David Henry Sterry has mad writerly skills and this is certainly penned with a flourish, replete with expertly turned phrases. The book is an often flavorful and occasionally vivid memoir recounting the experiences of a teen boy prostitute in LA. Oddly, it reminded me of To Kill a Mockingbird in the sense that the writer is an adult looking back but not letting his adult voice or hindsight judgment color the voice of a naive young man in his journey of discovery about the world. Sterry interweaves non-chronological short reminiscences about his childhood -- a very boring and normal white-bread American suburban one, as it happens -- with the developing account of his indoctrination into the so-called underbelly. Sterry has the good sense to keep the snippets of childhood memories short enough to not severely impede the flow of the main narrative. The point of the remembrances is to show that anyone, any average person, can find themselves becoming a sex worker, not just people with fucked-up childhoods.
Even so, I have to admit, I think Sterry tells us more about his childhood than we need to know to make the point of contrast -- yet another account of a baby boomer childhood with all the familiar rituals and icons is really not something that adds to the extant corpus, and is too obvious a tactic to shoot fish in a barrel -- and, like the customers described in the book, I kind of want things to get down to business, since, let's face it, we all read things like this with prurient intent, even when we claim to be social scientists or some such. Sure we read Playboy for the articles, but only secondarily. I check out the bush on the centerfold before I see what Norman Mailer has to say about law and order. In other words, I want to read about a sex worker, not about a kid who eats hot dogs, cheers Mickey Mantle and plays cowboy in a Roy Rogers suit. The point is made early and reduntantly thereafter.
If Sterry was a famous person who interested me as such, and this were a bio about same, then all this childhood memories could be justifiably included and I would care. But he's not a famous person, he's an ex-sex worker writing a book about sex work; otherwise there would be no reason to read this. That is why I read it; that's the audience the book is aimed at, and that's what I got only half the time from it. Sometimes it seems he's more explicit about describing how the family bulldog gave birth than about the way he screws his clients. There's something lopsided about that.
And I began to wonder at times reading this: Do any rich people in LA who buy hookers have anything resembling "normal" sex? Is everything fetishism and voyeurism and tantric hippie ritualism? Were none of Sterry's clients horny enough to simply forgo the preliminaries and whisk him to the bed and fuck and suck? Or was that deemed too boring to include in the book? Many times I felt Sterry was so caught up in his elaborate, flowery, metaphorical prose that his actual descriptions of what was going on became vague. There were times during several of the sex sessions where I couldn't tell if he was fucking the client or they were sucking him or what. I just would like to be told a little more straight up what the hell is happening.
The one time there is apparently a regular, non-freaky client encounter -- with a midwestern businesswoman -- Sterry goes to the trouble to set the scene but again obfuscates the kind of sex acts wanted by the client. Why? I want to know what they're into -- after all, it's a big part of the story -- but he won't say. And what about Immaculate Heart College, the school he was attending when this story takes place? He barely says anything about it. When I was in college, it took up a good part of my days. Here, we get flashbacks to childhood instead.
The contrast between the "normal" white-bread world of the "good girlfriend," Kristy, and the twisted freakiness of the clients seems like a forced dichotomy, an attempt at a kind of good/bad duality that is simplistic and seems overlaid for classical dramatic effect. It's an approach that is awfully judgmental and filled with mixed messages. Some people have weird needs behind closed doors, but does that make them bad? One clashing message seems to be that bland American suburban life is hypocritical, soulless, dispiriting and inherently corrupting -- if you're raised in it -- yet is something to desire if your nice girlfriend, who is not like the whores and johns you consort with, lives in it. As Sterry says throughout the book: "Whatever."
I realize that in saying this that Sterry is writing from the limited perspective of a young man who is not sure how to process and judge all the craziness going on in his life. And yet, there were times I wished some of the clients had been treated with more compassion, especially since the editorial selection was made to highlight the ones who were the most weird and least "normal". The deeply confused mother who has lost all of her family and tries to exorcise demons by dressing Sterry as her dead son and making love to him is one of the most haunting people I've ever encountered in a book. Yet, what left me with a bad taste was not her odd obsession but Sterry's reaction to it. It was times like these that I wanted Sterry's adult voice to intercede, that is, unless he hasn't matured and deepened his perspective since the age of 17.
I would attribute to editorial laxity the fact that one of Dorothy Parker's most famous witticisms of the Algonquin Round Table ("You can lead a hor-ti-culture but you can't make her think") is misquoted and misattributed to Oscar Wilde in one of the chapter prefaces.
In some ways, this book is the real version of Bret Easton Ellis' Less Than Zero except that Sterry comes out of his experience with a healthy sense of purpose in life. I loved the characters of Sunny and Jade and Tinkerbell, colorful denizens of the sex trade. The book really shines when these characters are given the stage. Sterry has a writerly flair for sure and I think I'd recommend this overall, but too much of this book comes off as overly precious and Sterry's voice is a bit too faux-naif for my tolerance.