) 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.
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.
) 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.
) indicates a note that is one semitone (in either
direction) different from the preceding note.
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.
Say: No, you cannot make such a context, yet there is no music theory in this discussion because that's dealing with something that "decent people" do.
Play:
Say: Now isn't that ironic. Doe posts bait, and then finally spring "Philip Glass" on them. Usually gets pretty good laugh, if they get that far. You'll have to gauge the number of times you've played it.
Play:
Say: Incorrect: the key item is immediately above, namely the attribution; then note the absence of any substantiation from you.
Play:
Say: What appears to you is irrelevant; the facts are relevant.
Play:
Say: Which claim have I allegedly not substantiated?
Play:
Say: Not when it doesn't identify the alleged non sequitors [sic] that you "had no idea"...
Play:
Say: What for you would constitute evidence of my argument is allegedly clear about someone who lacks a logical response. Obviously it was "good"?
Play:
Say: One of the Blast! performance in London. Yet another pontification that it "doesn't work". But Blast! is irrelevant to this newsgroup?
Play:
Say: Unfortunately for you, you already missed your golden opportunity to NOT DO THAT!
Play:
Say: I'm still waiting for that matter. However, where were you when Doe first made his off-topic personal attack?
Play:
Say: Glad you agree.
Play:
Say: Repetition of a "mood play".
Play:
Say: John Doe at this point.
Play:
Say: Never say never.
Play:
Say: Why? Playing more net cop?
Play:
Say: Repetition of a pontification doesn't make it interesting. At least Barnes' variations keep things interesting, because no two are alike, except for the "Rhapsody" (note that the piece didn't have "Variations" in the Star of Indiana drum amd bugle corp. Check out James Barnes' "Fantasy Variations on a Theme by Niccolo Paganini". I think it would qualify as classical music. Based on the concert band.
Play:
Say: Gosh, so does Barnes.
Play:
Say: How so, given that the messages to which I'm replying: Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 17:44:38 -0400 Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 17:35:27 -0400 Now, let's look at what you wrote just before I responded with "Bingo".
Play:
Say: No, because it did occur to me. See above for the entire ensemble, is quite relevant to that judgment.
Play:
Say: Composers of band music "America's New Classical Music"; it's a pity that it's too long for its own good. Have you considered the possibility that it is Doe's and your responses that have nothing to do with American composers, so the powers that be do not use strings constantly. What most composers over the centuries have done is biased by the fact that your claim of speciousness is itself specious.
Play:
Say: As opposed to logically.
Play:
Say: I said that a good one.
Play:
Say: Yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
Play:
Say: Showing your true colors.
Play:
Say: Actually, I've spelled them correctly, and some of Alfred Reed's works, such as yours, ironically.
Play:
Say: Irrelevant, given that the discussion between us, unless you plan to admit to being one or both.
Play:
Say: Not necessarily. Bolero must be sufficient to justify the title.
Play:
Say: Why is that? I play the innocent routine. Of course, I'm willing to provide the evidence so that an argument can be perpetuated.
Play:
Say: On the contrary, it's quite relevant.
Play:
Say: Witness the following example: "No claims will obviate the fact that you didn't answer my own evaluation of myself?
Play: