With regards to how much your column contains spoilers: I generally appreciative for a more complete and in depth look at the work as a whole. And if I haven’t read whatever you’re talking about I usually just read the introduction and conclusion to see if the comic would be something up my alley which avoids the spoilers anyway.

I love Warren Ellis’ John because he’s unrepentant bastard and once in a while, you see him do what John always does, lament his friends … and it seems more poignant. He doesn’t half whinge on a bit about all his dead mates, does our John. (That’s why I got sick of him.)

Whoops.

I was about 21 at the time, so maybe that’s part of why it appealed– but until today I’d had no idea that Ennis was the same age.

The dreary politics I took as being true to character– it was part of what had turned me off from Delano’s run earlier, but when it all came up again with Ennis I got comfortable with thinking that that’s just part of the Constantine shtick. It was only when it got transported to America that I reacted by saying, “huh– Ennis doesn’t have any idea what he’s talking about, and it’s pretty annoying.”

The continuity thing is tricky. I’m pretty sure it had to be a retcon that Hellblazer’s First wasn’t Lucifer. Gaiman overturned Hell’s applecart in Season of Mists, and Ennis had to hastily come up with a Satan/ Lucifer distinction.

The Snob (Gabirel) was probably my favorite antagonist of the run, and Ellie my favorite ally. John’s eventual betrayal of Ellie (was that under Ellis?) was what led me to drop the book, and I’m pleased Diggle’s moved it into the category of ‘bygones.’

Wearing your politics on your sleeve may not be desirable, but it’s normal. The political polemic expressed was a definite view of the times, both concerning the Royal Family (this is pre-death of Diana) and the feelings about America and the rest of the world – something that still hasn’t really changed down the years, I’m afraid.

That Ennis was so young seems to be used as both an excuse and a criticism. I’d suggest that being able to see the times in the stories today shows just how mature he was. Personally I reckon the inter-relationship vignettes and ‘discussions’, and the emotional fall-out, work extremely well. They work because they are utterly plausible snapshots of real life at the time (I’m talking here about the life side – not the supernatural elements, of course). And the juxtaposition of the slightly (ok very) seedy times with the lurking horrors works to highlight both – evil in it’s many forms.

As an aside, I’d be interested to know how many of those who have commented are English – possibly a case of ‘you had to be there to understand it’ – meant in the nicest possible way, not as a criticism.

Cheers!

Josh: I felt that way a little bit, too, but I didn’t want to get into it and make the post even longer. It seems like a lot of writers – not just Ennis – do that when they leave a title. They bring in all these new people and then kill them off or make it impossible, somehow, for a new writer to use them. I think it’s probably something to do with the fact that they’re either not allowed to kill of any main characters or, if they do kill them, the company will just bring them back. So they kill off their own creations, and usually nobody wants anything to do with them again. But I agree that it was a bit depressing to see the swath Satan cut through John’s friends.

However, I do recall one thing at the end of Ennis’ run that I thought at the time and part of me still thinks to this day with the death of Header, Rick, etc. “Great. Here’s another writer killing off a bunch of characters they created so that no one else can use them/will screw them up.” Ennis had built up the world around Constantine so he wasn’t just this amoral wandering interfering pain in the ass, but had his own environment and history with real relationships and depth. And then he slaughtered it all away. I get the concept of “Constantine goes alone, leaves his friends to die, etc.”, but in this case it read to me like the actions of a selfish writer who didn’t want anyone else playing with his toys. The deaths didn’t seem necessary to the story that was being told 9at least that was my impression at the time), but was just a clearing of the slate in the big climatic storyline before the next guy took over.

I did really like the vicious manipulator Constantine that Ennis did with Brendan’s salvation and Constantine’s “fix” for his cancer. Nasty as hell and a good story.

Out of curiosity, was there a reason you didn’t mention the “Heartland” special, the follow up to the classic issue you mentioned a couple times?

But what I enjoy most about it is the exploration of John’s addictive personality and inability (not refusal) to change. It made him a much more nuanced character, which I found I missed in later runs by Azzarrello and Diggle (Cary’s run was good, but lost focus and went on about a year too long).

But okay, it’s been many years since I’ve read it too, maybe I should take a look at it again. Still, I believe John only looks bad when you compare him to your more ordinary comic book hero. When you start with the assumption that John is only a guy, and that his world is a pretty complicated one, I think Ennis’s version is pretty admirable, flaws and all.

I’d even give Ennis credit. After Hellblazer, all his stories tend to have protagonists that are just too perfect in their own bad-ass way. Jesse Custer, Hitman, the Boys, they’re all sort of the moral authorities of their worlds. Even Hitman, being… well, a Hitman, is the guy that is always right and always cool. I think it’s great that John Constantine wasn’t always right and always cool.

I would recommend you read it again, because it was interesting for me to revisit it after probably eight years or so. Maybe in eight more years I’ll view it completely differently!

It’s probably my favorite of Ennis’s works, maybe because it’s less caricatural and less macho than his other stuff.

A point that I’ve often heard, and agree with somewhat, is that many Vertigo books, especially in its earlier years, were written a lot like they they were going for an Alan Moore style. I found this to be especially true for most Constantine stories. It makes sense, since John first appeared in Moore’s Swamp Thing. Still, it is annoyingly obvious at times. Ennis probably did it less than most writers, and is one of the reasons his run stands out.