Reviewed by: Nineteenth-Century British Music Studies, volume 2 Leanne Langley (bio) Nineteenth-Century British Music Studies, volume 2, edited by Jeremy Dibble and Bennett Zon; pp. xvi + 325. Aldershot and Burlington: Ashgate, 2002, £55.00, $99.95. Economic retrenchment in British academic music publishing might so easily have militated against this book's appearance; so too might wider skepticism about the value of printed conference proceedings, in addition to the usual problem of selling nineteenth- century Britain to a majority of musicologists—those more interested in, say, Antonio Vivaldi or Edgard Varèse. But here it is, against the odds, as the second volume in an ongoing series. The book contains twenty short chapters, all given as papers at the second biennial Conference on Music in Nineteenth-Century Britain at the University of Durham in 1999. Essay topics range from source problems, composers, and musical works to institutions, performers, and the interaction of music with other arts in Britain or Ireland. Far from pulling the plug on its music list, as the Oxford office of Oxford University Press has done, for example, Ashgate has been stepping up the voltage, notably— incredibly—in nineteenth-century British studies, under the editorship of Bennett Zon. Given this background of enterprise and rare opportunity, one might imagine that this volume would itself be advancing remarkable new work—challenging, revealing, well- grounded. Since these selected papers make up only a third of the number presented at Durham (some of the others being published elsewhere), they might well be assumed to be among the strongest. The biennial conferences have clearly excited interest and camaraderie among many scholars traditionally marginalized in mainstream musicology. But wait—appearances can be deceiving. This book is in fact more interesting for what it unwittingly reveals about the conflicted state of British academe, fashions in music scholarship, and current attempts to rebrand nineteenth-century Britain than for the bulk of its contents. To be sure, there are four or five excellent essays here, and a few [End Page 349] more that show command of fascinating material. Yet many others have such a weak grasp of period and place, or so clearly fail to draw any important or even coherent historical, critical, or musical conclusions—none of this helped by dilettante editing—that readers may wonder what the hype is about, what the special support is intended to achieve. In the end, the single most remarkable thing about the book is that Ashgate thought it worthy of publication at all (or republication: major portions of three chapters were already previously published). This raises questions not only about the direction and editorial management of their much-vaunted "Music in Nineteenth-Century Britain" series, which includes monographs as well as three volumes to date of Nineteenth-Century British Music Studies, but also, more importantly, about future work in this unfolding field. To cast doubt over a book's making is not to propose its dismissal, however. This one will be found on library shelves next to others in the series and it will be consulted. The text is divided into five named parts which represent a fair sampling of Durham themes—church music, opera and oratorio, reception and performance, analysis and the history of analysis, art and poetry. John Harper's chapter, drawn from his keynote address, is an authoritative summary, broadly conceived, of the revival of monastic music in nineteenth-century England. It is a secluded topic far from the real world of most music activity, but he makes clear the path of Victorian chant scholarship in both Roman and Anglican traditions and argues sensibly for monastic culture to be studied whole—including liturgical reform, music, and buildings. Jean Marie Hoover's essay "Constructing Ireland: Culture and Politics in Stanford's Shamus O'Brien" is more focused but equally impressive. Weaving political history and symbols of cultural nationalism with analysis of creative intent and contemporary criticism, she shows how Charles Villiers Stanford crafted a double-voiced opera whose ambiguity initially contributed to its success in both England and Ireland, in 1896, but later hindered claims for it as the first opera in a new English-language tradition. Therese Ellsworth contributes a careful and...