I was leafing through an old copy of the Encyclopedia of Science Fiction by John Clute and Peter Nichols and randomly turned to the page on author Leonard Daventry. I had never heard of him before, but the synopsis of his first book sounded interesting. I tried looking up the author and the book at Wikipedia, Amazon, etc., but could not find anything on them. So I resorted to buying a used copy of his first book on eBay. I did not have any strong motivation besides a passing interest in the synopsis, but I grew increasingly intrigued by how little information existed on this writer and his works.
SUMMARY Claus Coman is a “keyman”, which means he has psychic powers and works for a shadowy, loose-knit organization on planet Earth in the year 2090. Society is still recovering from a devastating, apocalyptic war. Huge swathes of the planet remain wastelands, while the populations survive in massive cities. There are also colonies on other worlds, and some aliens as well though they aren’t a very strong presence (Venusians may be aliens or just near-humans, I am not sure).
Coman lives with his two wives (unconventional if not completely unheard of in this setting) and lives in Twelfth City (formerly London). He occasionally run errands and performs special missions for the leader of the keyfellows, “Karns” (whom he only communicates with over a psychic device and has never met in person).
Coman is sent to the world government to influence an upcoming decision on whether to create a city that would house malcontents, psychopaths, and criminals. Along the way the reader is exposed to the world of 2090, where technology has created a leisure society where human beings have lost their focus and purpose, and increasing numbers of teenagers and young adults are going on murderous rampages.
OVERALL: 4 out of 5 This is a good book, and I am saddened by how it has gone forgotten in this modern day. It’s unique, and probably set the groundwork for a lot of the science fiction that follows. I wonder how much “Judge Dredd” is based on the same “recovery post-apocalyptic event” setting.
The character of Coman is as interesting as they come. I kept wondering what he was going to do next, or how he might view things, despite coming across as an unemotional, uninvolved character. I think Rutger Hauer would have nailed this.
It’s difficult to believe this was written in 1965. Some elements feel somewhat dated, but only if you stop to think about it. This was written at the height of the sexual revolution and in a time of social turmoil around much of the globe. Daventry was living during these times, and he translated them to a future society that is trying to recover, but still suffers from the scars of the past while discovering new threats that come with luxury and leisure.
I will definitely be seeking out other works by this writer, and hopefully the time will come when he is rediscovered.
RATINGS BY CATEGORY CHARACTERS: 4 out of 5 Claus Coman is a complicated creature. He comes across as a detached, staid operative along the lines of James Bond, but I felt like there was a lot going under the surface with him. He is intriguing, and the reader is not always certain how much he is actually influencing those around him with his psychic powers (and whether he is even aware of what he is doing).
His wives are interesting (apparently both lesbians who have a weakness for him in particular), but mostly serve to illustrate a hidden, softer side of his character.
Besides Coman, the most interesting other characters in the story include two “jokers” (unrestrained, mercenary psychics who don’t work for Karns) sent to intercept anyone like Coman at the government city, and also a fellow keyman who is drastically different from Coman.
I put a young (mid-1980s) Rutger Hauer in the role of Coman and that REALLY WORKED. So much so that it’s difficult to imagine the role being written for anyone else in mind.
PACE: 4 out of 5 This book is short and a fast read. I enjoyed the pace, and the author did a good job keeping every scene interesting (except maybe for one or two near the very end).
STORY: 5 out of 5 I have so many thoughts about this story that it is hard to get them all in order. In some ways I feel like it’s prophetic- the author seemed to realize that in a leisure society, people lose their motivation to exist and resort to insanity and violence. There’s also the question of what to do with criminals and other people who don’t fit in, and it’s strongly implied that Claus Coman should go to this “exile city” should it be founded because he belongs there.
At the same time it’s a very subtle work. There are some action scenes, but they seem to almost be happening in slow motion. A lot of details are left out because they don’t serve the immediate story, and this works, but it’s also apparent that this was written with a sequel in mind.
If the story has a weak point, I would say that it is probably in the assumptions that are being made. It’s obvious that Coman just has a way with people in general (women seem to swoon only minutes after meeting him, and with no effort on his part), but that isn’t as illogical as it is unexplained.
DIALOGUE: 3 out of 5 Most of the dialogue is good. I particularly liked Vane even though he did not have a lot of page time. The dialogue between Coman and his wives seems a bit abrupt at times, but I think that is because he communicates with them on a deeper level that the reader isn’t privy to.
STYLE/TECHNICAL: 3 out of 5 Most of the writing is clear, though it is also very subdued. I like the way Coman interacts with his boss/benefactor, but there are some gaps where things aren’t explained when first introduced and readers have to make some logical guesses. The action scenes also feel muted somehow, and that made them detached from a sense of danger or adrenaline.
"Leonard Daventry’s A Man of Double Deed (1965) is an dark and grungy tale of polyamory, telepathy, and apocalyptical violence. Swinging between philosophical and emotional introspection and awkwardly explained action sequences based on the flimsiest of plots, Daventry’s novel succeeds as a noirish character study but fails as a compelling unity of [...]"