Dan Hoy on flarf. Don't need to add to the discussion. But should confess I feel more guilty of not critiquing Google than I feel the flarfers are. Parodic critique seems built into that project. Article also did that classic move of not distinguishing between the artists and the comments on the artists so the comments about the artists get used to show how stupid the artists are. (Have heard so little utopian said about flarf by those who write it; the opposite, the anti-PC, has always been what has worried me about flarf.)

Then around same time Drew Gardner's Petroleum Hat came in mail. Whooza. The first thing I noticed something was up was in the blurbs by Ashbery and Mlinko. Ashbery sees jokes (I think that is it). Mlinko sees a new protest poetry (I think she is clear on that). I was struck by how beautifully clear it was. A whole new Drew Gardner! "Chicks Dig War" is an anthem. None of the copy on the book confesses to being flarf. And I am not so deep into flarf that I can tell when someone is using internet/social language or pretending to use internet/social language. (Had discussion with this with Bruce Andrews when he was here; he was claiming he "writes" (thinks up on his own? does not use collage in other words) all his lines; Stephanie and I were arguing with him about whether turns of phrase count as "writing" or not.) Is social language correct term? No. Want something term for work that is collecting what is out there in a wider way than most poetry of the everday did in the past. (Although still there are boundaries set about what gets in in this work.)