I absolutely LOVE that this is *still* a band that prompts lengthy analysis, discussion and (see above!) full-on off-the-cuff essays, and I tend to take it all in the way @waxbanks (and others) have suggested here, as a means for deepening our appreciation of the music, the moment, the ever-imminent possibility of revelation. Phish.netters (and Phish fans in general) tend to be pretty respectiful --this ain't no flame-wars-- and I love that too. (Beautiful comments, @reynardMachine).

I'll add a note about the notion of "risk" and exploration. Its not *all* about the jam, though I do agree with much that's been said about that here, both in praise and criticism. At its best, Phish's current approach emphasizes subtlety and nuance, as seen in what I've starting thinking of as "micro-jams," those intricate and beautiful jam-segment developments that fall under the 10 minute mark (several 3.0 Pipers are good examples, Worchester Roses, etc). This is (slowly) re-conditioning fans to appreciate that length isn't everthing (insert Phish @ Dick's joke here).

But Phish has an enormous catalog of gorgeous originals and compelling covers, and I want to see more "risks" like those taken at UIC I, when newer songs were treated to geniunely innovative exploration in favor of "standard" set openers and closers. And the thematic nature of that set, man o man. Hook line and sinker, you got me. Here's hoping for more of the same...