This month brings about exciting news elsewhere in the music blogosphere as our esteemed colleague and friend, Mr. Miner, of the wildly popular Mr. Miner’s Phish Thoughts blog embarks upon his first foray into the world of book publishing. His project, entitled Mr. Miner’s Phish Thoughts: An Anthology By a Fan for the Fans, includes a collection of writings spanning Phish’s comeback era, new essays on the band, full-color high-definition photography and a cover designed by popular poster artist AJ Masthay.
[Design by AJ Masthay]
To celebrate the execution of this grand scale vision, we invited Mr. Miner to share his thoughts and advice on writing as part of our long-running Writer’s Workshop segment. For fans planning to catch the Phish New Year’s Run in New York City, Mr. Miner will be hosting a book signing and both pre- and post-show parties on December 29th at the Irish Times, just a stones throw away from Madison Square Garden. Be sure to stop by, say hi, and check out the new book.
Hidden Track: Let’s start at the beginning. If I’m not mistaken, you started your music writing career on a more traditional route, writing reviews and conducting interviews with all different bands. What was the turning point when you decided you wanted to focus your efforts on a dedicated Phish blog?
Mr. Miner: Interestingly, I started writing about music back in 2000 when I moved to San Francisco and worked at JamBase.com. At the time I began writing about all types of music, but when Phish went to Japan that summer, Mr. Miner was born. My first time reviewing Phish shows, I wrote them for JamBase from overseas. When I got home, I received countless emails, from all sorts of fans that couldn’t make it to Japan, thanking me and telling me how they could really get a sense of what happened at the shows from my writing. It was pretty awesome feedback to hear, because I’d stay up all night with friends, exploring whatever city we were in, then when people crashed, I’d hit the hotel’s business center and crank out an article strictly from memory—and people really liked them! I continued to review the rest of the summer tour and into the fall, and about half way through the fall my laptop broke. I took it as a sign to just enjoy the final part of what could have been the last tour ever.
But after Phish retired in 2000, I got into education. I worked with elementary school kids first, and then decided to get a masters degree at USF and taught US History at a public charter school in San Francisco for five years. So I definitely took a break from writing. But after five years, I decided that teaching wasn’t my calling, so I quit to start writing again. Ironically, I stopped teaching in the Spring of ’08, and before I really had any real semblance of a writing career going, I learned Phish was coming back.
When I got this news, I started my blog, Phish Thoughts, in the Summer of 2008. I got a lot of positive feedback on what I was doing—writing about the band’s past while anticipating the future. And once Hampton came around, the readership on the blog skyrocketed. So, in less than a year my Phish writing had garnered quite a readership—and it really resonated with people, which was something I hadn’t totally expected. It was during that time, between the announcement and Hampton, that I decided to exclusively write about Phish for the time being. It felt like something really positive was happening around my blog, and it was a passion I had to pursue. I wasn’t sure what would come of it at the time, but lo and behold, three years later I have a book.
But before the idea of a book even came about, a large factor that kept the blog cranking for me, was the fact that people were coming together and forming a legitimate community on my website. And once shows started in this era, those online relationships began to develop into real-life friendships. Everything seemed to be clicking and moving in the right direction, so I had to keep on the path. It felt like what I was supposed to be doing.
HT: What would you say has been your proudest piece on Mr. Miner’s Phish Thoughts to date?
MM: Wow. I’m not sure I can really even pick one out of the hundreds and hundreds of articles over the years. I think some of my favorite essays are the ones that cut to the essence of the Phish experience; those intangible aspects of seeing the band that are so elusive for the vocabulary. I collected the best of these pieces as the first section of essays in my book, after the introduction—“The Intangibles.” These are pieces that after reading, many people have told me—“Yes! That is exactly what I’ve been trying to explain to my friends (or wife) forever, but just never knew how. I could never think of the words!” To me, if I can even approach describing the magic of Phish with words so that others can share in that understanding, I think that’s pretty cool.
PAGE TWO = The Objectivity Balancing Act and Dealing with Criticism
HT: One thing that I think is an interesting struggle that all music writers face is balancing between being objective and critical while knowing full-well that you‘re a fan of these musicians you write about everyday. Obviously, this is heightened in your case, given that you focus on one band in particular, so you can‘t go biting the hand that feeds you so-to-speak. Have you grown more comfortable dishing out the bad with the good as you’ve grown as a writer?
MM: Well, ever since I started reviewing Phish shows, I’ve never really tried to balance any line. Each and every night, I am giving my honest take of the show without worrying about how it’s going to be received. I certainly try to articulate my thoughts in an engaing and descriptive manner that any serious Phish fan would enjoy—and some nights I achieve that better than others—but when it comes down to it, the show reviews are simply my perspective. Objectivity is not something I am trying to achieve. The fact that so many read them and enjoy them, whether they agree or disagree with my opinions, is a very satisfying aspect to writing them.
In terms of writing critical things about the band, I’m not sure I ever had an issue with saying something negative about a show if that’s how I felt. If I don’t think a set, jam, or song placement worked, I will say so, because as I said, I am giving my honest opinion on the performance. But I don’t harp on the negative in my reviews. I enjoy writing—and I think fans enjoy reading—about the highlights of the shows, the most exciting jams and truly engaging music that went down.
Therefore, I focus on the positive aspects of a show as opposed to constantly highlighting faults or shortcomings. This is not to make the review seem “fluffier” in any way, but what’s the point of noting all the licks Trey missed in a song or show? Unless, of course, the negative aspects are so glaring that it affects the contour of the entire performance; in that case, I’ll say so. But the bottom line is that Phish is such a positive experience for me, and on most nights, I leave the show glowing with plenty of highlights to discuss, and those are what’s fun for me to write about.
HT: Similarly, one thing we all face in writing about Phish is you get a particularly harsh dose of is criticism from other fans and readers, as everyone thinks they know more than the next guy about the band. Does it ever get to you to see people criticizing your writing or the blog in comments or on Phantasy Tour or wherever it may be?
MM: Because Phish is something so many people feel so passionately about and connect to in such a personal way, putting any opinion of a show out for public consumption will inevitably draw criticism from someone. I knew that would be the case from the get go. One day I’m called a fluffer, the next I’m a called a cynic; it’s all quite amusing on one level. But to be honest, in willingly putting myself out there each and every night, the feedback has always been far more positive than negative, so more than anything I’ve found the any negative emails or comments to the board as comedic asides to the overall experience. On tour, when I would wake up after writing them, I’d share any absurdly negative comments on my blog as points of comedy to my friends, so it was never something that affected me in any serious way. I don’t read PT, but I’m sure they have plenty to say!
Occasionally, people take it a bit too far, blasting me in a very personal email. But as I’ve come to realize, this is usually in the case where I write a negative slanted review, a kid had a blast at the show, and then feels that my review is in some way invalidating his experience, which, obviously, it doesn’t—it can’t. People need to remember that I’m just one person writing one opinion of the show. Again, what has been crazy to me over the years is both how many people care to read my opinion and how many people with whom it really resonates. That’s been an awesome part of the overall experience of writing about Phish.
HT: So, let’s talk about the book. What are some things longtime Mr. Miner readers can expect and what do they get in a book form that you wouldn’t get on the blog?
MM: First off, they will be able to hold a gorgeous hardcover coffee table book drenched with amazing full color photography that they will be able to get lost in for years to come. Between the design and aesthetic of the book, the photos, and the amount of writing within, I think it will be something many Phish fans will love. There’s a certain tangibility to books, especially artistic books like this one, that has started to fade away from our culture with electronic media, and I think this book provides a lasting relic about a band and a subculture that we all love so much.
Additionally, it is a volume that really chronicles a fascinating time in the lives of everyone in the Phish community. Five years after Coventry, Phish was back in our lives, and people didn’t know what to expect. The years of 2009 and 2010—the foundation for the band’s 2011 explosion—are followed in great detail in the first part of the book. The second part is organized by subject into four sections—Tours & Eras, Shows, Songs & Jams and Culture—and everything is tied together with a systems of “Connections” that enable the reader to navigate the book by topic, in whatever way he wants.
Another interesting part of the book that is brand new is its introduction. Throughout my time writing about Phish, I’ve never written a definitive essay that explains my understanding of the Phish phenomenon. I decided to do this as the introduction of the book. I called this section “What Is Phish?” and it has several subsections that go into the many aspects of the Phish experience. This essay sets forth a framework of understand with which to read all of the essays in the book. I think this will be an engaging section for fans, both new and old, to read.
PAGE THREE = The Challenges of Getting The Book Published & Best Hoods
HT: What were the biggest challenges in getting the book published?
MM: As I began to investigate getting a book published, I spoke to published authors and people in the industry, and from what everybody told me, I learned that getting a manuscript picked up by a publishing house is next to impossible these days. Some of the stories I heard were just ludicrous. Meanwhile, I had a friend who had self-published some books as a part-time business and I began to talk to her about this option. Right about that time, a friend of hers who was working for a design firm in Philly—BAJ Design—reached out to me about my project. It turns out that their head designer, Brian Jacobson, was a huge Phish fan, had heard about my project, and really wanted to collaborate. It was another case of things falling into place when you are following your heart. He had only done two books before this one and I had done zero, so it was kind of like diving into the deep end together with only a few swimming lessons. But because we both had a passion for the band and making a product that would honor their legacy in every way, it really turned out to be a great partnership.
HT: Here’s a question that I thought you would probably have an interesting viewpoint on. To what extent do you think a great Phish show is premeditated versus coming to fruition in the moment? In other words, do you think Trey decides to write a crazy setlist and the band knows going into it on a given night that they are going to blow minds or do you think the truly great ones just happen?
MM: Ya’ know, that’s the eternal question, isn’t it? Here’s my take. Sure, there may be aspects to shows that are premeditated as far as setlists go and what songs will get huge jams that night, but when the band steps on stage, great shows happen in the moment. There is no question in my mind. If Phish “decided” to play great shows, why wouldn’t they do so every night? Why wouldn’t every show be transcendent? I don’t think the guys say to each other, “Let’s make this one extra special tonight. Let’s try harder than usual. Let’s really hit ‘em in the heart tonight.” Crazy setlists don’t make great shows, transcendent improvisation makes great shows, and that is something that happens when the band is fully synced and clicking on stage. They guys are human, thus it’s only natural that this single-minded playing will happen more easily on some nights than others. But when the band really gets in the zone, like August ’93, December ’95, or Fall ’97, they— literally—get on a hot streak where this level of communication is happening more routinely and more readily than usual. The band in these instances, like an athlete, feels the flow and is firmly in the zone and, subsequently, great Phish shows happen more regularly. Not to overuse the sports analogy, but a hitter in baseball doesn’t premeditate four-hit games, they happen in the moment as a convergence of many factors. I think IT works the same way for Phish.
HT: Finally, since it is your namesake and all, let’s hear Mr. Miner’s best three Harry Hoods ever played?
MM: Well, I’m no authority, but I can tell you a few of my favorites, how bout that? Interestingly, one of my absolute favorite versions just happened in Worcester last year on 12.28.10. I find that jam to be a portrait of perfect and equitable musical communication. But for the classic versions, 12.31.93 and 12.30.95 come to mind right away. And just for kicks, though a completely different beast altogether, we’ll throw in one from post-hiatus—Charlotte, 7.25.03, one of the more unique “Hoods” you’ll ever hear.
Wait for it… Thank you Mr. Miner.
Comments
Loading comments...
Leave a Comment