I believe Gumbrecht is trying to develop a new way of writing about history. He attempts to change the way history has been thought about traditionally, as a “homogenous picture,” (Gumbrecht xii) and perhaps one-dimensional. Instead, Gumbrecht wants the reader to feel like they are literally living in the year 1926, presented as experiencing a “historical environment,” (Gumbrecht xi) while reading. He also raises the idea that it may be impossible to “make present again, in a text, worlds that existed before,” (Gumbrecht xv), but he tries in a different and refreshing way. He immerses the reader in prose that is story like, sparking one’s imagination quickly. He sprinkles simple and lively topics throughout the book, allowing the reader to go to what they want to read about, ignoring the usual chronological nature of a history text. Gumbrecht creates a world, tells stories, and immerses the reader into 1926 instead of spitting facts chronologically, dragging the reader along piece by piece. He knows that his total picture at the end might not be a “coherent and homogenous picture,” but is instead offered “synchronically” (Gumbrecht xii). I think that Gumbrecht’s model is very useful for music historians because of how differently he writes. No matter what one might take out of his style, it is definitely refreshing and will at the very least trigger questions and new thoughts. He gives readers a more interesting reading experience, and gives a little more life to what might be dry material. He doesn’t necessarily think that his book will cause a huge shift and create a following, but it’s valuable in what it does bring to the table.