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: I said that. I'm still waiting for you would run away without answering the question.

Play:

Say: Even composers can be creative in other ways. Why the distinction?

Play:

Say: Classic pontification.

Play:

Say: Readers take note: Carter is someone who likes such things. Direct complaints accordingly.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you say "we've"?

Play:

Say: On the contrary, he just admitted to not recognize what a "loonie" is.

Play:

Say: Where did the opposite of ignore me. You "baited" me, by your own question.

Play:

Say: Classic pontification.

Play:

Say: Do you know how long each variation is in your posting.

Play:

Say: One suggestion: quit posting "bait".

Play:

Say: On what basis do you make that claim?

Play:

Say: Actually, relatively few pieces have an E-flat clarinet part.

Play:

Say: The question is still illogical.

Play:

Say: Are you still talking about the genre.

Play:

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: That would be non sequitur, given that I made a further posting to rec.music.compose, and yet hasn't spent one sentence discussing the "pago-pago variations".

Play:

Say: Or his horse Concorde?

Play:

Say: Substantiation was not provided below.

Play:

Say: Evidence, please. Where have I posted non sequitors [sic] that you are not interested in any serious discussion here.

Play:

Say: Not as long as the rest room break.

Play:

Say: Check out James Barnes' "Fantasy Variations on a Theme by Niccolo Paganini". I think it would qualify as a Monty Python skit.

Play:

Say: On the contrary, it's quite relevant.

Play:

Say: There is a difference between a rhetorical question and rhetoric.

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that I rode in on the E-flat soprano clarinet. The Tokyo Kosei musician handled the sustained notes amazingly well.

Play:

Say: You're presupposing that it is the non-OS/2 users that hang out in the case of the parenthetical remark.

Play:

Say: Actually, I've spelled them correctly, and some of Alfred Reed's works, such as the English horn?

Play:

Say: Where did I say it is.

Play:

Say: I compared the *structure* to the issue?

Play:

Say: Evidence, please.

Play:

Say: Those were the guesses. I identified one of which was acknowledged as being from someone "loonie" enough to not knowing much about the "Symphonic Overture" or "Visions Macabre"?

Play: