Another crossword puzzle of mine was published in the New York Times today. Good. I’m slowly reaching my goal of becoming a “famous” constructor. I doubt I will ever reach Elizabeth Gorski level – she’s the Leonhard Euler of crossword puzzle construction – but I would like to get to the point where every solver who cares about bylines recognizes my name, says “Oh, him again,” and then either smiles or sighs depending on their taste.
I submitted this puzzle about a year and a half ago, which is a pretty typical turnaround time for one of my themeless puzzles. I groused a few entries ago about the lag time from submission to publication in the New York Times, because I feel like it causes a misrepresentation of my current constructing skills. I don't feel that way as strongly with this puzzle, but the sentiment is still there a bit. To use a sports analogy: I feel like I'm nearing my prime, but solvers are doing my rookie year puzzles.
To take the comparison further, consider the career of retired baseball pitcher Randy Johnson.* In the early ‘90s, he was decent enough ballplayer -- a legit major league starter, but not a star. He threw a few great games and showed promise, but he was inconsistent and wild. So he worked on his control, and within a few years he was one of the best pitchers in the game. Now imagine it is 1993 -- Johnson’s first great season -- but instead of seeing what’s happening in the current season, baseball fans can only see his games from two years earlier, 1991. Nobody will see his 1993 season until 1995, when he will be in the midst of an even better season. That would be a bit frustrating for Johnson, right? That’s how I feel. And, yes, I am aware that I just compared myself to one of the greatest players in baseball history. I’m cool with that.
Anyway…
This puzzle is my first published attempt at a super low word count puzzle. It’s only 64 words (52 of which are longer than four letters), but filling it in was less daunting than one might think, because of the four Tetris-looking blocks of cheater squares. I think the staircase pattern helps as well. Honestly, this isn’t my favorite grid layout in the world, but I think it’s a nice changeup (keeping the baseball theme going) to the typical stack-heavy themeless patterns. It’s something different, which is good. You gotta throw off the solver's timing once in a while -- mix it up.
I’m mostly happy with the way it turned out, but it does have a few cringe-worthy parts that I might have been able to eliminate if I made it today. My least favorite part is the EAPOE, SATANS, RATINE section. That’s an abbreviated name on top of a random possessive on top of an obscure, boring word. That's not great. Then there is SAR on STER, which is less offensive, but also ugly. But that one is pretty well cooked into the puzzle. The EAPOE part I might be able to extricate and replace with something better. But then again maybe not. That was the last part of the puzzle I filled in, and it took me a very long time, so maybe that area is just thorny and there will be compromises no matter what. Plus, it is holding together the SATINSHEETS/MEMORYHOLE crossing, which I quite like. SATINSHEETS reminds me of the Madonna song “Express Yourself” (Satin Sheets are very romantic, but what happens when you’re not in bed…), and MEMORYHOLE reminds me of the Savage Lovecast. Of course, it is originally from 1984 (pretty good book -- although I think Orwell got it all wrong on mass surveillance, but that's a whole other topic), but that is not where I got it. As I explain in my XWord Info notes:
OK, let’s hit some bullets and call it a post.
I submitted this puzzle about a year and a half ago, which is a pretty typical turnaround time for one of my themeless puzzles. I groused a few entries ago about the lag time from submission to publication in the New York Times, because I feel like it causes a misrepresentation of my current constructing skills. I don't feel that way as strongly with this puzzle, but the sentiment is still there a bit. To use a sports analogy: I feel like I'm nearing my prime, but solvers are doing my rookie year puzzles.
To take the comparison further, consider the career of retired baseball pitcher Randy Johnson.* In the early ‘90s, he was decent enough ballplayer -- a legit major league starter, but not a star. He threw a few great games and showed promise, but he was inconsistent and wild. So he worked on his control, and within a few years he was one of the best pitchers in the game. Now imagine it is 1993 -- Johnson’s first great season -- but instead of seeing what’s happening in the current season, baseball fans can only see his games from two years earlier, 1991. Nobody will see his 1993 season until 1995, when he will be in the midst of an even better season. That would be a bit frustrating for Johnson, right? That’s how I feel. And, yes, I am aware that I just compared myself to one of the greatest players in baseball history. I’m cool with that.
[Randy Johnson's killer fastballer. Don't watch if you really love birds.]
Anyway…
This puzzle is my first published attempt at a super low word count puzzle. It’s only 64 words (52 of which are longer than four letters), but filling it in was less daunting than one might think, because of the four Tetris-looking blocks of cheater squares. I think the staircase pattern helps as well. Honestly, this isn’t my favorite grid layout in the world, but I think it’s a nice changeup (keeping the baseball theme going) to the typical stack-heavy themeless patterns. It’s something different, which is good. You gotta throw off the solver's timing once in a while -- mix it up.
I’m mostly happy with the way it turned out, but it does have a few cringe-worthy parts that I might have been able to eliminate if I made it today. My least favorite part is the EAPOE, SATANS, RATINE section. That’s an abbreviated name on top of a random possessive on top of an obscure, boring word. That's not great. Then there is SAR on STER, which is less offensive, but also ugly. But that one is pretty well cooked into the puzzle. The EAPOE part I might be able to extricate and replace with something better. But then again maybe not. That was the last part of the puzzle I filled in, and it took me a very long time, so maybe that area is just thorny and there will be compromises no matter what. Plus, it is holding together the SATINSHEETS/MEMORYHOLE crossing, which I quite like. SATINSHEETS reminds me of the Madonna song “Express Yourself” (Satin Sheets are very romantic, but what happens when you’re not in bed…), and MEMORYHOLE reminds me of the Savage Lovecast. Of course, it is originally from 1984 (pretty good book -- although I think Orwell got it all wrong on mass surveillance, but that's a whole other topic), but that is not where I got it. As I explain in my XWord Info notes:
I had MEMORY???? for the longest time and kept cycling through various options (e.g., MEMORYCARD, MEMORYLANE), but couldn't get anything to work right. Then one night I was working on the puzzle listening to Dan Savage's "Savage Lovecast," and a woman called Dan saying she had a one-off affair, asking if she should tell her husband about it. Dan told her that if she thought she would never do it again then she should not tell him and instead she should slide it down her "memory hole." How serendipitous! Who knew marital infidelities could aid the construction of crossword puzzles?
OK, let’s hit some bullets and call it a post.
- According to Jim Horne at XWord Info, this grid pattern has been used one other time, 18 years ago. It is the grid with the fewest words in the Crossword Compiler library (in my version, at least).
- Hootie & The Blowfish were inescapable my sophomore year of high school. I never really liked them -- kinda sappy -- but whenever I hear their songs now I get all nostalgic. I was happy to debut LETHERCRY in a puzzle.
- Speaking of sappy, nostalgia-inducing songs, I originally clued CETERA as "'Glory of Love' singer Peter". I suspected it would get changed, but I had to try. I fucking love that song. I am a man who would fight for your h-o-n-or...
- MOMJEANS was my only seed entry. It was inspired by our president. And I thought the clue for it -- "What some women are waist-high in" -- was pretty good. I think Will changed it a bit, but I'm pretty sure I came up with the gist of it.
- Late entry, but I've been noticing that the initial feedback from blog commenters on this puzzle has been mostly positive, and yet Rex Parker panned it (Amy liked it though). Interesting. The truth of the matter is that I still have no idea which of my puzzles people will like and which ones they will dislike.
Alright, that's it for this entry.
*Speaking of Randy Johnson, he has a very underrated double-entendre name. Think about it: Randy Johnson. One of the great tragedies in baseball history is that, despite playing in the same league for nearly half a decade, Randy Johnson never faced off against longtime Twins outfielder Randy Bush. You can read more about Mr. Johnson, Mr. Bush, and plenty of other players with great names (even some you can't make juvenile puns about) in my terrific book Urban Shocker All-Stars: The 100 Greatest Baseball Names Ever.
8 comments:
Don't fret about it; Rex hates EVERYthing (and everybody, pretty much.)
I'm a Bird Person (and a Word Person) but had never heard about The Pitch. I must say, it's quite a sight; at least it didn't suffer. If he had been offered a million dollars to try that, he'd never have been able to do it....
Left a note at WordPlay, where my secret identity is Mean Old Lady (MOL to the regulars.)
Congrats on becoming one of the bylines I recognize, though when I see it, I do ARM myself for battle.
"Pan?" Rex wasn't much harder on it than you were, and for many of the same reasons. Personally, I thought it was a fine tussle with a bit too much pop/product/proper names. The La Mesa region made me struggle the most.
@Z Well, maybe I panned it too :) My point was just that it is tough to predict what the public (or at least the blog-commenting public) will think of a puzzle in advance, and I was using Rex's review for contrast. Conversely, he's liked some of my puzzles that many of his readers didn't.
@Elaine Always nice to hear from Mean Old Lady, but I don't think Rex actually hates anything, especially people. In my very limited correspondence with him, he's been quite pleasant. He seems like a good guy. He might be overly critical of puzzles, and I find his blogging persona kind of grouchy, but overall I think his blog is a net positive for crossword puzzle lovers, and I never take what he says personally.
@DJG - I don't see the problem. Just construct for the 25-85 demographic who loves/hates rap and classical music, has a deep fondness for 50's/60's/70's/80's/90's/millenial pop culture, thinks puns are humorous/a blight on all that is holy, and make sure you never include eels, Che, RRNS, RCDs, minor European rivers, or random suburbs. Easy.
Exactly. I remember reading in an interview that Will Shortz responds to people complaining a puzzle is too hard by sending them a letter from somebody else saying that the exact same puzzle is too easy. It's kinda like that.
It was a fine puzzle Damon. I enjoyed your write-up. I agree with your defense of Rex. He may be a curmudgeon at times, but at least he is a true critic. His followers are a much better group to gauge the response to puzzles. Rexites are no afraid to disagree with Rex.
Wordplay is the worst place to go, if you are trying to get an honest assessment of how people really felt about any particular puzzle. The Wordplay crowd mainly consists of a handful of regulars who are engaged in a continuous love fest with one another. Ten or twelve people make 80% of the posts, and any one of them would rather have a root canal than seriously criticize a puzzle or constructor. Political Correctness is gospel at Wordplay and Deb Amlen enthusiastically leads the choir. Don't take my word for it. The next time Rex and the Rexites really rip a puzzle, go over and read the comments at Wordplay. Most everyone there will be saying what a wonderful puzzle it was.
BTW. Did you intend that the word "guards" in 39A be construed as a verb or a noun? Just curious?
@Chaos344
Honestly I can't remember if that clue is how I originally wrote it or if Will changed it. Either way I think it is clearly meant as a verb. In fact, I don't really get the controversy. It seems like a nice Saturday-level redirect to me.
@DJG:
Thanks for answering my query: If the clue was truly meant as a Saturday level "redirect", then kudos to you! You might want to check out the post from @David in CA: at Rex and my assessment. Looking forward to many more submissions from you. I really appreciate your construction, but especially your comments on same!
Post a Comment