SPOILERS

To be more specific, I did not find it plausible that the father (can't remember his name) would stake his and his daughter's lives (as well as his wife's degradation prior to death) on an untested theory of highly dubious provenance, as pointed out by other characters in the story. It's frankly ridiculous, and it's extremely jarring because of that. I could see him wanting to test his "salt" theory, but virtually anyone would try to do so under less dire circumstances. Yes, Ennis wants him to look stupid, but in typically Ennis fashion he overdoes it to the point that the character becomes a caricature.

I would find it more effective to have him look at the salt, his wife and child, drop the salt, and shoot his wife, then flee with his screaming daughter, showing the death of his naivete while offering some character development. That might bring me back for the next issue, to find out what effect his decision had on him and his daughter. Interestingly, it would also offer a stronger Biblical allusion, which I assume Ennis was clumsily trying to execute. As it stands, no characters shows any development within the single issue (decompression rears its tiresome head) and it simply strikes me as wasted opportunity sacrificed to shock value.

I stuck with Ennis through Hitman, but lost interest about 20 issues into Preacher, and have found no real reason to doubt that decision or to pick up any of his work since (except the Hitman/JLA two-parter). This issue didn't change my mind. I'm not going to debate artistic merit, because it's not necessary. Art endures, and the other stuff ends up in quarter bins. Mr. Cronin, it would be interesting to revisit this story in five years or so and see which fate prevails.

I can't deny that I find it strange admitting that Ennis's PUNISHER is what got me to like the man's work. Was never a PREACHER fan, and thought his HELLBLAZER run was ridiculously over-rated. And I have revisited swaths of that stuff in the last couple of years and still find it quite average, if not poor. But gosh-dang if I ain't just lapping up all the nought years. PUNISHER, GHOST RIDER, THE BOYS, KEV and, yes, CROSSED. To name but a few. Sometimes I hardly know myself anymore; still, I'm having fun not knowing.

Brian's right on for having them in his top five, but textual recaps don't do these scenes justice. The key is gross YET compelling and Ellis shows how high the stakes are with these moments.

I think "The Boys" is a first for him, because Wee Hughie isn't tough, and Annie January isn't tough. But I suppose it's all about getting them to be tough.

For the record, I recognize that Ennis is technically talented, and I sorta like some aspects of his work. But yes, his personality turns me off, and that infuses all of his works. Particularly the exaltation of "machismo" and the gleeful derision of any sort of romanticism. It seems like Ennis exists to tear things down (except for manly male friendship in bars, that is his sacred cow).

When I first read his, in his Hellblazer days, I was fascinated, because he was so different from everyone else, and had such raw strength in his writing. I loved his no-punches-pulled approach. When I read Preacher and Hitman, my enthusiasm was a bit lessened. The guy writes like this all the time, I thought. His protagonists are too much extensions of himself.

And yes, Jesse Custer had doubts, but not enough, IMO. I was mildly surprised by Wee Hughie, because he is the kind of guy that other of Ennis's protagonists would have made fun of. In the Boys, it seemed like Ennis has managed to fracture his alter ego in two pieces: Wee Hughie is much more sentimental and unsure than usual, while the Butcher is Ennis's hero with ruthlessness and sureness maxed-out.

I also recognize that guys like Gaiman and Ellis also do a certain kind of protagonist over and over, but I think I am able to identify more easily with them. Maybe I'm not macho enough or cynical enough.

But no, it's not the violence and the sex that turn me off. You're talking to someone who has a DVD collection with lots of Sopranos, Oz, Rome, Deadwood, and the L Word in it,

I also think the core romance between Tulip and Jesse in Preacher was gold.

I don't think he's a one-trick pony, but I do think that Ennis is trying to see how far he's allowed to go...

The Echo scene sounds somewhat like a scene in SiP where the guy who broke the Miracle story got killed. Probably grosser though.

Ennis is -- ew. Maybe not him personally, but his work... ew. Maybe I don't want to read Crossed. I got kinda queasy just reading your description, Brian.

And unfortunately, from what I hear, City Lights is kind of a dead project. Where I heard it was a trustworthy source, but I'm not sure if that source was "speaking on the record", so I won't say who, just to say it was at an Ithacacon in the last year or 2.

exactly one of the many many many reasons why i love Ennis over, say, Gaiman (whose characters always seem to be, erm, too effete and book-smart) and Ellis (whose characters always seem to be carbon copies of authorial wishful thinking).

i hope he and Dillon actually find the time to do CITY OF LIGHTS.

That generally seems to be the case with much of the criticism Ennis receives; it’s the overall tone of his works, not specific technical aspects, that people complain about. Generalities ( for example, ” Ennis is too gratuitous ” or ” Ennis is too blinded by hatred of superheroes ” ) are mentioned, but specifics are limited to key shock moments. The stuff that really makes Ennis’ comics is largely forgotten in these debates– the pub-side conversations, the validation of personal comraderie over societal BS, the brutal difficulties his heroes endure, and the cultural relevance throughout — in favor of the grace notes.

Yeah. when I see an argument like that that is clearly not actually based in the work, I usually just don't respond to it.

What's the point, really?

although it was more of a throwaway joke and less of a compelling plot point.

Yeah, that's how I took it as well, which is why it didn't make the list. If one actually wished to make a "crass for crassness' sake" argument, that'd be the bit to do it with.

I'd think Hughie getting his red wings would easily count as the standout shock scene of The Boys for this year, although it was more of a throwaway joke and less of a compelling plot point.

So thanks for the heads up, I'll give these titles a miss, and will proceed with a patented church lady superior dance.

That generally seems to be the case with much of the criticism Ennis receives; it's the overall tone of his works, not specific technical aspects, that people complain about. Generalities ( for example, " Ennis is too gratuitous " or " Ennis is too blinded by hatred of superheroes " ) are mentioned, but specifics are limited to key shock moments. The stuff that really makes Ennis' comics is largely forgotten in these debates-- the pub-side conversations, the validation of personal comraderie over societal BS, the brutal difficulties his heroes endure, and the cultural relevance throughout -- in favor of the grace notes.

Also note that Ennis' " badass anti-heroes " aren't painted as always unflappable-- Jesse Custer certainly had more than his share of doubts about what the right thing to do was. And the characters like Billy Butcher who do appear to have a clean conscience are shown to be dangerous psychopaths.