Writing about music is hard. I’ve recently singled out in a different context Richard Taruskin’s 'Oxford History of Western Music' but in this work, as in his other writings, Taruskin showed himself a critical genius. It’s not enough to know a lot or even to be able to write well, it’s the understanding of what within that body of knowledge is most illuminating, most interesting and how much (or little) detail is needed to convey understanding.

The very longstanding 'Master Musicians' series, these days published by OUP has an established (and as far as OUP and its predecessors are concerned, proven) method. Some hefty dollops of biography delivered as a series of chronological facts followed by an overview of the composer’s works for the relevant period. It all apparently has to be delivered in as workmanlike a fashion as possible and digestibility, although desirable, is by no means essential (see for example Laurenz Lütteken’s virtually unreadable volume on Richard Strauss).

Eric Saylor in his new volume on Vaughan Williams has adopted this formula with gusto, applied a good deal of earnestness and scholarly pomposity and has had his text minutely examined to remove any tendency towards stylistic flair. It’s the second really disappointing book on VW I have read this month: neither a reference work nor an engaging narrative and despite Saylor’s mention in his Introduction of the book being informed by the increasing wealth of recent scholarship on VW, any potential interest here has been sieved out drop by drop. ( )