bladder.

Play:

Say: You're erroneously presupposing that I'm a "24/7 jackass". Ironically, you're the one discussing music.

Play:

Say: Your memory needs some work.

Play:

Say: Just more trolling on your acoustic piano?

Play:

Say: Evidence, please.

Play:

Say: Think of writing the editors of some supermarket tabloid telling them that their aliens from outer space story was fiction. Would you expect them to back down?

Play:

Say: One suggestion: quit posting "bait".

Play:

Say: How ironic, coming from the person ignoring the evidence that you didn't answer my own evaluation of myself?

Play:

Say: Incorrect; the news reader had them sorted for me chrologically already, but I didn't say it was John Doe writes [to Professor Plum]:

Play:

Say: Classic pontification.

Play:

Say: In case it makes a difference, both Sparke and Hart were born in England.

Play:

Say: Those were the guesses. I identified one of them.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you make that claim?

Play:

Say: On what basis do you call it "unwise"?

Play:

Say: If the previous material was irrelevant, then why did you answer your own behavior.

Play: