<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title> &#187; annn quin</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.eugenelim.com/tag/annn-quin/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.eugenelim.com</link>
	<description>eugene lim&#039;s reading diary</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 16:49:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>three by ann quin</title>
		<link>http://www.eugenelim.com/2008/09/17/three-by-ann-quin/</link>
		<comments>http://www.eugenelim.com/2008/09/17/three-by-ann-quin/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2008 17:55:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>eugene</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[...]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[annn quin]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eugenelim.com/?p=51</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[a fascinating but subtly disappointing book, ann quin&#8217;s THREE is a formally radical novel. arguably more daring in form than her contemporary b. s. johnson&#8211;with whom she&#8217;s often lumped partly because they committed suicide in the same year&#8211;she&#8217;s here also more cagey and unfortunately more predictable.
the style innovations are daring. the book consists of several [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignleft" style="float: left; margin: 10px;" src="http://www.dalkeyarchive.com/images/book/cover/57/three.jpg?1207918611" alt="" width="182" height="276" />a fascinating but subtly disappointing book, ann quin&#8217;s THREE is a formally radical novel. arguably more daring in form than her contemporary b. s. johnson&#8211;with whom she&#8217;s often lumped partly because they committed suicide in the same year&#8211;she&#8217;s here also more cagey and unfortunately more predictable.</p>
<p>the style innovations are daring. the book consists of several modes: a line-breaking poem-like stream of consciousness; a fast-cutting, alternating POV style that reminded me of <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1089970.6_2_95" target="_blank">donald breckenridge&#8217;s <em>6/2/95</em></a>; and, reminiscent of both sarraute and gaddis, a skillful use of dialogue alone to reveal character.</p>
<p>and yet this book, which focuses on the bizarre love triangle of one airless bourgeois marriage and an interloping free-spirit femme fatale, somehow rang hollow. maybe because it was unclear how much of it was a critique of the malaise of middle-class marriage and how much of it was a self-pitying confessional narrative <em>from</em> that state. or: somehow it&#8217;s central content&#8211;which did seem central, not auxiliary&#8211;crippled the serious play of its language games. so i was left with a dull feeling, a disappointment at unfulfilled potential.</p>
<p>course i could be wrong. and the destabilized, unreliable narrative and narrators might have hidden reward which alluded me. plan to try her BERG soon down the line. despite what disappointed&#8211;another review called its style a &#8220;muted lyricism&#8221;&#8211;it&#8217;s definitely worth checking out.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.pavilion.co.uk/star/AQ.html" target="_blank">a good overview of her work.</a></p>
<p>and, from an interview quoted <a href="http://www.dalkeyarchive.com/article/show/52" target="_blank">here</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p><a href="http://www.dalkeyarchive.com/article/show/52" target="_blank"><span class="description">&#8220;Form interests me, and the merging of content and form. I want to get away from the traditional form. . . . I write straight onto my typewriter, one thousand words an hour but half will in the end be cut out. When I write the first creating parts of my book I can go on for three hours without a stop. When revising I can work up to seven hours, with breaks.&#8221;</span></a></p></blockquote>
<p><a href="http://www.dalkeyarchive.com/catalog/show/57" target="_blank">buy from dalkey</a> or <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/45958248&amp;referer=brief_results" target="_blank">find at your local library.</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.eugenelim.com/2008/09/17/three-by-ann-quin/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
