Many if not most literary journals are predictably similar quarter to quarter; they have a certain aesthetic the reader gets to know, and contain a mix of prose and poetry -- rarely art, drama, criticism, or graphic literature. Not so for Alaska Quarterly Review, which distinguishes itself not just by its general (high) quality but with inventiveness. Past issues have focused on Alaska Native writing, narratives that were not identified as fact or fiction, and special sections ("hidden Alaska," a Richard Ford interview packaged with a story and essay, conversation and selected poems from Billy Collins.) Past issues have also included varieties of creative nonfiction and memoir, plays, photo essays, expert essays on translation and language, "faux interviews," and novellas as well as short stories. Very often there have been guest editors -- especially for the poetry sections. It is much to editor Ron Spatz's credit that, after 27 years, AQR is always celebrating new and expanded literary expression. [Read a 49 Writers interview of Ron Spatz which covers many of those 27 years, here.]

The current issue (vol. 27, no. 1 and 2, spring and summer 2010) is no exception. Here, the special feature is "innovative fiction" assembled by guest editor Amy Hempel, herself an outstanding practitioner of short fiction. As if that's not enough, the "nonfiction" section is equally special -- a 79-page manual called "How to Write a Good Sentence," by Arnold G. Nelson, a 91-year-old retired English professor. And then there's the poetry section.

But let me take these one at a time, in the order they appear.

There are 21 stories in the "innovative fiction" section, some by well-published writers, some by first-time writers, some by writers better known as poets. (A feature of AQR that I appreciate is the short bio note that appears at the bottom of the first page of each piece of writing, which prevents having to fumble to a back section to learn about the writer.) Hempel said, in her introduction, that she looked for writing that would be new to readers, but also new to the writers -- something they had not tried before. There's a lot of very good writing in this section, but I'm afraid I have to say that I didn't find much that awed me with its "newness." Prose poems -- not new. Segmented writing -- not new. Monologue -- not new. All dialogue -- not new. Obscurity -- neither new nor particularly desirable. I suppose my personal definition of good writing includes, even requires, innovation -- the presentation of whatever the narrative is in some fresh way-and so to single out innovation as a particular sought-after quality can lead to disappointment, at least in my case.

The stories I ended up liking the best might have been among the more traditional ones, in the end. Jamie Quatro's "Up 58 South" concerns a woman dying of cancer -- a hackneyed (unfortunately) situation made remarkably fresh through character development, well-constructed scenes, and humor. Megan Mayhew-Bergman's "The Social Life of Mice" is also a traditionally constructed story, but in an odd setting: husband and wife veterinarians tend injured hounds at a bear hunt, and, in their conflicted relationship, speak to one another through their animals. Two others of my favorites are more unusual in structure and voice, and rich in surprise. Michael Ahn's "Flesh" is a short (four-page) narrative that braids three different stories in tight, fast-moving, image-filled paragraphs. Patricia Volk's "Did You See Me See You," masterfully conveys an entire relationship through a brief (one-page) first-person inquiry.