New York Times, Friday, May 9, 2014

As an economist and graduate of the one of the institutions with which Prof. 7-Across is associated, I'm pleased to debut his name in the puzzle today.

I made this back in 2012, seeded by KRUGMAN and MOT JUSTE / MUMBO JUMBO. I think many other answers are strong, with entries such as SHEER AGONY and NO HARM DONE in particular making for nice fill in some of the longer spots.

Since I constructed this puzzle, my standards and taste have evolved, mostly in response to feedback from you all. Partials, in particular, are something I now avoid obsessively, so it's a bit tough to look at the pile-up in the top half of the grid. I also anticipate backlash against some of the "crosswordese" in here (OLEO and ANIL stand out). Although I don't personally have a problem with this type of entry, in crosswords, the solver is always right, so I'll keep striving to give the people what they want! Hopefully today's puzzle meets that goal.

What a cool grid pattern. Typically in most themeless constructions we see two triple-stacks of answers running horizontally, two vertically. One reason for this is that arrangement helps separate the four stacks, allowing a constructor to work on each one (more or less) at a time. So it was pretty cool to see this unusual arrangement — check out how many long across answers are basically on top of each other: KRUGMAN (really nice to see this influential economist finally get his due), DIET RITE, ABNORMAL, MUMBO JUMBO, UTILIZE, SHEER AGONY, UNBEATEN. Not everything overlaps completely of course, but it makes for quite a challenge. Neat to see something different.

A lot of great fill today, with MOT JUSTE / MUMBO JUMBO being a standout. I found it really neat that they both follow the M* J* pattern, and they mean essentially opposite things. AL PACINO in itself is a really nice entry, but I love getting an iconic image in my head from a puzzle, in this case of Pacino in "Scarface." This is a great example of getting the most out of an entry / clue pair: for me, something that evokes emotion like this is a real winner.

What with all the horizontal overlap, I was impressed that James filled the puzzle as cleanly as he did. The parts I was wondering about as I was solving were the west and east sections, as I worried stitching the two halves of the puzzle would be tricky. On the west side, the halves come together pretty nicely. It's a little tiny bit inelegant to have USMC right next to NCAA, but they're both fine entries, of course.

Where I had a little frowning, especially in contrast to the high quality of the rest of the puzzle, was in the east. It's quite possible that NON-U has common usage in England? But I tend to cringe at its sight, along with the usual ADIT and ETUI type suspects. Could just be a personal preference, as I know several constructors who don't blink an eye at random Roman numerals, while they make me shudder. And seeing it next to Ned YOST made it stick out a little further — I like seeing some sports references in puzzles, but unless an athlete is in the Hall of Fame or has achieved something huge in his/her field, it feels a bit unfair. Sort of like having to fish out GINO Torretta or RIK Smits (I have a soft sport for the Dunkin' Dutchman, but I doubt many others do).

Also interesting to me was that I thought the NW and SE should be the cleanest sections, given how separated they were from the rest of the puzzle. James did a great job with the SE, nice fill there (I know ANIL bothers some folks, but it's totally fine by me as I saw a lot of it traveling in South America). The NW however, with its two partials in close proximity, felt a little unfortunate. I can see where fixing the beautiful MOT JUSTE and MUMBO JUMBO in place would cause problems, though. Always the trade-offs.

Finally, two clues I really dug. The first, appropriately, was [Digs in the snow?]. Digs here refers to a crib, a joint, a place to live, and it's a great misdirection, making me think about shoveling snow in the Indiana winter. The second, [Fix as a pointer]. In computer science, it's quite easy to have problems with syntax, using pointers to memory locations, so this clue had me baffled for a long time, thinking about what coding lingo would be appropriate. I felt silly (and delighted) when it turned out to refer to pointer-type dog. Dog-nabit, that's some nice stuff!