Just a random theory here....the thread about which was more important (10-31-13 or 14) to Phish's career arc got me thinking.

Now that we have definitive evidence that, at least for now, the '14 Halloween jams aren't a one-off thing, we can all wildly speculate on what happens if they stick around for real. Having solid instrumentals in the repertoire seems to me like it will be an incredibly valuable tool for setlist flow. If they segue into a new song, then you can pretty much kiss the original jam goodbye (ripcord or not) with rare exceptions like MPP. In terms of setlist flow, if the next song doesn't really have a jam attached then there is the danger of the all too familiar jukebox Phish.

Instrumentals don't seem to entail the same kind of commitment as to what constitutes the next 'song.' Did they play Manteca or just tease it? It seems like instead of an either-or disjunction between original song and next, there could be shades of back and forth where it all helps the original jam find new direction. After hitting the heights of [big jam> jamlet / stop / next movement] in Fall '13 I felt like my kind of Phish was back. This was the most important element of the Phish I grew up on (the consistent 20-minuters), but already we saw past the midway point of the summer's tour that Phish wasn't just going to follow this pattern and remain satisfied.

They were already deconstructing that immensely satisfying setlist pattern, and it was fair game which quarter of the show would deliver the goods. It seemed that they were going after the jamming when it felt right and not when the setlist dictated. They were also toying with a more '93 style seguefest where fluidity was king rather than time jammed.

Last night offered us a glimpse into the possibilities of returning to that style of organic flowing sets instead of us all simply wishing a jam would go big and if it didn't then that was the end of the story. At the tail end of Light (like so many other Lights this year), after they went abstract there were just no forceful themes put forward by anyone until Trey hit the chord that signals the 'Dogs' key. 'Dogs' is not officially listed on the setlist, partially because what qualifies as more than a tease is singing a verse or two in the right key/tempo of a new song. They were playing 'Dogs' to my ears, pure and simple. But was it a new song? The fact that its even arguable suggests that they can bounce back and forth with musical ideas, the instrumental a new launching pad, and maybe even synthesize the original jam with the new instrumental direction, creating a sort of hybrid oozing with creativity.

IF Phish decides to stick with these instrumentals, I think they've unlocked the door to a whole new method of delivering creativity. The Lengthwise/Twist/Manteca craziness seemed to me to be a natural extension of the kinds of possibilities this style of thinking about setlist construction provides. I can't wait to see if this stuff sticks around for good and I'm thinking it will.