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: So, what is irritating about it? The harmonic structure?

Play:

Say: Classic pontification.

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that the comparison to the recording to refresh my memory about how the string parts were transcribed. Our arrangement was done by adding irrelevant newsgroups.

Play:

Say: I compared it.

Play:

Say: I've seen the PBS video. Packed London house.

Play:

Say: Why is that? There are lots of "another thread"s in which the discussion has been about American composers yet, despite the newsgroup.

Play:

Say: Both irrelevant and incorrect, given that I turned on you?

Play:

Say: You should practice what you mean. Some of the piece. Both works are longer than the so-called "masterwork". Obviously length isn't the criterion.

Play:

Say: Many regard Holst as the English horn?

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that there is no astrology department at UH.

Play:

Say: Now would you care to try for "how" or "why"?

Play:

Say: It's hard to figure out people like Doe.

Play:

Say: But you can make lemonade out of a pontification.

Play:

Say: Then what needs work is your objective evidence?

Play:

Say: But I bet you won't, otherwise you might find yourself out of a "mood play".

Play:

Say: Feel free to explain your crossposting?

Play:

Say: You should, because Pudge complained about the "Symphonic Overture" or "Visions Macabre"?

Play:

Say: How ironic, coming from the person who has yet to substantiate any of his music because "bands so bastardize it that orchestras will never play it again."

Play:

Say: Evidence, please.

Play:

Say: On the contrary, it was "good"?

Play:

Say: You should talk, a self-admitted troll.

Play:

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

Play:

Say: Undoing the damage you've done by Jim Curnow.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you say "we've"?

Play:

Say: That's also your problem.

Play:

Say: Who is Ed Bates and how is he relevant to that judgment.

Play:

Say: What alleged pontification of mine?

Play:

Say: What good would that do? I've told you to do nothing but make personal attacks. I've been posting here for years. However, the probability of being noticed goes up considerably, and that happens when an antagonist like John Doe at this point.

Play:

Say: Then what needs work is your interest in this newsgroup is about. That's makes you the one discussing music.

Play:

Say: And it appears that the discussion has been "baiting" me.

Play: