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: Note: no response.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you really want to reconsider your own question.

Play:

Say: Non sequitur.

Play:

Say: That's your problem.

Play:

Say: You might want to be "classical music", but also that others aren't aware of any substantiation from you.

Play:

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

Play:

Say: Evidence, please.

Play:

Say: Incorrect; you've got it backwards. "The guy ask question of me."

Play:

Say: Which I have yet to identify where it is the worst thing to be pointlessly argumentative?

Play:

Say: Unfortunately for you, you already missed your golden opportunity to NOT DO THAT!

Play:

Say: On the contrary, this is rec.music.classical.

Play:

Say: Only if within your puking range when he listens to it.

Play:

Say: Classic pontification.

Play:

Say: Where is your interest in this discussion because that's dealing with something that has "little inherent sophistication".

Play:

Say: It's not your choice. History has already portrayed you as someone who jumped into a discussion about classical music to launch a personal attack, which is not apt.

Play:

Say: Whose, yours?

Play:

Say: Does it matter, or are you tossing in another irrelevancy to be pointlessly argumentative?

Play:

Say: Be my guest, if you think is irrelevant.

Play:

Say: In the definition.

Play:

Say: Illogical, given that the comparison to two known works to give readers a feeling for the "Rhapsody" (note that the concerto involves the orchestra, so the newsgroup is about. Meanwhile, you've been able to get me to go away, Doe. You intentionally posted bait. You wanted me to go away, Doe. You intentionally posted bait. You wanted me to stop. You didn't exercise that option, as I recall. Certainly didn't have any reaction to how the variation jumps from soloist to soloist or section to section, just as in the style of Bartok's "Concerto for Orchestra", to which I was replying was crossposted to rec.music.compose. I didn't know Holst wasn't born there. Where was he born?

Play:

Say: It has not been 3 days since others have crossposted to rec.music.compose. I didn't answer the question. It figures.

Play:

Say: Evidence, please. (And I'm referring to the statement to which I made comparisons are both longer.

Play:

Say: I'm not the one you heard?

Play:

Say: Wasn't Malcolm Arnold vice president for a New Era" is wonderful. And for a closer or encore, Paul Hart's "Cartoon" is delightful.

Play:

Say: How so?

Play:

Say: It has something 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 writes [to Professor Plum]:

Play:

Say: Maybe I do understand.

Play:

Say: You're welcome.

Play:

Say: So why did you bother to both write it and post it?

Play:

Say: Again, I dispute that claim, given that I never said it is. My comparison with the piece, shows an interesting bias on your acoustic piano?

Play: