Entry 300: A Crossword Puzzle Constructor Posts Mean Comments

My tenth crossword puzzle to appear in The New York Times ran today.  It is a low-count, themeless puzzle, which means that it is not for the crossword puzzle solving novice.  But, I think, it is a pretty good puzzle with a few answers that you might not expect to see in a mainstream publication like NYT.  You should check it out, if you are so inclined.  

(And if you are, then I suggest you stop reading this now and come back to it later, because what follows contains spoilers.)

I wrote a little bit about it here (again, spoilers).  And you can read a review of the puzzle here.  But I thought it would be fun to post a few comments from the haters and respond to them.  I'm doing it here, instead of a more "public" forum, because I really don't want to waste my time with a petty back-and-forth online, which is often what these types of things turn into.  And also because I don't want to come off as thin-skinned.  I'm not.  I really don't care about comments like this because: (1) I'm just not particularly sensitive to criticism (or in this case insults) in general; (2) Other people said nice things about it; (3) When somebody starts getting rant-y, their comments lose validity, because it becomes more about them (is this a moment of catharsis?) than the work; (4) My puzzle was published in The New York Times.  I already "won."  People you don't know hating on your work is not necessarily a bad thing; it is much better than people you don't know having no idea about your work.

So, without further ado:

This was the worst piece of crap trying to pass itself off as a Saturday NYT puzzle I have ever seen. How are A BALL crossing A BEAT, then A LUI, A GHA, A OUT, SAGER crossing RAVER, and RAS, RES, HTS, STES, CERF, CBER etc. fit to print? IJSSEL is easily inferrable, right? OH, COME ON now! Exactly half of all entries are shortz (3 and 4 letters). The boatload of obscure proper-name trivia plus BLAXPLOITATION and BICURIOUS did nothing to improve things, instead they pulled the puzzle further down into the gutter, which even LILLIAN HELLMAN couldn't prevent. A new low in NYT crosswords in my 45-year solving experience. 

For a good workout, try Stan Newman's Saturday Stumper instead. 

Enjoy your weekend.

  And one more:

Usually I find your reviews spot on, Rex, but calling this POS today a great puzzle makes me scratch my head and wonder if I have any idea what a puzzle is supposed to be. Too many obscure clues with zero chance anyone "normal" would be able to figure them out without Google. If you did, great...my hat is off to you. But I'm a mere mortal and I have to say GALBA (one of four emperors in a single year??), CHRISTIANMINGLE, FAUXFUR (hey veganism is about food, not garments), an unheard-of Lillian Hellman work, and some minor league hockey team in Knoxvile?? This is crap, pure and simple.

It took a truly awful puzzle for me to finally post a comment. Hope I don't have to again.

I like how the first commenter writes "A GHA" and "A OUT," when in fact the words are agha (a Mideast chieftain) and Aout (the French word for August).  Apparently words starting with 'A' are no good?

The second one does something I see often, which is thinking something is obscure because you, personally, doesn't know it.  Since he doesn't know Galba or the Lillian Hellman play (Toys in the Attic), he assumes nobody "normal" knows it either.  In fact, Galba gets nearly 600K hits on Google, which means somebody normal has heard of him, and Toys in the Attic was one Hellman's biggest Broadway successes (according to Wikipedia, anyway).  

Lastly, he clearly does not know what a vegan is if he thinks it is only about food.  Being friends with many a vegan, I know that it is about abstaining from animal products in general.  So I too hope this guy doesn't "have" to post again.  It's embarrassing for everybody.

OK, that's all I got today.  Until next time...