![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Very good. You give me so much at one time.
Yesterday was my cousin's graduation party, the ceremony having occurred on Friday night. It was a bit of a family rift, since there were two graduation parties going on at the same time, one here at my house, the other over in Redondo beach. As a result, families were mixing and matching themselves so as to be represented at both (and to avoid the subtle wrath of the graduates' mothers.) I went to the party of the cousin from whose parents I rent my house. I thought this was a good and logical idea.
I cleaned up my house and did some rearranging. I took out a leaf in my dining room table to open up some more space. I also moved a small table that I'd been meaning to relocate since I got the couch in. Now that table is behind the couch, instead not alongside it; This makes it much easier to walk around the couch.
As a service to my aunt and uncle, I allowed the front room (not the bedroom) to be invaded by the overflow of no-longer-8th-graders, all of whom, thankfully, were careful and used coasters.
At the party, talking with family members, some of whom I haven't seen for a while, my recent goals came in very handy. See, I wasn't the cousin who was working nights and living in the guest house in the back (although most partygoers agreed that it was a fine, fine pad), I was the cousin who was trying to get a play produced. To my shock and surprise, though, people were far more impressed that I was going to be submitting a crossword puzzle to the New York Times.
This was, of course, the reason I wanted to submit one. I enjoy writing puzzles in light verse and cryptics and random unusual things more. But telling someone that you do that is difficult. It requires explanation, and the explanation is too often met with dismissal. "Oh, really, that's nice. I don't understand, and so I'm just going to forget everything you say in five minutes, but go on." But everyone's seen a crossword. Most people have solved one of some difficulty. And everyone knows that the New York Times are the hard ones.
But, maybe because I know people who make crosswords and things far more complex all the time, I didn't think that it was that big of a deal. I envisioned it as something nice to fill out an informal bio type of thing. "Tablesaw is an avid puzzle solver and has had a crossword published in the New York Times." Nothing more.
But bringing up this submission seemed to draw out each individual's personal relationship with crosswords in general, and the New York Times crossword in particular. People were eager to tell me how hard they thought puzzles were, how long it generally takes for them to solve the puzzles, which are their favorite puzzles, how fascinated they were by the segment on Will Shortz on [insert news-magazine show here], and how curious they were about how it was made. Did I use a computer? Did it fill in the words for me? How did you think of a theme? And on and on.
It made me feel good. At this point, even if I fail horribly at getting a puzzle accepted, I've made back my investment on the whole thing.
Later on,![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
wjukknibs was going to come over, but didn't. So he has to come tonight, BIOTCH! I need to show off my fancy clean room before it ceases to be either.
MonNYTX: 4:45; MonLATX: 3:30.
I cleaned up my house and did some rearranging. I took out a leaf in my dining room table to open up some more space. I also moved a small table that I'd been meaning to relocate since I got the couch in. Now that table is behind the couch, instead not alongside it; This makes it much easier to walk around the couch.
As a service to my aunt and uncle, I allowed the front room (not the bedroom) to be invaded by the overflow of no-longer-8th-graders, all of whom, thankfully, were careful and used coasters.
At the party, talking with family members, some of whom I haven't seen for a while, my recent goals came in very handy. See, I wasn't the cousin who was working nights and living in the guest house in the back (although most partygoers agreed that it was a fine, fine pad), I was the cousin who was trying to get a play produced. To my shock and surprise, though, people were far more impressed that I was going to be submitting a crossword puzzle to the New York Times.
This was, of course, the reason I wanted to submit one. I enjoy writing puzzles in light verse and cryptics and random unusual things more. But telling someone that you do that is difficult. It requires explanation, and the explanation is too often met with dismissal. "Oh, really, that's nice. I don't understand, and so I'm just going to forget everything you say in five minutes, but go on." But everyone's seen a crossword. Most people have solved one of some difficulty. And everyone knows that the New York Times are the hard ones.
But, maybe because I know people who make crosswords and things far more complex all the time, I didn't think that it was that big of a deal. I envisioned it as something nice to fill out an informal bio type of thing. "Tablesaw is an avid puzzle solver and has had a crossword published in the New York Times." Nothing more.
But bringing up this submission seemed to draw out each individual's personal relationship with crosswords in general, and the New York Times crossword in particular. People were eager to tell me how hard they thought puzzles were, how long it generally takes for them to solve the puzzles, which are their favorite puzzles, how fascinated they were by the segment on Will Shortz on [insert news-magazine show here], and how curious they were about how it was made. Did I use a computer? Did it fill in the words for me? How did you think of a theme? And on and on.
It made me feel good. At this point, even if I fail horribly at getting a puzzle accepted, I've made back my investment on the whole thing.
Later on,
wjukknibs was going to come over, but didn't. So he has to come tonight, BIOTCH! I need to show off my fancy clean room before it ceases to be either.MonNYTX: 4:45; MonLATX: 3:30.
no subject
is all that furniture yours?!
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
Gabby
(no subject)
I may have bigger for you.
Bigger? My, my.
very good!
Re: very good!
Re: very good!