Mid-Week Musings

6.10.11 (G.Lucas)

After the incredibly successful summer that Phish has already had, we still have a dozen shows to go! In a bit more than a week the circus will travel to the hallowed grounds of the Gorge to kick off the back end of the touring season. And things couldn’t look brighter. When we left the band just a few weeks ago, they had just thrown down the best weekend of music in the modern era amidst a full-blown Phish festival of the sorts we only dreamed about a few short years ago. It is impossible to deny the musical momentum built over the first half of this summer and— more than ever—it certainly feels like the dawning of Phish’s Golden Age.

 

7.3.11 (G.Lucas)

Full-blown creativity, new improvisational directions, experimental jamming, airtight communication, uncharted territory—all of these facets were part of Phish’s opening month of tour. And if the progress made from leg one to leg two during the past two summer tours is any indication, Phish is going to come back with even sharper jaws and enhanced improvisational adventure. At Super Ball, the band seemed to play with a laid-back patience, understanding that we were all there for three days and there was no reason to rush anything. As a result, almost almost no jams were ended prematurely and the weekend possessed an undeniable flow. Though some sets were better crafted than others, the band left us with a slew of the most innovative music to be played in this era.

Two nights at the Gorge, Hollywood Bowl, Tahoe x 2, Golden Gate Park, then two three-packs—at UIC and Denver…there is heck of a lot of music left to be played this summer! And just like the last two, when all is said and done, my bet is that the second leg will produce the most memorable jams of the tour. Building off a spectacular June that was in a different league than its 2009 and 2010 predecessors, the thoughts of what might come out of August is awe-inducing. Five new venues and a return to two of their most classic haunts will provide us with 24 more sets to take us through a Phishless fall. But something tells me that after a spectacular—and lengthy—summer, that won’t be too much of a problem for anyone.

In 2011,  Phish has created a buzz in the community like no time since their Hampton return. Showcasing a completely revitalized improvisational brilliance—built upon the foundation of ’09 and ’10—Phish took people by storm in Bethel and have maintained that quality of play, and improved upon it, right up through Super Ball. It’s an exciting time to be a Phish fan, as the entire comeback has brought us to right now. And heading up to the Gorge in this context, could anything be sweeter?

=====

Jam of the Day:

Light > Number Line” 6.19.11 II

Deep in Portsmouth’s second set, Phish got into an intricate and psychedelic take on “Light” in which Trey actually sets up a quasi-transition into “Number Line.” With so much meat in his show, this “Light” jam hasn’t been discussed to much; check it out.

[audio:http://phishthoughts.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/phish2011-06-19.d2t08.mp3,http://phishthoughts.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/phish2011-06-19.d2t09.mp3] Tags:

510 Responses to “Mid-Week Musings”

  1. MrCompletely Says:

    I have no time for or interest in FF since it has nothing to do with real football in any sense but a pickem league might fit my busy modern lifestyle

    Red Alert PayPal users
    http://pastebin.com/LAykd1es

    they generally are not kidding

  2. Leo Weaver Says:

    Well, I guess he’s proven that he was the best and most important player on his team…and a media darling. And can run fast and hard in Gus Malzahn’s system.

  3. voopa Says:

    I know a Robyn from Portland as well. Awesome woman.

  4. negev79 Says:

    Wow, I had no idea the name was so popular! I had one friend in college who was so named, but that’s it.

    @Voopa – apparently there is another person in Portland with the same first and last name as me. They sometimes confuse me and her at OHSU when I go for a doctor appt and I once got a call from an insurance investigator for a fender bender involving what I presume was her car, since I didn’t own that make or model and had had no accidents. Maybe it’s your friend? Wouldn’t that be crazy.

  5. GoingSouth Says:

    I can’t stop listening to Camden’s “Curtain”! Around 12:45, Mike hits an absolutely *divine* bass line…

  6. SillyWilly Says:

    @Mr. C

    El Dude was using a system of rhetoric borrowed from the American revolution to discredit the Tea Party.

    My idea is simple: Using rhetoric like that to discredit American politics ignores that the Tea Party is using the same rhetoric. My point is that the typical American rhetoric used in situations like these has been a sham.

    And, I agree with you that the men in the infantry line holding the muskets were by-and-large poor. But, the poorest? Were they black? a few. Were they Native Americans forced off their land? Fuck no.

    How big do you think these armies were back then? And how many people actually lived in the colonies at this time? Continental Army was hardly ever bigger than 10,000. There were millions living in the colonies by 1776.

    And, we each have different understandings of “fought” and “fought”

    George Washington fought. George Washington was not poor. Alexander Hamilton was not poor. Paul Revere was not poor. The Marquis de Lafayette was certainly not poor. And he was coming from a government at least as tyrannical as britain.

    all the people making the decisions were not poor. They were fighting. They would have been hung for their part.

    Ultimate point: it’s all how you see it. I prefer to notice the people who were shat on by the revolution in an effort to prevent it from happening again, instead of glorifying it’s propaganda and allowing the problem to perpetuate as it is and has been since yorktown. well, since a monkey stood up on it’s hind legs.

    Playing the Tea Party’s game and trying to grab the American Revolution’s rhetoric for your own can backfire.

  7. SillyWilly Says:

    and my point behind the size of the army thing is: Many of the Continental Army were disgruntled businessmen.

    If the poor cared enough, the Army would have more than likely been much larger.

  8. Mr palmer Says:

    Buying into any of the bs political rhetoric is ludicrous. All scare tactics.

    The Us will not default on it’s debt under any circumstances. Little old men and women will not stop getting their social security and Medicare checks, under any circumstances.

    Both sides are dispicable.

  9. Leo Weaver Says:

    Damn, Mr. P preachin’ the truth!

  10. voopa Says:

    negev- I think we once established that you & “my” Robyn have different last names…in fact, I’m pretty sure she doesn’t live in PDX anymore.

    Speaking of same/similar names, someone, maybe a repo guy, came by last night looking for Joe Flores. My name is John Florek. Great.

  11. Robear Says:

    Top of the mornin all!

    ‘Greensky Bluegrass’ is touring again! Just caught their show in Arcata. Heading down the coast to Sebastapol today.

    Click my name for tour info.

    Silly sez: I learned if you have more money in this country, you can have a better defense.

    @Silly, please, please, please, tell me you didn’t go half way thru law school and thru and internship before you knew this.

    I’m getting a bit concerned.

  12. Robear Says:

    *ting

  13. SillyWilly Says:

    Well.

    I’d warn you that cutting the budget has very, very real consequences.

    We’re already seeing the effects in Wisconsin.

    Walker is hammering the public defender’s budget. Prosecutors get raises. The Public Defenders do not.

    Increasing penalities for non-violent drug offenses. Privatizing the prison system while leaving upkeep on the taxpayers.

    We have to pay for the state to produce evidence. DA’s do not.

    He repealed the minimum wage raises that were passed 2 years ago. Might not effect the middle class.
    But, to the poor, that’s a HUGE deal.

    don’t be fooled. Cutting billions of dollars hurts someone. It might not be you, but someone.

  14. MrCompletely Says:

    well of course the leaders were landowning aristocrats

    and I do agree that almost all historical “patriotic” references of any kind are off point so we are on the same page there

    but I think you are trying to have it both ways and basically presenting a view that is equally distorted

    the Howard Zinn/Chomsky academic-history concept that all prior historical eras should be re-evaluated in terms of modern ethical mores is valid to a point. It needed to be done – the deconstruction of received ideas about history, which of course have been intended to reinforce the culturally conservative status quo. That’s all good.

    But to equate the two completely is I think well off base. You don’t think democracy is better than monarchy? It seems you think that the motives of the revolutionary leaders was essentially economic – fat cats fighting over the loot. That was a factor for some of them but it’s just not the case in general. It smacks of modernist projection.

    Of course Lafayette was largely helping the revolutionaries out of his own national interests. But he wasn’t a simple monarchist. He was part of a moderate group in France that tried to prevent the collapse of the country by opening up the government in a liberal sense to make it more responsive to the common people. For his time, he was a relatively liberal aristocrat and clearly not just a monarchist henchman. Judging him according to modern standards is meaningless and unfair.

    Deconstruction of history is important but has gone too far. Both sides in the Revolution were not equal. The Revolution was about more than just venal economic interests and many of the so-called founding fathers clearly did believe in democracy even if the limitations they placed on it seem strange and contradictory by modern standards.

    Pointing out the inequities that remained is utterly beside the point and reduces any historical achievement to nothing. Martin Luther King failed to return the lands that were seized from Native American tribes all across the continent, and in fact he seems to have ignored this cause entirely, so I guess he was just another establishment pawn, huh? Neither did he seem to care about gay rights or transgender issues.

  15. EL Duderino Says:

    It’s my fault Guys sorry….

    Blame it on EL Dude.

    I still believe that Tea Partiers are nothing what the colonists stood for.
    They’re scared white people afraid of change in society nothing more.

  16. Guyute711 Says:

    These pickers have something against the south Robear. That just doesn’t make sense.

  17. MrCompletely Says:

    “If the poor cared enough, the Army would have more than likely been much larger.”

    completely false historical analysis

    size of armies is always limited by economic factors. Continental army was usually broke and poor farmers can’t afford to go fight and not get paid because then their families starve

    actual size of the Continental Army averaged more in the 15k range with a lot of rolling turnover (meaning many more than that served for varying lengths of time) and was generally supplemented in whatever its current theater of ops was by local militias which were pretty much all local landowners/farmers.

    Army size is also fundamentally limited by logistics, a fact few people realize, and the logistics of the Continental Army were famously troubled. Basically, the Army was as big as it could be, based on the rate at which supplies could be delivered.

    The British Army was of course larger, being a professional imperial military, but not tremendously so. Armies of the day were simply quite small in modern terms. Large armies of over 50k or 100k (or much more) evolved during the Napoleonic and American Civil Wars.

    I’m curious if you have any evidence that a significant fraction of the army was made up by “disgruntled businessmen” (I doubt it) or even if it true how you could have insight into their motives for risking death? You assume base greed drove them – on what evidence?

    Your understandably critical views of the united states and its history have, I think, clouded your view of reality as much as anyone who accepts the canonical story. The truth lies in between conservative propaganda and the leftist academic rhetoric you seem to have accepted.

  18. MrCompletely Says:

    “They’re scared white people afraid of change in society nothing more.”

    you are absolutely right

  19. Tray Anastasio Says:

    Black board just went type II, folks

  20. Robear Says:

    “We are here to tell you, the History books lied. Also, the books about the history books, also tell lies”

    Trey before KITNO in Atlanta.

  21. SillyWilly Says:

    @Mr. C

    I think the motivation was economic. I think most issues in history are economic.

    If it was freedom, liberty, and democracy they would have done more about slavery, their own colonialism and the like.

    And as far as fair or unfair: I’m not really concerned with that. These figues take on mythical status. They rise to the level of symbol. These symbols are mis-leading and need to be deconstructed unless we decide to follow their example. They rise to the level of ideology regardless of their intentions.

    When we use the same recycled ideas and expect different results we’re nuts.

    MLK didn’t fight for those causes, but he didn’t actively perpetuate them either. How many dead native americans resulted from the decisions made directly by Washington or Jefferson and by MLK?

    Sadly, we use Thomas Jefferson and George Washington to justify our decisions and exert power instead of the alive (barely) millions who need to get food and healthcare. We hold up historical figures for their glory in military and politics, but we should value the lashed, scarred, and starving slave more.

  22. MrCompletely Says:

    sorry but I nerded out on 18th & 19th century military history for quite awhile in a fair amount of depth esp. the evolution of warfare into modern forms in the mid 19th century…so claiming that the restriction on the size of the Continental Army was based on ideological or political factors is something I know to be categorically false. it was essentially a logistical and economic restriction.

    very very puzzled by the idea of an army of disgruntled business owners though. that particular bit of revisionism is new to me, though the image is an amusing one

  23. mitch Says:

    Mr C, I wanna bail on paypal but that’ll screw some of my life up. Damn those alternatives need to come quickly.

    I def am not using it until I learn more.

  24. negev79 Says:

    “All scare tactics.” “Both sides are dispicable.”

    Ok, I usually stay out of the political discussions, as I’m sure it will get me into trouble. But I just can’t help myself.

    The media is so fond of “both sides do it” – but in this case, no, it is not both sides. It is one side, and more than that, it is House Republicans.

    The debt ceiling has been raised numerous times WITH NO CONDITIONS over the years. Reagan raised it 17 times.

    The bat shit crazy House Republicans, who Boehner cannot control, have decided to use the debt ceiling as a hostage, to get what they want. Which is cuts to benefit programs, not debt reduction.

    At this point, Harry Reid has offered them a ridiculously conservative option, one that Democrats, and especially progressives like myself, hate. But are willing to accept because we need to raise the debt ceiling. It gives Republicans everything they want – massive cuts with no increased taxes. But they won’t take it. Because now they’ve convinced themselves that Obama wants the ceiling raised through 2012 for political purposes. And, I think, because it doesn’t do what they really want – cut so called entitlement programs.

    And it’s not just Democrats saying bad things will happen if the debt ceiling is not raised. Wall Street and business leaders, generally aligned with the right, all say quit fucking with the country’s credit. Not to mention other countries have weighed in as well as the IMF. Nobody outside of the House Republicans think any good will come from default.

    I’m not an economist so my information is limited to what I’ve read/heard, just like most others. So whatever, it’s just my opinion.

    Will old people get their Social Security? Probably. But it’s not guaranteed. Will my mortgage interest rate go up? Not sure. Will I still get my unemployment check? I sure hope so. No one is exactly sure what will happen. But it will very likely be bad. That’s not scare tactics, it’s reality. Default is fucking asinine and completely avoidable, and I am pissed off that it’s even being discussed.

    So glad Congress is spending time on this instead of figuring out how to create jobs. Maybe they can throw in a few more pro-life bills that have no chance of passing, or spend more time on lightbulb choice.

  25. Mr.Miner Says:

    My beard has nothing to do with my “look” it’s more about not having to shave and it’s fun to stroke when pondering life’s difficulties

    ^ i echo mitch 100%

Leave a Reply