New York Times, Monday, October 7, 2019

Placing theme entries is always tricky. But when they're pinned to specific numbers, it's a major pain in the asterisk. Add or remove a black square anywhere and watch half the grid fall into misnumbered mayhem. Fix one corner only to break another. It took forever to set all seven themers. As a result, my first submission didn't have a revealer—it seemed impossible to fit in.

Of course, Will Shortz and Joel Fagliano then (quite rightly) requested one. Five months and seventeen layouts later — Q.E.D. The Monday slot feels like getting an A+ for keeping the puzzle relatively open and free of crosswordese.

Lastly, a shoutout to my own roots, as the product of an econ professor and a math teacher who've been solving problems together for 35 years.

One of the great joys in my life is taking on a Herculean construction task and seeing it through to a finished product. The exhilaration of finally cracking a seemingly impossible challenge is 75% of why I keep on constructing.

(The other 25% is stupidity.)

Requiring certain theme entries to be at fixed numbers is right up there with the toughest of trials. It's easy to get the first two or three into place, but trying to massage everything in is like solving a Rubik's cube — that operates under its own internal laws of physics. Thought you had a way to get all the reds and blues lined up? Bwa ha ha, I now operate in n-dimensional space, you sad little 3-dimensional being!

A great construction challenge doesn't necessarily lead to a great solving experience, though. Once I saw the gimmick and put in ONE, I quickly wrote in TWO through SEVEN at the appropriate spots, and the puzzle was effectively over.

Now, thanks to Keiran's careful craftsmanship, I did get a lot of pleasure from such long extras as FOREST FLOOR, SOLILOQUY, VIOLINIST, THOREAU. Talk about FINESSE — classing up the joint!

And better yet, the grid is so Monday-friendly. No major offenders, only minors such as ARR, FTS, SGT, TUE — stuff that's called out on editors' spec sheets as undesirable, but all easy entries for newer solvers to figure out.

There is something to be said about lobbing up a softball once in a while. I bet a lot of newer solvers will feel great about finally being able to finish a NYT crossword.

Although the solver in me shrugged and didn't get a lot out of the puzzle, the constructor in me was awed by the audacity of the task. I'm not sure I would have taken it on, seeming like the constructor's equivalent of building a perpetual motion machine.