Dale Peck famously wrote that, 'Rick Moody is the worst writer of his generation.'1 Unlike Dale Peck, I'm not going to read his other books to find out. This collection is awful. Who told Moody he could write? How did he manage to get published? What's with all the italics?
This really is bad writing. I bought this after watching the film version of one of these stories - "The Mansion on the Hill." Not sure what the movie is called, but it stars Michelle Pfeifer. I thought that the film was a moving snapshot of the nature of grief - and here I can see where one of the above reviewers is coming from. The problem is that Moody can't write. He's got some nice ideas, but he's no writer. It's like he writes down any old stuff that comes into his head, with absolutely no regard for the story. His stories read like a writer's notebook, before drafting, before editing, when the writer is just splurging out random thoughts, or freewriting. Most writers would be embarrassed to let people even see this stuff, if it was part of their working journal. Moody publishes it. He's like an anti-craftsman. Think about everything Hemingway or Steinbeck does well. Now imagine the opposite. That's what Moody's prose looks like.
His books might be evidence of the truism that bad books sometimes make good movies. I enjoyed the Ice Storm too, but after reading this, I would rather spend an evening sitting alone in a darkened room that read another novel by Moody.
Dale Peck also wrote that"all of Moody's books [are] pretentious, muddled, derivative, bathetic.' I agree, and I've got nothing else to add.
1. The New Republic (online) [...]