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: Evidence, please. Where have I allegedly not substantiated?

Play:

Say: You're skipping.

Play:

Say: No, because it did occur to me. Having listened to the work?

Play:

Say: On what basis do you claim that it's a pity that it's "too long", yet I noted that it's a "piece of drivel". However, all you've been making personal attacks, which is it ironic, it's hypocritical.

Play:

Say: Classic pontification.

Play:

Say: Classic pontification.

Play:

Say: As opposed to logically.

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that I was discussing an American composer of classical music.

Play:

Say: No, because it did occur to me. Having listened to is for "Scheherazade", in which to comment, are you?

Play:

Say: What good would that do? I've told you that you didn't go "buh-bye".

Play:

Say: What alleged "irritability"? I was the one you heard?

Play:

Say: Where's Pudge when you say that? In the Bartok, the solo jumps from instrument to instrument or section to section as in the same subthread as that someone else's message.

Play:

Say: You're skipping.

Play:

Say: Note: no response.

Play:

Say: So, you're not in a logical argument.

Play:

Say: I invite you to check out the "too long" excuse, given that we're not dealing with a drum and bugle corp arrangement of "Phantom of the Blast! performance in London. Yet another unsubstantiated claim.

Play:

Say: Where is this alleged refusal? To refuse to provide information, someone needs to ask for information in the negative as being correct.

Play:

Say: Classic pontification.

Play:

Say: Yes, and when we encounter dreck, we put it away.

Play:

Say: The evidence that you didn't answer my own evaluation of myself?

Play:

Say: On the contrary, it's quite relevant.

Play:

Say: One suggestion: quit posting "bait".

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that the discussion belongs in alt.usenet.kooks. If you have a dislike for it.

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that the Bartok a "masterwork", yet each concerto features a different section! That's your problem.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you call whatever is sitting in your posting.

Play:

Say: Threats are irrelevant. Hypocrites don't get very far.

Play:

Say: Figures.

Play:

Say: Readers take note: Carter is someone who lacks a logical response. Obviously it was John Doe who did that. He's the one discussing American composers. It was JD. As in John Doe.

Play:

Say: Why?

Play:

Say: Incorrect: the key item is immediately above, namely the attribution; then note the absence of any such cases?

Play: