I grow weary waiting for Garth Ennis to grow the fuck up.
I read The Boys One and Two [sic].
Garth Ennis has some interesting and possibly even insightful things to say about subjects like honor, duty, God, institutions, and the union of love and sex. He doesn't say them here. He's more interested in women begging to be degraded and dogs that have been trained to rape on command.
And, of course, slagging on superheroes. It does, however, tend to diminish the impact of anything you're trying to say about superheroes when the very first thing that happens with respect to superheroes* is, in fact, nothing that would ever appear in any superhero comic book whose purpose wasn't to tear down superheroes, specifically the dismemberment of a sympathetic character at a tender moment by the carelessness of a superhero during a superspeed pursuit.
*Not counting the lead character seeing superheroes fly overhead and remark, "I'm going to have you, you cunt."
In other words, Ennis has erected a straw man. He's not interested in pointing out or addressing any real problems the superhero genre might have.
I'll also add that the dismemberment serves to motivate a character into "The Boys", and it seems evident that he's meant to be taken as a wanker before and "The Boys" are going to turn him into a Man.
This juvenile, misogynistic, rape and revenge fantasy has no redeeming features whatsoever. It is shit, and it's an embarassing and condemnatory blot on the career of a man thirty-year-old boy with so much potential.
Posted by Greg at September 12, 2006 10:10 AM
Garth Ennis has some interesting and possibly even insightful things to say about subjects like honor, duty, God, institutions, and the union of love and sex.
I don't really think Ennis has ever had anything interesting (in the sense of being original or new) to say about these subjects; rather, he tends to spout tired cliches in not-very-interesting ways.
Note that I did not say that he has said such things, but that he has them to say. I am waiting for him to grow up.
It is also the case that "original or new" is by no means the definition of "interesting".
It is also the case that "original or new" is by no means the definition of "interesting".
That's true, but what he has to say on these subjects is so trite (brothers stick together! killing makes a man manly!) that it would have to be said in a remarkably interesting way to even be mistaken for anything interesting. As it is, Ennis typically uses themes like "God" and "duty" and "honor" as vehicles for anal rape jokes.
I've recently been re-reading some of the early Preachers, and they hold up pretty well. Especially compared to this bilge.
Still...the first thing that happened with respect to superheroes in Miracleman was a guy getting hideously burned and disfigured as a side effect to the character's transformation. The first couple of things that happened with respect to superheroes in Watchmen include one getting fatally tossed out a find, another walking into a bar and torturing the first person he sees, and, in flashback, one raping another at a team meeting. Are those works attacking straw men and not addressing or pointing out anything in the real superhero genre?
Jeff:
The first superhero thing that actually happens in Miracleman was either the dream about approaching the "spaceship"/bomb, or (in the American edition) the invasion from the future.
But that being said, the actual transformation serves as notice that this is a different kind of superhero comic--but everything else in the book affirms that this is a superhero comic--the person who gets injured by the transformation is a bad guy, the protagonist is a superhero, with superhero morals. In issue two, when a bystander gets killed, it's by the deliberate action of the supervillain.
It's a different kind of superhero comic, but it's definitely a superhero comic. Even though innocent bystanders get killed by collateral damage in later issues, that's long after the book has established its bonafides as a superhero comic.
Watchmen similarly goes to considerable creative effort to establish how it is different from a standard superhero comic, specifically its intent to model superheroes as speculative fiction/science fiction rather than fantasy. (It also has superhero protagonists.)
The Boys is clearly different. Its intent, in fact, is to establish that the superheroes are the antagonists. If anything, it's more deeply fantastic than ordinary superheroes, so it can't defend collateral damage on a basis on realism.
From its first page, Watchmen tells us that it is a cerebral mystery that's going to apply a different set of analytic tools to the superhero genre. The Boys tells us that it is a misogynistic rape and revenge fantasy that has no intention of analyzing anything.
My impression is that Ennis does want to defend the collateral damage on a basic of realism (or a realistic approach to fantastic elements). So, basically, it's Scott McCloud's Destroy!, with added anal rape.
I'm not sure that he actually succeeds, mind. (Would a speedster without sufficient reflexes to jink away from hitting a slow-moving civilian be anything but a liability in a serious superhero combat?) But I think that's what he's trying for.
That may be Ennis's intent, but if it is, it's stillborn, because nothing else in the book is held up to that level of realism.
I was only moderately interested in this title, and in collections only at that. From the pre-release news it didn't sound like much more than black ops guys beating up superheroes.
The "colateral damage" in The Boys #1 really rocked me. It's about time someone addressed it.
I remember a Marvel Two-In-One where a monster destroyed a bridge, sending hundreds of cars plunging into the river. A few seconds later, the Thing says, "Well, looks like the Shore Patrol rescued everybody." Sheesh!
Bottom line is, Ennis never fails to entertain me.
You know, the last thing I'd expect from Garth Ennis at this stage in his career is a comic written specifically for the kind of self-important jackoffs who hung out on the Warren Ellis Forum... but I continue to be surprised.
Ennis can't even make anal sex funny, when he's INTENDING TO.
Fuck this lame comic.
Anyone who reads superhero comic books looking for "realism" is barking up the wrong tree to begin with. They very existence of the lead character(s) negates the possibility of realism. Even Alan Moore's "Watchmen" and Frank Miller's "Batman Gets Angry" are completely silly to anyone who is not an adolescent comic book geek who confuses gratuitous sex, violence, and swearing with "adult material."
mr ellis is showing yes i am writeing about superheros but on his own terms ie the are more fucked up and amoral then the bastards they are going after and it reflects the modren world who is really the good guys he in interviews he hates the janura but writes in a way that make him want to read this muck of a shower of bastards in spandex
The key insight to understanding Mr. Mulhall's comment is, I think, that he's not sure how to spell "genre".
Ohhhh! Okay, I didn't realize that's what that was.
I have to admit I can't really parse that...sentence (I can't think of what else to call it), but I absolutely love the phrase "muck of a shower of bastards in spandex." It's a little hard off the tongue, but I think that's part of its charm.
I personally think the key to the comment is the interchangability of mssrs. Ennis and Ellis, a point to which I alluded upthread.
I think it's weird that I keep seeing that scene referred to as "anal rape", since (a) it's not rape and (b) it looks more like sex-from-behind than up-the-behind.
That said, I also think it's weird that people seem to be interpreting that as Ennis having weird fantasies, when it seems pretty clear to me that Ennis is trying to establish that this guy isn't really all that much better than what he's fighting.
The "realism" of the book isn't real-realism, it's "If there really were super-heroes, people with extraordinary abilities who are both world-famous and police officers, how would they really act?" He's not taking the piss out of superhero stories by aping them, he's taking the piss out of them by saying "People who would do this are psychotic fascists with crazy powers, they would not be good to have around."
It's no 'Hitman', but I think it's a good book so far. Best thing Ennis has done in a long time.