Katherine K. Preston, George Frederick Bristow (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2020). viii+204 pp. Cloth $110; Paper $29.95.

Abstract

alsowho is included and excluded from academic conversations. To be clear, I do not wish to place blame onLacombe or anyofmy colleagues for this; I see this instead as a structural concern, albeit one that became visible with particular clarity while considering this book. In privileging archives as a precondition for determining originality and value, we quietly push to the side thosewho cannot access such resources due to disability, funds or distance, and we thus inadvertently create an increasingly homogeneous, wealthy, privileged, abled andwhite norm for scholars in our field. This has likely biased our field, but it can be overcome. It helps, for example, thatmassive digitization projects like Bibliothèque nationale’s Gallica have made an ever-growing number of sources from Paris available remotely. Such projects, however, continue to prioritize better-known materials whose scholarly value is readily apparent rather than materials whose potential may yet be unrecognized. This is especially true of material that remains uncatalogued. Thus – for now, at least – scholars able to consult materials in situ hold an advantage within a discipline that favours such archival work. Projects that embrace the globalization and creolization of archival work will also help: Jann Pasler’s current European Research Council project could prove a crucial litmus test here, just as Claire Rowden and Richard Langham Smith’s Carmen Abroad has already created an excellentmodel for howa project withworldwide aspirations might look. Beyond this, crafting scholarly space for critical rereadings and reconsiderations of pieces, practices and evidence (as happens constantly in the study of literature) could bring critical minds from more diverse backgrounds into the fold without demanding archival access as a precondition for academic value. Thus this collection does more than just highlight and celebrate the exemplary work on nineteenth-century French opera that has been conducted so far. Looking ahead, it also indicates both implicitly and explicitly the innovative work that remains. May it serve as a firm foundation for new scholars whose work will explore horizons we can barely see.