Mike Shenk’s Wall Street Journal crossword, “Play It Again”—Jim’s review
Theme answers are familiar phrases that feature the letters REP turning upwards before finishing in the Across direction. The revealer is REPRISES (64a, [Repeated musical passages, and what happens in five answers in this puzzle]), which is REP RISES when you re-parse it.
Wall St Journal crossword solution · “Play It Again” · Mike Shenk · Thu., 10.17.24
- 17a. [Bones of contention] SO(RE P)OINTS with 3d PERU.
- 19a. [In a state of disrepair] DEC(REP)IT with 11d PERK.
- 28a. [Kin of popovers] YORKSHI(RE P)UDDING with 7d VESPERS.
- 48a. [Tourist shop purchases] PICTU(RE P)OSTCARDS with 31d IN PERIL.
- 66a. [Due to be disciplined] ON (REP)ORT with 55d PERI.
That works. I’m not going to say it’s an exciting theme for a Thursday with its groan-worthy pun of a revealer and the repetitive nature of each entry, but it definitely works as a theme. For sure, plenty of solvers will appreciate this theme for the little joke and the help in filling in each answer.
I will say however that such help was questionable in that SW quadrant with PERI [Fairylike being of Persian myth] crossing SEINES [Weighted fishing nets] and right next to ANNE [“Breathing Lessons” author Tyler] which could’ve easily been ANNA. I wonder if PERT, PERM, PERP, or even French PERE could’ve been used instead to make that corner a little less thorny.
I did like the naked JAYBIRD, CODE RED, SICILIA, and ANORAKS, but struggled with GO DEAD since I thought the crossing Spanish city was AVIEDO not OVIEDO.
Clues of note:
- 35a. [Title for Lestrade: Abbr.]. INSP. From the Sherlock Holmes stories.
- 37d. [Concessions]. SOPS. I only know this usage from crossword. Any of you solvers more familiar with it in real life?
3.25 stars.
Peter Gordon’s Fireball Crossword, “Downsizing” – Jenni’s write-up
I knew something was going to get squeezed into a rebus. Rebuses (rebi?) are more difficult when the rebus is a different set of letters each time and when the rebus squares aren’t symmetrical. Since this is Peter, of course it’s both.
I had no idea what was going on until I got to the revealer and the light dawned. 62a [Efficiently designed dwellings…and a hint to this puzzle’s theme] is TINY HOUSES. Each rebus is a kind of house. Easier to see in Peter’s grid.
Fireball, October 16, 2024, Peter Gordon, “Downsizing,” solution grid
- 16a [Places that might have themed suites] are B{OUT}IQUE {HOT}ELS. OUTHOUSE, HOTHOUSE.
- 24a [Device for bakers] is a KITC{HEN} SC{ALE}. HEN HOUSE, ALE HOUSE. The latter isn’t in my everyday vocabulary, which doesn’t mean it’s not a thing.
- 35a [2019 film written and directed by Tyler Perry] is A {MAD}EA FAMILY {FUN}ERAL. MADHOUSE, FUN HOUSE.
- 50a [Someone to hire if you have trouble with numbers] is a VO{ICE} {TEA}CHER. ICE HOUSE, TEA HOUSE.
This one qualifies as blazingly hard, and was a lot of fun to solve.
What I didn’t know before I did this puzzle: never heard of that particular Tyler Perry movie.
August Lee-Kovach’s New York Times crossword — Zachary David Levy’s write-up
Difficulty: Average (11m46s)
August Lee-Kovach’s New York Times crossword, 10/17/24, 1017
Today’s theme: ALTERCATION (Punny summary of the battle between editor and writer seen in 17-, 24-, 35- and 46-Across?)
- DRAMA over a PERIOD
- FUMES about RUN ON sentences
- TENSE regarding.. EXCHANGEing TENSEs (or possibly/more likely, the EXCHANGE is the spat)
- FIGHT over the TITLE
A distant relative of the “C+ — Fix!” Sunday puzzle from a few weeks ago. Played on the average side for me. As for the revealer, we ALTER the CAlcium-TItanium ON-button. Yes, that’s definitely it, swish. Also maybe just an ALTERCATION about ALTERing things, in which case it’s half pun/half vaCATION.
Cracking: TO DIE FOR, you simply must try one
Slacking: LTSULU, looks only slightly better than flbertyzqnn
Sidetracking: the red BARON
Amanda Rafkin’s USA Today Crossword, “A Sight to Behold (Freestyle)” — Emily’s write-up
Such a sweet one today!
USA Today, October 17, 2024, “A Sight to Behold (Freestyle)” by Amanda Rafkin
Favorite fill: YOUREGORGEOUS, DONTLOOKATME, FOREHEADKISS, and ICANDOTHIS
Stumpers: SOFTY (needed crossings, haven’t heard in a long while), GRASPS (“grabs” came to mind first), and LAURA (new to me)
A fun, easy solve for me today, with one of my fastest times. Loved the lengthy fill in particular and there was so much of it too! This grid is one of my new faves–it is a sight to behold for sure. Nicely done!
4.75 stars
~Emily
Brendan Emmett Quigley’s crossword, “Number Place” — Eric’s review
BEQ Blog Puzzle Solution 2024-10-17, CROSSWORD #1723: Number Place
The theme is perfect squares, mathematically speaking:
- 20A [Nobody lives there] ABANDONED TOWN
- 25A (2014 Ne-Yo and Pitbull hit] TIME OF OUR LIVES
- 45A [Surface between stories] MEZZANINE FLOOR
- 50A [Cambridge, Massachusetts neighborhood directly in between the campuses of MIT and Harvard, and what is literally in the other theme answers] CENTRAL SQUARE
I haven’t been to Cambridge in 30 years and don’t remember Central Square. It wasn’t difficult to get that name from the crosses, and knowing that the other theme answers had squares helped somewhat with the unknown to me 2014 hit and the redundant (to my ear) Mezzanine Floor.
But the NE corner was tough. I knew the architect Gaudi’s first name was some form of “Anthony,” but couldn’t remember how to spell it.
22D [Utter] wanted to be “rank,”especially given the K from 34A SUNAK.
I’d also never heard of 24A [Political pundit Kasparian], which could be “Ana” or “Ani.”
Either way, 19D [Genre for Pet Shop Boys or Men at Work] was NEW ___. (Why I didn’t think of “Wave” is a mystery.) I finally caved and looked up the Ne-Yo/Pitbull hit. For 21D [Metal god Ronnie], I’d had DIs (which looked like it could have been right). At least “Time of Our Lives” is plausible as a song title.
I expect this puzzle was a lot easier for anyone for whom 25A was a gimme. All in all, it’s a bit embarrassing to make my Fiend debut with a review of a puzzle that I couldn’t finish without a lookup.
Bryant Shain’s LA Times crossword – Gareth’s summary
Bryant Shain’s puzzle today features a typical theme type, though with a few mechanically interesting wrinkles. The revealing answer is on the right hand side: BREAKSITALLDOWN. Another three long vertical entries contain both IT and ALL separately within them. I get the feeling though, that this double requirement was quite restrictive, as only QU[IT]ST[ALL]ING felt like a choice long entry. POL[IT]IC[ALL]EADER is functional, whereas H[IT]SAPAYW[ALL] felt a tad arbitrary.
Others:
- [Set with 95 printable characters], ASCII. I had no idea it was that restrictive, but it explains a few things…
- [Shofar horn source], RAM. A thing in Jewish religion and some trendy Evangelical Christian sects too…
- [Eschewed cooked foods], ATERAW. Another entry that feels like some words rather than a phrase.
- [Sacred Nile wader], IBIS. Sacred wader around these parts as well. They’re surprisingly filth-loving for something considered divine.
- [Medieval Times prop], LANCE. Odd capitalisation?
Gareth
NYT: I’m jet-lagged and may well be missing something, but I’m not understanding the revealer- ALTERCATION.
I know what an Altercation is, but if it is about editing/altering things, then ALTER makes sense and CATION is… puzzling.
+1 ^
I came here looking for an explanation of the revealer… I don’t see the pun other than the alter…
p.s. I’m not jet-lagged, but still missing something, even after reading at Wordplay site.
I should add, I enjoyed the theme until I got confused by the revealer. But I was expecting a bit more from a Thursday than cute plays on common phrases.
me three. I want more from a Thursday puzzle than bad puns, and the revealer makes no sense. I could see this as a (not very good) Wednesday puzzle, but why they chose to run it today I can’t understand.
Maybe they were “positively charged” about each other’s alterations?
Not a laugh riot, but it will have to do. I do wish the FUMES entry was more idiomatic.
NYT: I think the ‘pun’ is simply ALTER-ALTERCATION, if that makes sense. I kinda liked it!
And just to mini-rant here about the kibitzers who complain about the quality and themes of the puzzles: do you think there is a countless supply of “great” “mediocre” and “shitty” puzzles that Will/Joel choose from everyday?? And today they picked from last one?
I’m curious how many puzzles have been submitted and have been deemed ‘acceptable’ for publication. I doubt there is a bottomless well here. We are at the mercy of the creators and I, for one, appreciate their efforts. They can’t all be special or none would be special. (End rant)
I believe almost everybody agrees with you. Unfortunately reviews/comments tend to focus on negatives. It’s why performance reviews got such a well deserved bad reputation.
Every one of my posts which point out a negative could be prefixed with, “I have great respect for all constructors. It’s difficult to create a publishable puzzle. I appreciate each and every effort. I don’t expect every puzzle to seem as if it was written for me personally.”
I think others would say something similar.
“I’m curious how many puzzles have been submitted and have been deemed ‘acceptable’ for publication. I doubt there is a bottomless well here.”
Then maybe that implies that NYT should be paying their crossword constructors more. They appear have the subscription income to afford it.
Most/all of us who solve the NYT are paying for them. I don’t have any qualms about griping about NYT puzzle quality (which encompasses construction and editing) if I feel I’m not getting my money’s worth.
For what it’s worth, they do pay the highest rates in the industry.
Only those folks who can self-syndicate or publish make more, or who get a full-time gig as writers or constructors elsewhere.
so i suspect from a business point of view, the NYT sees less benefit to raising constructors’ pay—they’re already above the competition.
If/when other outlets start to catch up is when they’ll open up the checkbooks
I agree that the pool is not infinite. More importantly, I try to remember that there are real people on the other side of the puzzle who have put their thoughts and energies into it and I greatly respect their contributions and creativity.
But I feel it’s important to strike a balance between appreciating the efforts and maintaining high standards. I think it’s possible to do both, and I strive to achieve that in my role as a scientific editor.
In the end, much depends on the tone of the “kibitzing” :)
I submitted (a few years ago now) three puzzles to the NYT, and they were all rejected. So that’s three brilliant, creative crosswords they chose not to publish :)
I think it’s perfectly fine to be respectfully critical of a product that ultimately we pay for and consume. Yes it’s someone’s creative work but it’s okay to not like the fill or not like a theme so long as people aren’t getting totally raked over the coals for it.
Quite a few bright and experienced crossword solvers here who don’t seem to be able to make clear sense of the revealer. To me, that suggests a problem (with the revealer, not the commenters).
And I haven’t seen any comments, so far, suggesting that this is a “shitty” puzzle.
For my part, I “got” the theme and mostly liked it, but:
a) it seemed more Wednesday-ish to me (not the constructor’s fault)
b) the revealer didn’t add anything – just elicited a “Huh?”
In 2021, Will Shortz said the acceptance rate was 3-4%. My guess is that there are more submissions now, so the rate is even lower.
That being said, they have said that a disproportionate number of Thursday submissions are rebuses, so the rate for non-rebus Thursdays may be higher.
NYT: I liked 3 of the 4 themers just fine but TENSE EXCHANGE didn’t work for me. It’s a consistency issue; the idea is supposed to be that they’re all ordinary phrases reinterpreted as “hostilities about grammar/style.” But the ordinary phrase “tense exchange” itself actually conveys hostility, whereas the reinterpretation suggests a conversation about verb tense that might be wholly neutral.
Interesting point…
I’d say TITLE FIGHT suggests hostility in ordinary parlance as well.
That one didn’t bother me so much. A “fight” that’s a sporting event is not necessarily hostile, it could be downright collegial.
dunno about that review on the wsj puzzle
for me it was the best of thursday’s offerings
surprised to see such low rating, very solid puzzle for me
WSJ: Agreed – a delightfully clever puzzle and a great revealer. It obviously didn’t thrill the reviewer; I rated it very highly.
I wonder if a lot of the folks giving a low ratings missed the trick.
that’s what i was thinking, too
In case anyone cares, the BEQ is a pangram.
Thanks.
I didn’t notice that, but that’s not unusual for me.
I also meant to heap some praise in my review on AppleTV+’s “Slow Horses.” Gary Oldman and Kristen Scott Thomas are great in that show.
Congrats on the new gig!
Thanks!
Oooh, is that you reviewing BEQ? I will start doing them again if this is going to be regular. I stopped when we ceased getting write-ups and explanations, and BEQ was unresponsive . I forget now what my problem was, but others had the same questions.
Anyhoo, glad to see you on Team Fiend!
Thanks! I’m happy to be a part of this team.
That’s the plan — I’ll cover both of BEQ’s puzzles each week. If you ever have any questions about them, I’ll do my best to answer them.
Welcome, Eric! So glad to see someone reviewing the BEQ puzzles again. I got stuck in a couple of places on this one and had to use the Check and Reveal buttons. BEQ puzzles are some of my favorites. Getting another person’s take on them makes them even more enjoyable.
Thanks!
I hope I’ll be able to answer whatever questions you have. I’m excited for the opportunity to try.
Best wishes and thanks on the new gig.
Thanks!
I’m a little late in piling on, but I was happy to see a review of a BEQ puzzle again, and a good one it was. Glad to have you here! And your lookups were about the same as mine.
Thanks for covering the puzzle. I also haven’t been doing them since no coverage here, but today I did and it was quite enjoyable. Appreciate the forthrightness about the lookup as well, sometimes I feel the reviewers here are inhuman, haha! Also, congrats on the gig, in my perusing this blog I’ve enjoyed your comments more often than not
USAT: When would anyone ever use the phrase “ALMOST HERE” to mean “I’m getting close now”? “ALMOST tHERE”, sure. I went with “ALMOST HomE, even though that doesn’t really work very well either. Hmm.
Worst puzzle, on the wrong day of the week, in years.
The revealer is nonsense.
Just, what, ???!
Truly baffling….