51 Comments on “REVIEW: Joseph Larkin’s Arcade Of Cruelty”

1. 1 RJ White said at 9:49 pm on May 11th, 2009:

   Well played, sir. Well played.

2. 2 Joseph P. Larkin said at 9:53 pm on May 13th, 2009:

   LOL, my friend! I doff my cap to you, funny guy! A clever “review” like that deserves an equally clever retort. Here’s mine: I just Mapquested (not a real word) directions to [REDACTED], which you may recognize as your street address. I’m about to hop into my expensive luxury automobile, where I will write the word “FAIL” in black magic marker on the knuckles of my right fist, you know, my punching fist. Many hours from now, I will use that fist to pound on your door, which you will foolishly open only to be greeted by a tsunami of punches, kicks and gnashing teeth. I will pummel you until the word “FAIL” is tattooed on your stupid fucking face and imprinted on every one of your stupid fucking teeth, even the ones that will no longer be in your smart little mouth, the one that’s never ever kissed a girl. I’ll handily ask through clenched teeth, “How’d you like THAT shit-sandwich, bitch?!” You will say nothing in response because you are a cowardly pussy of a man that has never kissed a girl let alone fondled a girl’s breasts. See you soon!

3. 3 Kevin Church said at 1:04 am on May 14th, 2009:

   Some more of the fantastic humor that makes this book so unique, you guys!

4. 4 Geoffrey D. Wessel said at 2:01 am on May 14th, 2009:

   “And with my patented doodling techniques and unnecessary grotesqueries, along with penchant for being an Internet Tough Guy, YOU TOO CAN BE A THIRD-RATE MIKE DIANA CLONE!”

5. 5 Doktor Puppykicker said at 2:03 am on May 14th, 2009:

   Woah, threatening a guy who made fun of you on the INTERNET?

   What a fucking badass.

6. 6 Daniel Latta said at 3:09 am on May 14th, 2009:

   Are you sure Joseph P Larkin isn’t one of Harlan Ellison’s pseudonyms?

7. 7 Dario Delfino said at 3:17 am on May 14th, 2009:

   But… unless he writes “FAIL” on his knuckles backwards, the tattoo he’s promising you won’t look right.

   Mr. Church, if you would be so kind… an actual review? With words of your own? I think Mr. Larkin is asking for one.

8. 8 William Gatevackes said at 3:20 am on May 14th, 2009:

   I don’t know about you, but I’m scared. Oh, and totally want to pick up Arcade of Crueltry. Well played Mr. Larkin. Well played.

   Okay, now I’m being serious. Show of hands. Who here thinks Larkin’s ever kissed a girl himself? Thought so.

9. 9 Les McClaine said at 4:25 am on May 14th, 2009:

   wait– I think I’ve met your girlfriend. You’ve never kissed her? That’s pretty messed up, man.

10. 10 Rrrrrrr!!!! said at 4:49 am on May 14th, 2009:

    Larkin’s revenge scenario is incomplete. Because after the front door opens, he’d still have to walk downstairs to Kevin’s Mom’s basement. The one with the Cheeto-stained couch.

    Larkin, if you would truly be the 1,000,000th Maddox clone, you must use EVERY tired internet cliche about the divide between the lameness of “opponents” and one’s incalculable badass-itude.

11. 11 Dan said at 7:01 am on May 14th, 2009:

    Holy cow, Larkin. You’re a complete and utter idiot. You should be truly embarrassed for carrying on like that. Wow.

12. 12 Ray Cornwall said at 7:15 am on May 14th, 2009:

    Wow- not only did he threaten you, but he self-reviewed his own book on Amazon.

    http://www.amazon.com/Arcade-Cruelty-Joseph-Larkin/dp/0615217990/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242299627&sr=8-1

    He’s not just an asshole. He’s a SPECIAL kind of asshole…

13. 13 Pab Sungenis said at 7:26 am on May 14th, 2009:

    Dainel Latta: “Are you sure Joseph P Larkin isn’t one of Harlan Ellison’s pseudonyms?”

    Ellison would have used a more entertaining choice of words, ending with something like:

    “And then, as you die and your body slowly decays, your molecules rejoining with the earth and spreading the news of your abject failure to the microorganisms which will enjoy the wonderful holiday feast which once was you, I won’t notice because I’ll be too busy counting my sales receipts.”

14. 14 Dan said at 7:33 am on May 14th, 2009:

    Thanks for that link, Ray. I suggest that everyone here follow suit and leave a review on the Amazon page in question, or at least a comment on his review, calling him out for being a douchebag to Kevin. Kevin, I think you should publicize his comments, to make sure people see how he threatened you. Only a true hack of a writer, completely insecure and inexperienced, would react the way he did.

15. 15 Larkin's a Hack said at 7:45 am on May 14th, 2009:

    Larkin, not only are you an asshole, as others have mentioned, but you’re also rather shortsighted in strategizing your attack. If you pummel the word “FAIL” onto his face by first writing it on your own fist, it will show up on his face as “LIAF” but with the letters facing the wrong way. Is that rally the message you want to send? I don’t think the Long Island Alzheimer’s Foundation or the London International Animation Festival would appreciate your using their acronym for violence. Or were you referring to laser-induced auto-fluorescence? That seems even less relevant to your childish rant than the above two. Either way, the Urban Dictionary defines “liaf” as “when someone fails repeatedly and miserably.” If your post is an example of what goes wrong when you try to post a witty, tough-guy rebuttal to someone who has called you out for your hackery, then you, sir, are clearly the liaf here, not Kevin, who has repeatedly succeeded in schooling idiots like you.

16. 16 Thom said at 8:22 am on May 14th, 2009:

    “Thanks for that link, Ray. I suggest that everyone here follow suit and leave a review on the Amazon page in question, or at least a comment on his review, calling him out for being a douchebag to Kevin.”

    Wouldn’t it be more appropriate to threaten to track him down and beat him up? You know…speak his language.

17. 17 Dave Lartigue said at 8:37 am on May 14th, 2009:

    Boy, nothing says “I am on the cutting edge of daring humor” like an extended “joke” involving the word “FAIL”.

18. 18 Katharine Tapley said at 8:42 am on May 14th, 2009:

    I had to read that comment through a few times before realizing it was REAL. It seems like something one’s good friends would do as a humorous example of an unprofessional reaction. Now, I can understand anyone being upset that their work was compared to “Shit Sandwich”, even upset enough to comment, but to react that way is just…ridiculous.

    Kevin, if I ever send you anything, and you review it, and you utterly detest it, I will not threaten you with LIAF punches. I will be way more professional and send you videos of myself crying.

19. 19 MW said at 8:44 am on May 14th, 2009:

    You guys, you’re forgetting that many of our greatest authors have bombarded critics with juvenile threats of violence.

    Remember when Oscar Wilde told a particularly ribald newspaperman that he would “poo right in his stupid mouth?” Or when Ernest Hemingway told a radio reporter that he would “make his face his butt and his butt his face so he has a face-butt and a butt-face.” And don’t forget Toni Morrison’s response to a TV talk show host, in which she said, “I’m gonna kick your junk ’till it breaks in half.”

    No, I’m just kidding. None of that happened.

    But maybe, with Joseph Larkin’s help, it will.

20. 20 Bill D. said at 8:51 am on May 14th, 2009:

    You know, I once heard a podcast interview with Matt Fraction where one of the hosts of the show professed to not particularly enjoying Casanova, and Fraction’s response was along the lines of “Well, I get that it’s the sort of book that’s not going to appeal to everyone, but I sincerely appreciate that you gave it a try.”

    That right there? That’s how you handle a negative review correctly. Our boy Larkin here? Well, to paraphrase Russello from “Fat Albert and the Cosby Kids,” Larkin is like a teacher on summer vacation. No. Class.

21. 21 Isaac said at 8:56 am on May 14th, 2009:

    You know, I wonder what kind of response you’d have received from this jackass if you’d posted a more substantial review. Not to say you’re at fault here—I think the Spinal Tap quotation is pretty clever, and probably that level of effort is appropriate to the material you’re reviewing—but it does seem kind of lazy. I mean, I’ve never seen any of his stuff, and while I am convinced by your review (and his response) that I never want to pay for the book, I don’t know what we’re really talking about here, except for Larkin’s moronic and childish response to criticism.

    Maybe if you’d taken the time to tell your readers in more elaborated detail what makes the work of Joseph Larkin such a shit sandwich, he’d have blown up into a verbal tsunami worthier of Get Off the Internet.

    I wonder. I don’t think you have anything to worry about as far as knuckle-printing goes. I’ve arranged for people to pour sugar into the gas tank of his “expensive luxury automobile.” Why not post a more thorough review for our scrutiny and delectation?

22. 22 Ken Lowery said at 9:04 am on May 14th, 2009:

    Why not post a more thorough review for our scrutiny and delectation?

    Because at this point Kevin gains nothing by continuing down this path; Larkin’s seen to that. It’ll be seen as another volley in a war of words, and not a stand-alone piece of criticism.

23. 23 Jeff said at 9:33 am on May 14th, 2009:

    Well, now I’m definitely buying a copy of Arcade of Cruelty.

24. 24 Matthew J. Brady said at 9:52 am on May 14th, 2009:

    Having read the book and gotten a full dose of Larkin’s persona and sense of humor, I think it’s safe to say that he’s not being serious there, but is being antagonistic in order to get attention. Not really worthy of the condemnation, if you ask me. The thing is, some of the responses in this thread are funnier than anything Larkin has done; the extended meditation on the term “laif” made me smile more than anything in Larkin’s book.

25. 25 Kitty said at 10:05 am on May 14th, 2009:

    You can be humorously antagonistic without posting someone’s address on the internet and without making disparaging sexually-overtoned remarks. It is possible, I swear.

26. 26 rk said at 10:10 am on May 14th, 2009:

    Ah, I wish I could inspire such hatred…

27. 27 Thom said at 10:39 am on May 14th, 2009:

    Now, Kitty, that’s just not true… it is a requirement to mock someone’s weight, sexual history and living arrangements. A requirement, I say.

28. 28 Dario Delfino said at 11:43 am on May 14th, 2009:

    I’m still confused as to how the Fail tattoo would work.

29. 29 Paperghost said at 1:41 pm on May 14th, 2009:

    Well, he could at least have made the comment funny, instead of crappy, even if it was supposed to be in jest.

    Also: posting random threats (jokingly or not) containing an address in is pretty stupid when his own address is pasted on his website store, and also on his Whois. If I decided to post up some dox – God, I hate that word – as part of a comment that can easily be taken as having serious intent, I’d at least make sure my own info was tucked away out of plain sight.

    Also: Googling “Joseph P. Larkin” returns this page as the first result, so at least he’s a winner at something.

30. 30 Kevin Church said at 1:43 pm on May 14th, 2009:

    Googling “Joseph P. Larkin” returns this page as the first result, so at least he’s a winner at something.

    It’s almost like I do that sort of thing for a living.

31. 31 Rob Osborne said at 2:03 pm on May 14th, 2009:

    I think the whole thing is hilarious. And incredibly effective. First, Kevin “Came From Da Heaven” Church besmirches Arcade of Cruelty with this Spinal Tap clip de juer, then Joseph “Lurkin’ Fo’ Breasts” Larkin responds with a bizarrely aggressive, clumsily funny retort.

    I’ve been a fan of Dr. Beaucoup for years now, and I think this is another shining moment for him and his magnificent blog. But this is my first introduction to Dr. Larkin, and I must say, he’s made quite the first impression. I almost want to read Arcade of Cruelty, but then I’d probably write a review that said something like, “The greatest cruelty was reading this cocamamie fondle-a-thon.” Which would sound boorish and unoriginal.

    Glad I didn’t step in that mess.

32. 32 Sub said at 2:45 pm on May 14th, 2009:

    In trolling– deliberately or unintentionally– it’s always best to do the get the most out of your target with the least effort out of you. Getting a huge, stunningly unfunny response starring the Internet’s deadest dead horse word out of a mere Youtube embed is, by trolling standards, a superb victory.

33. 33 Nate said at 2:53 pm on May 14th, 2009:

    Isn’t Larkin’s book built around some conceit about authorship? If you skim some of the other reviews he turns up in the comments section with comments in the same “voice.” I don’t find any of it fresh or amusing, but man, I’m pretty sure he’s having a laugh. Kevin seems to imply as much in his response.

34. 34 Matt M. said at 7:34 pm on May 14th, 2009:

    I only wish Kevin would hate me this much. I could use the hits.

35. 35 Tom Spurgeon said at 1:09 am on May 15th, 2009:

    I’ll happily fight anyone in comics if they want to fight, and I encourage Kevin to adopt the same philosophy. I can’t fight worth a lick and I’m a bleeder, but the threat of being attacked spices up the conventions.

    Now that Nabile Hage is gone there’s no one in comics that’s all that scary except maybe Moritat, who looks like if you somehow happened to win the initial fistfight he’d find you later on and run you over in a truck.

36. 36 steveyd said at 4:06 am on May 15th, 2009:

    Googling “Joseph P. Larkin” returns this page as the first result, so at least he’s a winner at something.

    It’s almost like I do that sort of thing for a living.

    Very, very well played.

37. 37 Patrick Dean said at 8:43 am on May 15th, 2009:

    I thought the proper way to handle a bad review was to direct your friends to the reviewer’s site and suggest they flame him and awkwardly defend the book/album/whatever. Or pose as someone else and defend your own book in the third person. Or mail him a sack of Arby’s and… aw, forget it.

38. 38 Barack Obama said at 1:08 pm on May 15th, 2009:

    Has anyone bothered checking with Joseph Larkin to make sure it was really him who commented, and not some troll going for easy lulz? It’s not like you need a retinal scan to comment here with a fake name.

39. 39 Kevin Church said at 1:17 pm on May 15th, 2009:

    Considering that his IP address matched the general area of the also-ran.com domain information and that Larkin linked from that site, referring to me as a “cunt,” I think we’ve got enough to suggest a strong probability. Larkin’s cartoons suggest a very limited satirical range that seems to get off mostly on outrage from the reader versus making any sort of point, and the comment made by him is very much in line with the vitriolic one-note material the book features.

    (Also, that’s the only time I’m letting a stupid pseudonym like that slide again, local person who’s using Comcast.)

40. 40 Felipe said at 1:56 pm on May 15th, 2009:

    Come on, guys, you’re being too hard on the kid, he’s clearly 12 judging from the comment… Who the fuck else would use “FAIL” in his retort, and also imply that by not having touched a tit Kevin would be somehow disqualified to see how bad the book is?

41. 41 Hackety-Hack said at 5:15 pm on May 15th, 2009:

    So, does tit-touching make one a better critic? If so, then two things are true: (1) porn stars would make the best critics, and (2) Catholic priests would make the worst.

42. 42 Thom said at 12:30 am on May 16th, 2009:

    (Also, that’s the only time I’m letting a stupid pseudonym like that slide again, local person who’s using Comcast.)

    Damn…I had planned to make myself more memorable by calling myself Barack Obama. Glad someone else did it first.

43. 43 Marty Janetty said at 6:03 pm on May 29th, 2009:

    Its pretty clear that Joseph’s post here is in the voice of the character in Arcade of Cruelty. How you Kevin Church (who claims to have read the book) and all your clever fanboys missed this is beyond me. Larkin put out a hook there for his critics to bite on and you all swallowed it right up. Simmer down, I assure you that Larkin has a pretty thick skin to your brand of invective and you are essentially getting excited over being threatened by a comic book character. Larkin: 1, Church & fanboys:0.

44. 44 Kevin Church said at 6:06 pm on May 29th, 2009:

    I don’t think I missed this at all, Janetty (and you’ll note that I even commented on that being the sort of humor he employs in the book) but surely Larkin has to realize that people who haven’t read his book are getting an entirely different impression of him, and that’s something that should be discussed. How comfortable would you be if I said, in public, I was coming to your home in Trenton and beating you up for saying mean things about me?

    I’ve dealt with harassment from people in the past and took this much less seriously than I could have (some have argued that I should have contacted the police.) I get that it’s a character that Larkin is playing out, unfortunately it’s got his name and he should accept responsibility for his actions.

45. 45 Mikester said at 7:38 pm on May 29th, 2009:

    Frankly, I’m more insulted by the implication that Larkin’s “Internet Tough Guy” persona was such an original piece of Andy Kaufman-esque comedic roleplaying genius that we were all bamboozled by it.

46. 46 Dave Lartigue said at 10:01 pm on May 29th, 2009:

    I assure you Marty, I didn’t “miss it”. I have been in Internet forums and before those, BBSes for some time, and I’m very familiar with the persona Larkin is doing here, because every single online community has about a dozen of them. It’s one of the laziest, easiest “personas” to do, and requires no special talent on the part of the person taking it on. It’s also tiresome and dull. The usage of the standard “look, I’m an asshole saying all sorts of outrrrrrageous things!” doesn’t make his situation any better, it simply exposes that we’re dealing with someone with a pretty meager bag of tricks and ideas. (And to cement that, between his comment and the sample pages on his site, there’s “meh”, “FAIL”, and “hilariously wrong” Family Circus comics. Really pushing the envelope, there.)

47. 47 Marty said at 5:18 pm on May 30th, 2009:

    Kevin you can’t hide the fact that your response to Joseph was full of glee and amazement based on something that wasn’t there. The evidence is seen right above. Joseph posts something and the Kevin Church internet community consolidates to reaffirm their moral and artistic high ground. Larkin aspires not for this status, rather to make fools of people who do. This is the essence of the book. Larkin lets people make their own jokes about themselves while he observes it. And I must say you all have done a superb job providing him with material.

48. 48 Kevin Church said at 6:02 pm on May 30th, 2009:

    “Glee?” Yes, obviously, there was a lot of glee on my part, seeing Joseph Larkin freak out in my comments and threaten me. Did you even read what I typed, or do you just wait to pipe up with soundbites praising the genius of the guy who said I will pummel you until the word “FAIL” is tattooed on your stupid fucking face and imprinted on every one of your stupid fucking teeth, even the ones that will no longer be in your smart little mouth, the one that’s never ever kissed a girl?

    Yes, it was a joke, all part of his grand facade. Look at how clever this author is! This guy creates a book of bad cartoons with a thin glaze of metacommentary, sends it to reviewers, gets bad reviews, and then insults them and gets to say “Look! The audience is art! I’m fucking Sam Beckett over here because the theater is absurd!”

    The problem is, that joke isn’t funny, and trying to justify it by pointing out that it’s all part of the scheme doesn’t suddenly transform it into art. Larkin is a poor cartoonist and manages to be a worse satirist. Next time, I’ll let the spam catcher eat your comments, “Marty.”

49. 49 Matt Maxwell said at 6:14 pm on May 30th, 2009:

    Because having to explain the joke makes it a successful or funny joke. Got it.

50. 50 Thom said at 11:42 pm on May 30th, 2009:

    “And I must say you all have done a superb job providing him with material.”

    He did such a superb job only you and he get the real joke?

    He should start a religion, so he and his merry band can lament how the world doesn’t get them-therefore all but his followers are stupid-heads.

51. 51 Thom said at 11:46 pm on May 30th, 2009:

    By the way, Marty…writing books that insult and mock the audience (which, mind you, is what you are apparently praising) is neither brilliant nor skilled. Any jackass can do that.