It has been a while since the last comprehensive study about the pianist-composer Edward MacDowell (1860–1908) appeared. Yet, as is true for many other U.S. composers and topics in music related to the long nineteenth century, new research and new approaches are necessary—in fact, overdue—in order to update our knowledge and trigger further discussion. That Douglas Bomberger's biography of an American composer is integrated into a series of publications prominently labeled “The Master Musicians: The Lives and Music of the Great Composers,” tells a story of its own. MacDowell is the first and, to date, only U.S. composer in this series, which hitherto has been dedicated to established European composers, ranging from Claudio Monteverdi to Arnold Schoenberg. Is there hope that more volumes on U.S. composers will follow, side by side with Franz Schubert, Franz Liszt, Pyotr Il'yich Tchaikovsky and others? If so, this would set a sign of nobilization for research on American music: it would indicate that U.S. music history is no longer a niche part of musicology, but an essential part of a global music history composed of interdependent counterparts and contexts.

MacDowell's classification as a “Master Musician” in this series also sheds light on the nimbus of this particular composer, whom many during his lifetime hailed as the U.S. composer. Bomberger's study oscillates between the narrative of a biography and analytical reflections on parts of MacDowell's music. His main goal is to help find a fresh view on MacDowell, whom he introduces as “the most iconic and enigmatic composer of nineteenth-century American composers” (ix). One major point of his research is to lift the veil of the enigma a bit more and, supported by subtle and careful psychological reflections, outline a portrait that reflects the strengths and the weaknesses of a person who, probably more than any other U.S. musician, was the source of legends. To accomplish this task, Bomberger focuses on two areas: the development of MacDowell's personality and the correction of false information about him. The latter, in many cases, is made possible by the evaluation of thus far unknown or (temporarily) inaccessible material, including selections from his extensive correspondence with family members, friends, colleagues, and business partners (e.g., the Leipzig-based publisher Breitkopf & Härtel).

Bomberger's factual corrections encompass questions such as MacDowell's birth date, his relation to Teresa Carreño (who was never really his teacher), Liszt's support of the young U.S. composer, and details about his complicated, persistent, and grueling negotiations with publishers. Several entries in well-known dictionaries and encyclopedias will need to be updated now—my own in Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart included! The well-researched chapter about MacDowell's time at the Paris Conservatory and, later, in Germany is an excellent example of why U.S. music history is an indispensable part of music history in general, music history that must be seen as one history. The stories around the procedure of the Paris Conservatory's famous “concours,” about the people involved and the dynamics of the competition, sometimes read like part of a detective story. They also intertwine with so many other topics, including research on composers such as Antoine François Marmontel, Gabriel Pierné, Camille Saint-Saëns, and Claude Debussy—just to name the most well-known—that this book should be the new reference text for anybody doing research on topics connected to the Paris Conservatory in the later nineteenth century. Bomberger's remarks on Conservatory policy for the admission of foreign students might even help shed light on earlier periods.

MacDowell's mental problems and early death are another cryptic part of his biography, one that contributed significantly to the forming of legends around the composer. Bomberger's investigation of these matters again reveals meticulous research. He delineates MacDowell's personal disposition, which was affected by two characteristics: depressive phases—mostly in the light-deprived winter months—and, because of his early socialization in a Quaker-affiliated culture of silence, a lack of communication skills to facilitate conflict resolution. Both personality traits led to behaviors that were later interpreted as signs of a mental disease. Yet according to documentation about the symptoms of his final illness, and especially of his medical treatment, the composer exhibited the symptoms resulting from bromide poisoning, due to the long-term prescription and use of bromide to treat his insomnia.

Certainly, one of the topics at the core of this study is whether and how MacDowell fit (and fits) into concepts of “American music.” Bomberger discloses how much MacDowell himself, like several of his U.S. colleagues, opposed all-American concerts because he did not want to be classified only as a U.S. composer. Much like his contemporary George W. Chadwick, for example, MacDowell wanted to be heard as an individual, as a composer with a voice of his own, one who was judged in the context of international approaches to music and on par with European composers, without “jingoistic nationalism” (232). However, accepting the praise of being regarded as the “greatest of American composers,” as, for example, Rupert Hughes put it in 1900 in Famous American Composers (34f.), raises questions about one's personal and cultural identity: How to be American? MacDowell's ambivalence shows itself in the fact that, in spite of his opposition to them, he profited from the all-American concerts, where his music was promoted and, subsequently, widely discussed. He kept his distance from the public discussion concerning Antonin Dvořák's statements about what should make U.S. music distinctively American; however, despite his disdain for the Czech composer (and the hype about him), he included “American” references and associations in compositions such as the “Indian” Suite for Orchestra, op. 48, premiered in 1896; Woodland Sketches, op. 51 (1896), for piano; and New England Idyls, op. 62 (1901–2), also for piano. Nonetheless, the question of identity remains crucial. When idealizing “optimistic vitality and undaunted tenacity of spirit” as U.S. traits that should be “echoed in American music” (quoted, p. 196), MacDowell comes closest to an affirmative and aesthetic approach towards “American music.”

Maybe his own ambiguity about his identity, pianist or composer, cosmopolitan or American, made it difficult for MacDowell to participate in networks dedicated to questions about U.S. music. This was, as Bomberger documents, certainly exacerbated by his poorly developed communication skills. When, in 1896, MacDowell was appointed Professor of Music at Columbia University, he had the chance to become the standard bearer of music in higher education. Unfortunately, the idea of creating an interdisciplinary, top-class music department, which might have served as a future model for musical training in academia, did not work out: MacDowell would have needed open-minded university managers and executive partners for this goal, partners who would have good-naturedly balanced the disequilibrium between his brilliant idea and his shortcomings in communication.

Bomberger's monograph is the new reference book on MacDowell. If one were to look for flaws, one would find hardly any. This book is an exciting, often captivating read with well-chosen musical examples and well-written analyses. However, it would have been helpful to be able to read the original texts whenever French or German sources were quoted, not just their translations. A couple of times, information given from sources seems to raise further questions: Was someone like Chadwick really superficial and not correcting his parts—or was it just MacDowell saying so? Were Arthur Foote, Horatio Parker, Arthur Whiting, and others from the Boston bunch as uninteresting and stubborn as MacDowell put it? Was Leipzig, a place otherwise admired in the nineteenth century for its numerous green spaces, really flat and gray, as Templeton Strong claimed? The book also helps shape bigger, more urgent questions: How do we deal with hierarchies, especially if a composer is so often labeled “the greatest” in the nineteenth century? Although it represents progress when a U.S. composer is included in a “Master Composers” series, are there other masters in this generation as well? This question is one of those demanding discussion now, thanks to this biography, which has helped shape them more concisely.

The “extras” of this book, which comprise an extended timeline, a works list, and short biographies of its more important (and sometimes lesser known) “dramatis personae,” increase its value. It is fascinating reading and a useful book for study purposes, if not, by design, a textbook. Bomberger succeeds in making a strong argument for the study of a U.S.-born composer of nineteenth-century music as an indispensable part of global music history.