Like so many books these days, Ali Smith’s “Gliff” presents an immediate challenge to a reader expecting a traditionally formatted narrative: the text isn’t justified. This may be a small thing, but it can throw you at first – that is, until you get used to it. And the way she handles conversation (no quotation marks), and starts some new lines without capital letters…
Playing with format is undoubtedly a modern ‘thing’. Gimmickry rules, OK? Is it pursued to differentiate narratives? To make them stand out? To compensate for the quality of the writing?
No compensation is needed in Smith’s case of course (as those of you who have read her four ‘seasons’ novels will know). “Gliff” is a great read – and would still be a great read if it was laid out conventionally; there is no deficiency in the words for which variation in format needs to compensate. Laid out conventionally the story might be even more menacing, more Kafkaesque. Indeed, I’d even say that there is a danger of losing a reader early on as they come to terms with the formatting style presented to them. (I’m reminded of Anna Burns’ “Milkman” – another great book.)
“Gliff” may be disturbing in a dystopian way, and Smith may not answer all the questions she poses, but you should certainly give it go.
Ian Gouge - Writer 