Constructor: Martin Ashwood-Smith
Relative difficulty: Medium-Challenging
![]()
THEME: none
Word of the Day: Larry KERT (47A: Larry of the original "West Side Story") —
![]()
So … it's January, the time when I make my annual week-long pitch for financial contributions to this blog. Actually, I didn't make the pitch last year. I used last January to raise money for other causes instead (and it was my pleasure to do so). But this year I once again ask you (especially you regular readers) to consider what the blog is worth to you on an annual basis and give accordingly. As I've said before, as much as I love writing this blog, I treat it like a job— answers and commentary go up every day, without fail, usually at 12:01 am, but certainly by 9am at the very latest. This has been true for seven straight years. I know that some people are opposed to paying for what they can get for free, and still others really don't have money to spare. Both kinds of people are welcome to continue reading my blog, with my compliments. It will always be free. I have no interest in cordoning it off, nor do I have any interest in taking advertising. I value my independence too much. Anyway, if you are so moved, there is a Paypal button in the sidebar, and a mailing address here:
![]()
Rex Parker
℅ Michael Sharp
54 Matthews St
Binghamton NY 13905
Maybe I'll stick a PayPal button in here for the mobile users. Let's see...
For people who send me actual honest-to-god (i.e. "snail") mail, I have this great new set of thank-you postcards that I'm hoping to burn through: "the iconic Pantone color chip design in 100 brilliant colors." Who will be the lucky person who gets … let's see … Pantone 19-2025: Red Plum? Ooooh, elegant. It could be you. Or give via PayPal and get a thank-you email. That's cool too. Anyway, whatever you choose to do, I remain most grateful for your readership. Now on to the puzzle …
Update: I got my first snail-mail donation on Tuesday—look at the cuteness:
![]()
![]()
THE SATURDAY PUZZLE: It's a quad stack. Two, actually. Two quad stacks. I knew that's what I'd be dealing with before I even opened the puzzle. OK, fine. And it's much like all the others I've encountered. Looks the same. Has the same combination of dull / forced long stuff and awkward short stuff—although today I will say the short stuff is better than usual, possibly because the long stuff is so full of RSTLNE. Phrases with super-common letters abound: DENTALASSISTANT, STEMLESSGLASSES. Lots and lots of easy-to-work-with letters.There are a few interesting answers—most notably OBSCENE GESTURES (great) (51A: They're usually pixelated on TV) and PALESTRINA (27D: Renaissance composer of "Missa Papae Marcelli"), which only dimly rings a bell, but is lovely, and was pretty fairly crossed (unless NEALE got you, I guess (34A: Grid great Greasy)). But this issue of fair crossings brings me to the puzzle's one truly terrible element—the WAUKESHA / KERT crossing. Here is the one thing in its favor: I guessed correctly, so that "K" must have some tenuous claim to inferability. I have no idea what/where WAUKESHA is, but that missing letter *felt* like it had to be a "K" (my friend Amy says this was probably the influence of "MilWAUKee"…). But I had zero confidence in the "K." Was considering "B." Never heard of KERT, which is one of the dumbest-looking names I've ever seen, no offense (47A: Larry of the original "West Side Story"). He's been in the puzzle (per the cruciverb database) … twice. WAUKESHA, once. All three instance of these words had very fair crosses. You just can't cross one oddly spelled and not fantastically familiar proper noun with another at a letter than can't readily be inferred. We have a name for that: NATICK. (For a definition of "the Natick Principle," go here and scroll down)
Now, the last thing I care about, the Last thing, is whether any individual knew one or both of these. That is not the issue. Of course there are people in the world who know both things. Saying you knew WAUKE$HA so the crossing must be fair is like saying your aunt smoked and lived to 93 so smoking must not be harmful to your health. From a construction standpoint, you never, ever, ever want to have a solver end with one square where it's a know-it-or-you-don't situation (which is almost always proper noun x/w proper noun). It's god-awful form. If I knew neither answer and had to guess, it's a good bet others will be in same boat. And taking a random stab is not "solving." It's not fun. It's a drag. And it's especially Not the way you want solvers concluding their experience with your puzzle.
And that's the thing—these are answers generated by a database. They are deemed OK because someone already deemed them OK for an earlier puzzle so they must be OK. Only a computer thinks this way. A human being has to be able to say "yes, they were in other puzzles, but they're kind of obscure and, look—when the *other* puzzles used them, the crosses were ordinary words. So maybe these two shouldn't cross." No, Computer Say, 'Work Fine Boss.' There is a difference between constructing and database management. Subtle, sometimes, but very real.
Relative difficulty: Medium-Challenging
Word of the Day: Larry KERT (47A: Larry of the original "West Side Story") —
Larry Kert (December 5, 1930 - June 5, 1991) was an American actor, singer, and dancer. He is best known for creating the role of Tony in the original Broadway version of West Side Story. (wikipedia)
• • •
THE PITCH — [You can scroll down if you've already read it]
℅ Michael Sharp
54 Matthews St
Binghamton NY 13905
Maybe I'll stick a PayPal button in here for the mobile users. Let's see...
For people who send me actual honest-to-god (i.e. "snail") mail, I have this great new set of thank-you postcards that I'm hoping to burn through: "the iconic Pantone color chip design in 100 brilliant colors." Who will be the lucky person who gets … let's see … Pantone 19-2025: Red Plum? Ooooh, elegant. It could be you. Or give via PayPal and get a thank-you email. That's cool too. Anyway, whatever you choose to do, I remain most grateful for your readership. Now on to the puzzle …
Update: I got my first snail-mail donation on Tuesday—look at the cuteness:
• • •
Now, the last thing I care about, the Last thing, is whether any individual knew one or both of these. That is not the issue. Of course there are people in the world who know both things. Saying you knew WAUKE$HA so the crossing must be fair is like saying your aunt smoked and lived to 93 so smoking must not be harmful to your health. From a construction standpoint, you never, ever, ever want to have a solver end with one square where it's a know-it-or-you-don't situation (which is almost always proper noun x/w proper noun). It's god-awful form. If I knew neither answer and had to guess, it's a good bet others will be in same boat. And taking a random stab is not "solving." It's not fun. It's a drag. And it's especially Not the way you want solvers concluding their experience with your puzzle.
And that's the thing—these are answers generated by a database. They are deemed OK because someone already deemed them OK for an earlier puzzle so they must be OK. Only a computer thinks this way. A human being has to be able to say "yes, they were in other puzzles, but they're kind of obscure and, look—when the *other* puzzles used them, the crosses were ordinary words. So maybe these two shouldn't cross." No, Computer Say, 'Work Fine Boss.' There is a difference between constructing and database management. Subtle, sometimes, but very real.