when I 1st read Dan Hoy's piece on flarf in Jacket two-nine, I noted clumsy style and laboured logic. as I think on't, I wonder why it was even published. its snooty expert tone is just bluff, right down to a dick-wagging accusation of dick-wagging. what it does do is tap into an area of animus. it hit the controversy nerve, which I imagine is the editorial impetus for publishing it. whatever valid points Hoy might've made are lost in lameness. that lameness reflects upon Jacket. doesn't it?