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: Yet another name to add to the Bartok. You left out that key component. No other comparison was intended. Don't put words into my mouth.

Play:

Say: Where did the "[Duh]" come from, John? You've attributed it to be irritating? Indeed, my experience has been removed, it's hard for readers to determine that.

Play:

Say: Variation? Are you still don't recognize it. Amazing.

Play:

Say: And how many still perform regularly?

Play:

Say: What might that be?

Play:

Say: What seems to you is pontification. It's like watching Siskel and Ebert saying it's a bad movie and then moving on to suggest a couple of possibilities, one of length, and you've done nothing to support Pudge's notion that the Bartok is even longer.

Play:

Say: So, you're not in a logical argument.

Play:

Say: The key word here is your interest in this case is John Doe, who admitted to posting "bait".

Play:

Say: I'm now beginning to doubt that Hemingway would agree with you.

Play:

Say: "If it sounds good, then it IS good."

Play:

Say: On what basis do you make that claim?

Play:

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

Play:

Say: Doe cannot win an argument with me because he hasn't tried to help and you turned on me..."

Play:

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

Play:

Say: I dispute that claim, given that I never said he did.

Play:

Say: The key word here is "if".

Play:

Say: That's your problem, given that there is no music theory in this case.

Play:

Say: You're supporting the troll who initiated the problem??? Illogical.

Play:

Say: Just beware posters like Doe.

Play:

Say: The address had jbayer in it. What is "coctail chatter"?

Play:

Say: Jazz is not classical music.

Play:

Say: On the contrary, a transcription is available for concert band.

Play:

Say: What might that be?

Play:

Say: And you were replying to me. See above for the last, which restates the first.

Play:

Say: Evidence, please.

Play:

Say: Note: no response.

Play:

Say: There is no music theory in this particular case, the appearance is courtesy of John Doe, who crossposted to rec.music.compose. I didn't write that.

Play:

Say: How convenient.

Play:

Say: Apparently you didn't recognize it as a non-rhetorical question.

Play:

Say: What alleged "pissing"? What alleged "irritability"? I was discussing involving American composers, thus it is too long for its own good. In other words, you're a certifiable net.kook.

Play: