In this chapter, I argue that interest (or interestingness) can serve as a reliable guide to the detection of important research topics, but only under specific conditions. My argument begins by reflecting on a specific cultural difference between the natural sciences and the humanities that exemplifies the disparate roles that interestingness plays in the two domains. I explain how this specific difference is a symptom of a much more far-reaching contrast between them, and this contrast tracks differences in the tendency of something of genuine scholarly significance to emerge from the pursuit of research questions that one finds interesting. I argue that disciplines whose members do not agree on a large corpus of substantive claims — in short, disciplines in which consensus is a rarity, if it exists at all — do not function as intellectual communities capable of cultivating a causal link between something’s being interesting and something’s being important.

The transformation of Beach’s reputation from an almost-forgotten relic of a bygone era to one of the most highly regarded American Romantic composers provides a case study in reception history. Her “renaissance” resulted from determined advocacy on two fronts: scholarly research and musical performance. In scholarship, the University of New Hampshire and the Library of Congress have assembled formidable archival collections, while Adrienne Fried Block and a bevy of dissertation writers have worked to shed light on Beach’s life and works through publications and conferences. In the performance realm, pianists Virginia Eskin, Mary Louise Boehm, and Joanne Polk have worked tirelessly to introduce her music to the public in concerts and recordings. Several recent documentary films confirm her appeal as a subject and her status in American cultural history.

Explains the difference between a dissertation and a book and suggests ways to revise a dissertation for publication as a book and/or articles.

A survey of dissertations on Strauss reveals trends that emerged over time in terms of topics and methodologies that captured the interest of emerging scholars as well as the geographic locations and eras that produced the most research. Yet Strauss scholarship is not merely defined by the issues it addresses and questions it puts forward, but also by those it ignores or unwittingly pushes to the margins of discussion. After assessing the past, this chapter proposes topics and approaches largely absent in existing Strauss scholarship, many of which have been more thoroughly explored in related fields. While far from comprehensive, this discussion points to potentially fruitful paths for future research: the Lieder, his influence on contemporaries, his role as Kapellmeister and administrator, his material possessions, and his relationships with figures trusted to construct his legacy.