New York Times, Friday, August 25, 2017

This is a weird case where my original seed entry* was deemed a puzzle killer, but Will was interested in the rest of the grid, so I salvaged the puzzle. Unfortunately, this led to the grid having less sparkle than I aim for in my puzzles today — the parts of the grid which can typically shine most are the least constrained parts, and tearing out my only seed then rebuilding that section effectively led to the grid having zero unconstrained regions.

It is pretty clean, though, I think — a bit more flash / personality and I'd really like it. I DON'T MIND, though! I wouldn't have submitted the revision if I didn't think it had enough GOOD STUFF, and I hope solvers agree.

I love writing hard clues, so my recent focus on themeless puzzles has been lots of fun in that regard. My favorites here are for ODOR EATER, PUFFERFISH (also my fav entry in the puzzle), TAROT CARDS, and ULTRASONIC. I also love all the clue echoes Will and co. added — stuff like giving three entries the clue [Test] and the disparate John Hancock references adds a nice sense of cohesion for me as a solver.

Til next time!

*This entry was "MOM, DAD — I'M GAY" which was (fairly) rejected for being arbitrary. I got too attached to the clue [Parental advisory about sexual content?] to realize that, I think (and it's possible that clue is too "risque" anyway). Being more objective and recognizing that other people's experiences / preferences differ from my own has been an ongoing goal for me in construction — and my focus on improving in that arena has greatly improved the puzzles I've made in the year-plus since I made this one (I hope???).

GOOD STUFF all around today, Sam jam-packing in so many assets. It's such a rush to keep uncovering great entry after great entry after great entry, SORORITY ROW to NEVER EVER to BANANA PEELS to PUFFER FISH to TAROT CARDS. I count about 13 assets in this themeless, well over my threshold of 10.

I also liked the intersections of TAKE A SNOOZE / DOZE (both using that snazzy Z!) and ASSAY / TRY both clued as "test." There's something so fortuitous about those sorts of crossings in a themeless.

There were a couple of entries that fell flat to my ear. FRESH FACED … hmm. DARE ME? These do appear to be reasonable phrases, at least to Google. I wouldn't go out of my way to incorporate either into a themeless, though.

I wonder if some solvers will complain about HEGIRA and/or ALEWIFE, especially crossing each other? I don't actually mind either, and I'd much rather get a HEGIRA than a DARE ME. There's so much subjectivity in assessing how "good" an entry is, but I'd argue that HEGIRA is an important term in Muslim history, something educated solvers ought to know (or strive to know if they don't).

I do appreciate that DARE ME is more inferable, but just as long as all the crosses are fair, I'd much rather have HEGIRA.

Great craftsmanship overall, with hardly a dab of crossword glue. I'd argue that nearly every 70 (and 72) word themeless should be this clean and sparkly — there's just no reason to settle, given that it's near the maximum allowable word count. We as constructors should rarely — perhaps NEVER EVER — settle for less.