I often fail in trying to explain what "tightness" means when applied to crossword themes. Today's puzzle illustrates the concept so much more clearly than I ever could — can you think of any other phrase in the form of (black and white animal) + (one other word) = in-the-language-phrase? Not me. That makes this theme superbly tight.
I could barely think of another black-and-white animal. There is the orca — Peter's note refers to the great Sam Donaldson's annual crossword awards, which unfortunately don't quite have the cachet of the Oscars.
Not yet, at least!
What other animals? Maybe … husky (the dog)? Dalmatian?
You might have wondered why Peter went to 16 columns, instead of the usual 15. He could have made ZEBRA CROSSINGS singular, which would have also made the themers more consistent (so that every themer was singular), right?
Well, yes and no.
Here's the LONG ANSWER why:
ZEBRA CROSSING in the singular would have forced all the themers to be squished into rows 4 6 8 10 12. With long themers, that sort of compression is rarely easy to fill around.
Wait … why is that?
Couldn't he have kept PUFFIN BOOKS in row 3?
Yes. But a-ha! What happens to SKUNK CABBAGE then?
With the normal 15 columns, there must be three black squares at the end of SKUNK CABBAGE. That, in combination with the black squares at the end of ZEBRA CROSSING, would force a huge number of black squares at the sides of the puzzle. It'd be horribly unsightly at best, and at worst, it would net a request for complete redo.
Here's the SHORT ANSWER why:
Because reasons.
The 16-column crossword is surprisingly difficult to execute on. Even if you go up past the usual maximum of 78 words, which Peter did (81), you usually end up with (at least) a pair of big corners that becomes hand-wringingly difficult to fill smoothly. That SW, with NEATH OSTER ESSEN, is gonna be unwelcoming for some newbs.
Throw in ELOI, an answer that baffled this sci-fi geek when he first started crosswords, and KOD — I think it's legit as KO'D (knocked out) — in the opposite corner, and it's not a puzzle I'd give to a newer solver.
Overall though, I was pleased by the opportunity to explain "tightness" much better than I usually do. Such a tidy theme set.