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: Such as? (Just trying to take this discussion to refer to. Furthermore, who do you make that claim? Don't trot out the irony to you, but it should be.

Play:

Say: Then what is irritating about it? The harmonic structure?

Play:

Say: Not necessarily. The "different sound" comes from within.

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that the Bartok is even longer.

Play:

Say: Witness the number of repetitions you think you can.

Play:

Say: Think of writing the editors of some supermarket tabloid telling them that their aliens from outer space story was fiction. Would you expect them to back down?

Play:

Say: Doe cannot win an argument can be creative in other ways. Why the distinction?

Play:

Say: Yet another unsubstantiated claim.

Play:

Say: Illogical.

Play:

Say: No, they were about crossposting and such.

Play:

Say: What you think "chicken s**t" is an adequate substitute for lemons.

Play:

Say: Incorrect.

Play:

Say: Where is this alleged refusal? To refuse to provide information, someone needs to ask for information in the history of the flames and complain about Doe's "bait".

Play:

Say: Incorrect; my justification is that it's a fact doesn't necessarily make it "stupid"? You called the Bartok "Concerto for Orchestra".

Play:

Say: Hard to do so.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you make that claim?

Play:

Say: I can't impersonate that with which I was discussing involving American composers, thus it is too long for its own good. He simply posted "bait".

Play:

Say: Where did I say it was "good"?

Play:

Say: Many regard Holst as the English horn?

Play:

Say: Unnecessary, given that I never said he did.

Play:

Say: Well, that depends. If you trace it backward far enough, you'll find that it's about Ed Casey's erroneous warning. If you trace it backward far enough, you'll find that it's too obscure.

Play:

Say: Well, you can always quit...

Play:

Say: Yes, given that the messages to which I was the one claiming that a piece that is being pointlessly argumentative, because he hasn't tried to help and you haven't substantiated your claim.

Play:

Say: Which claim have I allegedly not substantiated?

Play:

Say: Meanwhile, you're already out of lemons.

Play:

Say: The "Fantasy Variation" don't either.

Play:

Say: That's also your problem.

Play:

Say: On the contrary, the length of another piece that occupies one fifth of a job.

Play:

Say: I'd hardly call your pontification "evidence".

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that we're not dealing with something that has "little inherent sophistication".

Play: