New York Times, Wednesday, July 24, 2019

This puzzle was accepted just over a year ago. It was the first time the NYT accepted a puzzle of mine as is, without asking for a revision. However, since I read a while ago that the constructor Joe DiPietro despises partials and the letter S in the lower right corner I avoid those things when I can, so it gives me a bit of discomfort to look at this grid, which has both. I've heard from both coders and composers/arrangers that looking at their earlier work has often triggered mild disgust. I suppose this can be seen as an encouraging sign of progress.

My original clue for TO PUT IT MILDLY invoked a shampooist.

TO SAY THE LEAST as a task for a monk? That's a quality one-liner. Made me smile.

TO PUT IT MILDLY as a Thai cook toning down the spice … that's close to working. Would I ever say to a chef to "put the spice mildly"? Maybe if his/her spice had lit my brain on fire and I was having trouble stringing words together.

Sadly — or amusingly, depending on if you were me or the observers around me — that's happened before.

TO NAME A FEW is perfect for a task given to the parents of octuplets!

Wait. TO NAME A COUPLE? That's a phrase in usage?

Great theme idea. I'd have loved for Jake to keep brainstorming, letting this one marinate until his brain could turn up one more solid themer. Going with only three themers — none of them grid-spanners — is already dicily thin. Then embiggening one of the three to make the puzzle work is no bueno.

I liked Jake's choices in long downs, four out of four winners. Some solvers not as witty or urbane as moi might not recognize the great Niccolo PAGANINI, you know, that guy who … classical music ...er ... he was a … composer … no wait … conductor?

SHUT UP YOU.

With just three themers, you owe it to NYT solvers to give them a fireworks-quality grid: stunning, full of oohs and aahs. Jake came close with this quartet of long bonuses.

Unfortunate to have some duds, though. ALGAL is hardly AN ACE up anyone's sleeve. I was a big fan of "Futurama" but even I'd have a tough time expecting the broader solving community to know LEELA's name, much less how to spell it.

Toss in some crossword-crutchy NEAP ORANG OPELS, and the grid could have used another round of revision.

Overall, a fine idea that could have used more aging to develop better body, refinement, and distinction.

I like this one more than Jeff does because the theme is delightful.

Tell me if this analogy works for you. If Jeff and I were hired to be Olympic judges, he'd handle figure skating pairs and I'd take care of ice dancing. The two categories seem similar, but one focuses more on technical merit, and the other on artistic impression. If a puzzle has a slight wobble when landing the triple axel, Jeff would mark down his score while I might not even notice, being caught up in the beauty of the flow between moves instead.

That makes Jeff more sophisticated than me. On the other hand, I'm a better hockey player so why listen to him?