I don't remember at this remove in what order I read them. It's possible I read Huckleberry Hashimoto first and then found the earlier books. The first two were basically comedy routines that couldn't have been performed on TV; Huckleberry Hashimoto was an account of Douglas's 1963 trip to Japan with his (third) wife, Reiko and their rambunctious sixteen-month-old son Bobby. They went by way of Tahiti and Hawaii, largely by ocean liner. Bobby was, Douglas informs us,
sixteen months old when we started out. Reiko was twenty-seven and I was forty-eight. When we got back home he was nineteen months, Reiko was still twenty-seven, and I was a hundred and three [9-10].In fact, Douglas seems to have told a little white lie here. According to his Wikipedia entry, he was born in 1908, which would mean he was 55 in 1963. (According to her obituary in the New York Times, Reiko was born in 1936, so she was 27 when they went on that fateful trip.) But the marriage seems to have been successful -- they remained together for the rest of Douglas's life.
I enjoyed the book this time around, and was surprised by how many of the situations and gags had stayed with me. What I noticed on this reading was the number of references to homosexuals. It's been a frequent complaint of many homophobes that although we are a small minority, we still insist on talking about ourselves all the time - you know, the "the love that dared not speak its name" routine. There is some truth about this, though we're not any more obsessed with our sex lives than heterosexuals are about theirs. But what I find interesting is how obsessed with homosexuals many heterosexuals are. Douglas is not terribly bad, really -- he doesn't fuss and fume hysterically, he sticks to the neutral term "homosexual" for the most part -- but he does keep mentioning us, more than our minuscule numbers would seem to justify.
For example, early in the voyage Douglas catalogues some of the characters he saw on board:
... I saw Miss Ethel Murdock and Mr. Peter Corbin enjoying a glass of beer (their eighteenth) under a rear table in the Outrigger Bar. (Miss Murdock is a forty-five-year-old third-grade teacher, with more than just a suggestion of a moustache, in search of "new experiences." Mr. Corbin is a homosexual who didn't realize that Miss Murdock wasn't Pancho Villa.) [27].Then, on the way to Tahiti:
This particular deck steward also told me that if I was going to write anything about Tahiti in my new book, to check up on the stories concerning a certain movie actor, who had made a picture there. The stories all pertained to the fact that he was a homosexual. I told him that that's what they said about everybody in show business, that they were either homosexuals or communists.It's hard to sort out Douglas's commentary from the steward's in this story, so I'm not going to try. I think Douglas was a bit more sophisticated than he let on, for once he got to Tahiti he reported
He said, "Jesus -- I didn't know he was a communist, too!"
I said, "I didn't say that -- besides, what proof has anyone got that this actor is a homo?"
He said, because all the Tahitians called him a "mahu" which is Tahitian for "faggot" and also this actor in making this movie (which was about Tahiti) insisted that all of his "boys" be in it, and when he didn't get his way he stamped his sandaled foot and swished off the set into his thatched hut where he sat around in his muu-muu and sulked and pouted and moued for three days. Something had to give, so finally the producer agreed that his "boys" could appear in the trailer for the film, if not in the film itself. This seemed to satisfy the movie star and he emerged from his hut, his lip still a little Jackie Cooperish, but more or less ready to continue making the movie. In all fairness to this movie actor, I did check up on him when I got to Tahiti and the consensus was unanimous -- he's a fag [47-48].
the penchant the Tahitians have for sensational gossip, one facet being that according to everybody on the island everybody else is queer. Also, everybody that comes to the island is either queer or double-gaited -- or both. (For those of you who are not familiar with the term "double-gaited," it means a homosexual who is happily married and the father of six children, but who is madly in love with the boy next door.) [90]I found this pretty funny, actually. It reminded me of the stories Mark Padilla told in his book on male hustlers in the Dominican Republic, who would mention "to me that one or another of their peers was known to 'dar el culo' (give their ass) on occasion, which often produced much hilarity on the part of the storyteller." Padilla didn't draw the connection himself, but he also reported that some of the same young men who told him that other guys would steal from their clients, turned out to be thieves themselves. I suspect, then, that at least some of the Tahitians who gossiped -- no doubt with "much hilarity" -- about the predilections of their fellows and of tourists were sounding him out to see if he might be available and interested. (The same might have been true of the steward.) Douglas may even have realized it; who knows?
There were a couple of passing references to homosexuals later in the book (see page 122 if you ever read it), but you get the idea. Douglas wasn't complaining about homosexuals everywhere, trying to take over, which puts him ahead of many his more highbrow peers in those days; he was just showing how worldly he was. And to give him credit, he was also genuinely interested in Japan, got along with Reiko's family, and picked up more Japanese than most gaijin who married Japanese women seem to have troubled to do. His account of staying with Reiko's family -- her father was a Buddhist priest, by the way -- in Hiroshima is pretty sensitive for the era. He gets comedy out of their stay in Japan, but no more than he does of everything else, and I liked him overall. There were other books by other writers that I read in those days that disturbed and frightened me by their handling of homosexuality; but Douglas' treatment made no impression on me, and I went on reading his books happily for years afterward.
So let me conclude with a story that I found rather charming:
The last thing I remembered as I drifted off that first night was the incident of the dignified little old Japanese gentleman and the electric-eye door at the hotel in Kyoto. Every time he left the hotel or entered it, the electric eye would fling open the door for him. And every time he would stop and bow to it [166].