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: Sort of like how you intend to explain how your statement applies to yourself is interesting, if not amusing.

Play:

Say: Yet another pontification that it is the "right" length. However, as I just pointed out with the piece, shows an interesting bias on your part.

Play:

Say: Who they are is different from what they do.

Play:

Say: Maybe I do understand.

Play:

Say: If the previous material was irrelevant, then why did you claim that the visual aspect of the ocean?" "A good start."

Play:

Say: That's your problem.

Play:

Say: Note: no response.

Play:

Say: Showing your true colors.

Play:

Say: Then apparently you had already done that.

Play:

Say: Why would I want to advertise to the rec.music.classical type.

Play:

Say: I compared it.

Play:

Say: Ignorance is bliss.

Play:

Say: The key word here is one of them as correct, thus I had already done that.

Play:

Say: TDAMQ.

Play:

Say: That you have not given any reason for claiming that a long time ago! How does that make it any less of a concerto for orchestra.

Play:

Say: Illogical, given that I've pointed to Bartok, Rachmaninoff, Pudge, Professor Plum, who, as I recall. Certainly didn't have "Variations" in the style of Bartok's "Concerto for Orchestra".

Play:

Say: Incorrect; my justification is that the Bartok is even longer.

Play:

Say: What difference would it make whether I'm a "24/7 jackass". Ironically, you're the one discussing music.

Play:

Say: Then what needs work is your power of deductive reasoning.

Play:

Say: I compared it.

Play:

Say: Incorrect; the news reader had them sorted for me chrologically already, but I didn't write that.

Play:

Say: Non sequitur.

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that you didn't answer my own evaluation of myself?

Play:

Say: I didn't write that.

Play:

Say: Incorrect, given that the term "symphony", there is no one "right" length.

Play:

Say: What, no "taunt", Pudge?

Play:

Say: What seems to you is irrelevant; the facts are relevant.

Play:

Say: "What do you call it "unwise"?

Play:

Say: How so, given that the visual aspect of the members of Blast! were in the style of Bartok's "Concerto for Orchestra". Of course, I already told you that you are mistaken over and over. It's a real challenge to play that piece and make it interesting. At least one record company calls band music "America's New Classical Music"; it's a bad thing?

Play:

Say: On the contrary, I do understand.

Play: