Australian Crosswords

The internet provides a number of forums for those who’d like to write their own cryptic crosswords. Of course, you could always have a go and publish on your own website, but if you feel confident enough and are prepared to open up your work to the solving public at large, then certain sites will give you a publishing opportunity. Try these:
Alberich Crosswords, where you can submit a crossword but there doesn’t seem to be a public feedback mechanism; and Big Dave’s Rookie Corner, where you can get published and receive some great feedback.
Some crossword sites post the odd guest puzzle, not as a matter of routine, but usually to drum up support for a budding setter. A recent posting on David Astle’s blog is one such example.
I honed my skill by joining the Australian Crossword Club, who rely on members to submit puzzles for publication. Members give direct feedback through the monthly magazine, CrOZworld, which gives new setters a chance to learn from a very experienced solving group. Of course, there’s no point using a forum such as this and ignoring comments, especially ones that keep coming up about the same thing, as these solvers are the people a setter is writing for, and the ones that will determine how successful they are. A setter may think they have written a great clue/crossword, but if the solvers don’t agree, then they haven’t, it’s as simple as that.
It’s always important as a newbie setter to establish that you understand the fundamentals of setting before you explore the cryptic boundaries. It’s a respect thing. You’d like to think that those setters who “bend the rules” as a matter of style are also capable of writing a perfectly acceptable bog standard cryptic that could be published anywhere in the world. Some crosswords are so off the mark that you wonder what kind of crosswords the setter is solving/learning from. If a newbie employs non-standard devious devices but can’t get a basic anagram clue right, then is their work worth following?
There’s so much cryptic crossword history if you count time, countries and the number of publications involved, that there is no excuse for a new setter not to have considered the recurring issues that come up in crossword setting. Despite this, comments like this one make me wonder, as the new setter clearly hasn’t formed thier own opinion on a popular device used in their crossword. It’s not a clear-cut issue for a solver (as different setters have different interpretations), but it’s clear as day for a setter. A solver should be able to rely on a particular setter to be consistent when an indicator such as “centre” is used – it should mean the same thing each time it is used, not vary from crossword to crossword or even within the same crossword. Even a term such as “essentially” should be scrutinised so that the setter is 100% happy with using it – use by other setters in published works is not enough to give it a thumbs up – not all setters would use it. My general rule is that what I use should be explainable to a new solver, someone who isn’t tainted by crosswordese and doesn’t just except devices based on past use.

I’m usually scratching around looking for something to talk about each week, but this week’s cryptic comment is a no-brainer. Last week the owners of The Independent newspaper in the UK announced the demise of their printed version at the end of March, putting all their eggs into the digital basket. As soon as this happened, solvers of The Independent’s daily cryptic and their weekly Inquisitor crossword, started speculating as to the future of these crosswords, as the official announcement by the owners made no mention of what will be included in the digital publication. An interesting discussion developed, covering a number of angles including the role the Indy had fostering new setting talent as well as information about the Indy’s past dealings with setters. One thing was clear though, solvers believed the cryptic crosswords should be continued in the new digital format, and as a result a petition was set up on change.org. I’ve signed this petition and urge you to do the same as it’s really important outlets for cryptic crosswords aren’t taken away, especially ones that encourage new setters and employ a staggering 30 setters (according to the best for puzzles website).
I find the whole thing really interesting as this is in some ways what happened to The Stickler, but, in this case, the whole paper is affected at once. The Stickler was cut (and a host of other changes were made that shared more content across metro papers) to reduce costs and I was told at the time it came down the survival of the papers which were suffering from reduced advertising revenue. Here the Indy cryptic may well survive, but don’t count on it, as it will all be about cost. While setters are paid very poorly, syndicated crosswords are much much cheaper, and despite the numerous claims that some people only buy the paper for the crossword, it may not be perceived as enough to make up the revenue difference.
While the arguments for keeping the cryptic are passionate, there are a couple of factors that should be kept in mind. The number of people solving cryptics has been declining for a long time – younger generations are just not getting involved and replacing those leaving us from the older generations. The world has changed, and the solving pastime is not being passed on. Younger people do not read newspapers in any form, and word games tend to be shared among friends and played on the go. The notion that cryptic crosswords translate easily into the digital age is only partially true – there’s strong evidence from my experience that the physical newspaper, bought or delivered daily, is a huge factor in the doing and enjoyment of cryptic crosswords. An online app may well represent exactly the same thing, but there’s no “romance”. Whether it’s an app or a downloadable PDF, it doesn’t matter, it’s not the same thing. Sitting in front of a computer solving an online crossword is the last thing I want to do. Instead of picking up the delivered paper from the front lawn or from a local newsagency, a solver must actively seek out the crossword. Solving online isn’t an option for me as I like to solve at my own pace and usually at my leisure, which means I have to download and print it, and it becomes a loose piece of paper. I go and get it, rather than it coming to me. Older generations aren’t universally tech-savvy, and can be put off by minor things. I constantly have complaints from people not able to find things on my website, which, I believe, is simply constructed in a blog format. Of the many people who solved my crossword in the paper, now only 150 do it each week, and only about half are from The Stickler state, NSW. Cryptics generally require time and a scratchpad of sorts, pen and paper – the online app isn’t the same. A number of people said they had abandoned The Stickler Weekly because they didn’t have access to a printer or didn’t know how to print. Many people in retirement villages simply don’t have access to luxuries like printers.
There’s one big downside to the online world – nothing is missed, everything is logged. Currently the change.org petition has 400 supporters – there’s a real danger that the petition may show there’s not that much support compared to the daily Indy newspaper sales. Also, online editions will definitively show how popular or otherwise the crosswords are, either through the number of subscriptions or website statistics. 13 years ago I helped set up and contributed to Fairfax premium crossword service, which ran for about three years. The numbers just didn’t add up, and it was abandoned. Likewise the SMH/AGE crosswords were available free on the web for a number years but were canned, not to boost the premium service or be replaced by a subscription model, but purely because the cost of providing the service wasn’t matched by the number of people using it.
I really hope the Indy powers-that-be keep the crosswords and include them in the online version of whatever they publish, but I fear if cryptics weren’t already feeling the pinch then the gradual decline of newspapers in print will definitely put a spotlight on the value of cryptics to newspapers.

This week I’m going to be more self-indulgent than I usually am. I’m often asked about repetition and coming up with new ideas. The truth is that in a 15 x 15 cryptic grid, repetition of the grid words is inevitable, especially if you limit yourself to what I would call appropriate words. Not all words in the dictionary are suitable to clue, either technically or demographically, as the crossword must suit the average solver’s knowledge and vocabulary. Over time some words, especially short ones, keep cropping up. The compiling software is partially to blame, as it seeks the best path to grid completion, but the final choice is always mine. When a common word appears, I get a list of the clues I’ve used before, and scan them to see how I’ve tackled the word in the past. Most words provide multiple wordplay paths, but some don’t, and those that don’t I’ll usually pass by. However, sometimes towards the end of the grid build, I’ll have no choice (unless I want to rework an entire section) and I don’t look forward to coming up with something new. This is what happened with the answer to 1 down, DEBATE, last week. I had ten different clues already and couldn’t think of another way to tackle it. There’s BAT/TAB in DEE, BAT/TAB in (DEE)D, BE< in DATE, BED< + ATE, DEB + AT + E with numerous variations: it seemed to me I’d worked most of the angles. One obvious one left was DEB + ATE, but not all combinations work with wordplay and definition, so the fact I hadn’t clued it before meant to me I couldn’t find the right combination. This is where persistence and effort comes in: I looked up everything I could find regarding DEB and ATE, trying to spot different terms and descriptions, anything to convey the right words without watering down the wordplay components too much. Sometimes just one part of a wordplay comes to the party, and the other stubbornly holds true to itself enough to create a mismatch, which is what I thought was going to be the result of this clue. DEB = One who’s coming out was great, but how to link it to ATE and DEBATE? In my time I must have searched for synonyms for EAT and ATE a thousand times, so when I started looking again I didn’t hold out much hope for something suitable. I was prepared to look, be disappointed and start writing the clue a different way, but no, I found a term I hadn’t used before that fitted perfectly: had something. Combined with a definition for DEBATE in verb form and I think I created the perfect clue – One who’s coming out had something to consider (6). Really simple in construction that reads well, with deception and economy. My favourite sort of clue.