Bully for Them

Poet and critic William Logan offered his take on the life and work of Frank O'Hara in Sunday's New York Times Book Review.
Among other things, Mr. Logan restated his belief that if O'Hara were alive today, "he might have written a blog."
Bloggers took note, and they quickly offered up their take on the life and work of Mr. Logan.
To wit:

"wow," writes the scribe at Vowel Movers "we’re all for the grey areas and fine tuned distinctions, but chrissakes Logan, did you like the friggen book or what?"
"It troubles me," says Short Schrift" to see a critic taking so much of O'Hara's self-built mythology at face value . . . "
"Typical of Logan, the overall tone is snide, and, I would also say, a bit homophobic," offers Philip Gentry.
John Latta sneers, "Logan generally proceeds with the archest of manoeuvres, attempt’d pummeling by one-liners."
"A NY Times kicking on Gay Pride day to boot! A real 'time-sensitive' editor there, I say!" writes Stephen Vincent
"Not again, BIlly," moans Greg Rappleye.
"Stupidity after stupidity," seethes Jack Kimball.
"On the positive side, Logan is always bold, loud and exciting to read," sighs Levi Asher.