Phriday Phish Phry

By Blake Townsley

Howdy folks. It’s a pretty busy Friday here in Chicago, as you may have heard. Or probably not, since I’m guessing not too many of you are big hockey fans. So for those of you that aren’t, and even those who already know, the Chicago Blackhawks won the Stanley Cup on Wednesday in Philadelphia. Kind of a big deal since, like most Chicago sports teams, the Blackhawks had the longest active streak of Stanley Cup failure. Not as bad as the Cubs mind you, but still several decades long. The victory parade is today down in the Loop, and I’m headed out as soon as I can email this to the PickV powers-that-be. But that’s not the only big thing happening in Chicago today.

Phish is in town, and for the first time in ten years or so, I’m gonna go check out the scene in the parking lot, then hit up the show. But we’re not here to talk about my plans for the weekend, right? So let’s put the Phish phenomenon under the microscope for a bit, and see if we can figure out why a band so under the radar has managed to succeed for as long as it has. Oh man, this is gonna be the easiest thing I’ve ever written. Are you ready for a revelation? Because I’ve got something really good here. I’m not expecting a Grammy for investigative journalism or anything, but I think you’re gonna like where this ends up. Prepare yourselves for wisdom. Phish is the second coming of the Grateful Dead. Boom! Problem solved, microscope turned off and stored, column over. I’m outta here. Wait, what’s that you’re saying from the cheap seats? You don’t log on to read half-baked accusations, obvious hypotheses which are poorly supported? That’s just a lazy conclusion from someone who doesn’t understand what the band is all about?

My first question is, how did you hear about this column, and thanks for joining us today for the first time. I hope you’ll come back. Fine, you’re right. Let’s talk about it. Let’s look at it for a moment, shall we? Straight from the Grateful Dead playbook. -Jam band with no significant radio airplay or monumental album sales? Check. -Devoted following of hippies with spare time on their hands to follow the band’s tours, a rabid obsession with hearing different versions of the same songs over and over, and a predilection for consciousness-altering drugs? Check. -Beloved lead guitarist with not-so-secret heroin addiction which interferes with the band’s ability to do its job? Check. Sounds like the Grateful Dead to me, check ya later, Bill and Ted, I’m going to see a parade. But wait a minute, how could Rolling Stone name Phish the Most Important Band of the 90s? Why are all those fans so devoted that even years later shows sell out, and people anxiously await the tour dates near them? What gives? The first question is this, what is so great about Phish? I guess the first answer that comes to mind for me is musical virtuosity. Every single member of that band is a world-class musician of exacting technicality, with the possible exception of Fishman. You’d have to ask a drummer about that one, though I will be on the lookout tonight. That’s the first big difference between Phish and the Dead. From a composition standpoint all the way through performance, Phish has long harbored ambitions much grander than anything the Dead achieved, or even tried to achieve.

Much of the band’s work borders on the operatic, without the pesky problem of operatic vocals. The Grateful Dead certainly never wrote and performed a series of songs written as a final project for a college degree in music. Phish was the logical next step in the evolution of what the Dead started. The Grateful Dead didn’t have a blueprint to follow, they just happened to create it while they were exploring the confluence between mind-altering substances and jazz, rock, country, bluegrass and whatever the hell they felt like. Phish had the advantage of that blueprint’s existence, but instead of copying it, absorbed it, applied a tremendous amount of intellectualism and talent to the endeavor, and succeeded in bettering the Dead in almost every way, musically. Wow, that even feels sacrilegious to write. I’m not suggesting that the Grateful Dead weren’t tremendously talented, or non-intellectuals, or even that their songs are somehow of lesser quality.

Phish just had the balls and musical ability to take an iconic band’s legend, and make it inimitably their own in a way that won’t be duplicated any time soon. So while I’m never going to fully enjoy tonight’s show as much as I would one by the Allman Brothers or Black Crowes, for a whole list of reasons too lengthy for today’s discussion, I guess I have to admit that Phish impresses me. There, I said it. I guess I’m going to have to spend the rest of the day learning how to tie-dye t-shirts and make grilled cheese sandwiches on the engine block of some trust fund hippie’s hybrid SUV. Wish me luck.

(Credits: Image by greenbk)