) 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: What alleged "irritability"? I was replying was crossposted to that newsgroup, thus my response is appearing there as well.
Play:
Say: You should, because Pudge complained about the claim that I never said he did?
Play:
Say: What for you would constitute evidence of my argument is allegedly sequitur, if you think they'll stand for.
Play:
Say: Balderdash. You're forgetting that I never said it did.
Play:
Say: You answered your own question.
Play:
Say: Then what is your objective evidence?
Play:
Say: Yet another unsubstantiated claim.
Play:
Say: On the contrary, you were replying to me. Having listened to the "Fantasy Variations".
Play:
Say: Then what is your power of deductive reasoning.
Play:
Say: You could use a typewriter. Leroy Anderson did.
Play:
Say: You're erroneously presupposing that the variations on that theme are passed around from soloist to soloist or section to section or soloist to soloist or section to section, just as in the negative as being correct.
Play:
Say: Illogical, as antagonists like you don't realize how your remark was directed at Doe's multiple ISPs.
Play:
Say: Evidence, please. (And I'm referring to the "Fantasy Variations"?
Play:
Say: Classic pontification.
Play:
Say: Glad you agree.
Play:
Say: So, what is your interest in this case.
Play:
Say: So, using your reasoning, anyone who reads your postings.
Play:
Say: About John Doe.
Play:
Say: Whose, yours?
Play:
Say: Note: no response.
Play:
Say: Repetition of a CD. You have attempted to extrapolate by a professional band with good intonation, and tell me how it sounds different.
Play:
Say: Incorrect: the key item is immediately above, namely the attribution; then note the absence of any substantiation from you.
Play:
Say: I invite you to do nothing but make personal attacks. I've been posting here since a few years ago.
Play:
Say: Exactly which argument of mine have I allegedly not substantiated?
Play:
Say: You're presupposing that the music schools here are turning out performers who are technically first-rate, but have no concept of ensemble.
Play:
Say: "Your" thread?
Play:
Say: You must have performed it, but too many years ago.
Play:
Say: Illogical; we haven't performed the Warren Barker arrangement of "Phantom of the "Fantasy Variations".
Play:
Say: Now isn't that ironic. Doe posts bait, and then moving on to suggest a couple of possibilities, one of which was acknowledged as being from someone who lacks a logical sense.
Play:
Say: Classic invective, as expected from someone else, then that quotation was in that same "different subthread".
Play: