Australian Crosswords

Some weeks ago, a NZ setter, David Tossman, wrote on his weekly blog about purging “anachronisms” from his setter’s toolset. (David writes a cryptic for The Listener in NZ and his blog format for solutions inspired my weekly ramblings). David was responding to one of the SMH/AGE setters, LR, who had tweeted on the subject, offering up a number of possible deletions such as Model=T Daughter=D Son=S Sailor=AB. In my mind none of these fall into the anachronistic category as it’s not the length of time they’ve been in use that matters, it’s their current relevance or standing that’s important. Apart from the early days when it was about style rather than substance for me, I haven’t used “Model = T” simply because it doesn’t (Ford model = T, maybe), however, I think as a piece of history it has a permanent place in our language and therefore in our cryptics; “Daughter=D”, “Son=S” etc fall into a different category, one of abbreviations, and have the same usage now as when genealogists first coined them. They are not out of date, however, a setter should ask how relevant they are in general and use or not use them accordingly. My mum once asked me why I used the first letters of words without indication: my reply was that they were “valid” abbreviations – obviously not valid in my mum’s eyes and therefore not useful in helping her solve. Abbreviations need to be more than justifiable or long-used in cryptics, they need to be appropriate and recognisable to the solving audience. “Sailor=AB” is a current classification in the shipping world and deserves its place, but as with a lot of cryptic cliches, should be used sparingly. To me true anachronisms are those with a limited life like “CHE” for revolutionary and “DI” for princess – these are fine when current or recent, but lose their meaning without some kind of qualification if used later on. They always have a historical standing and can be referred to as such (old/Chilean revolutionary or “princess once”, for example), but their prime time has gone.
A setter is very reluctant to remove anything from their armoury simply because it gives them less to work with, and an average setter will just keep on using the same old stuff without really thinking it through. For experienced solvers this isn’t a problem as they have seen it all, but new solvers will see some of this crosswordese as a stumbling block to long-term solving.

Last week I ran an introduction to cryptic crosswords through a Sydney and Melbourne based group called Laneway Learning. Their aim is to get (mostly) innercity folk to try new things and they make use of cafes that would normally be closed during the evening. I’ll talk to anyone or group about cryptic crosswords as I believe spreading the word is the only way they will survive. Laneway Learning’s clientele, being innercity based, are generally on the younger side so it’s a great opportunity to get people involved early.
I do have reservations about squeezing anything about cryptic crosswords into just 75 minutes, especially an introductory presentation, as this first impression could start or end a solving career. I believe I could convey all the head knowledge needed to solve cryptic crosswords in about half an hour, but it would probably take a year of practice, patience and persistence for someone to become a proficient solver. There’s always a danger then, with a short time available, that budding solvers walk away confused, their heads crammed with new knowledge but very little practical experience to match. Very few people come cold to cryptics and “get it” straight away and it’s not for everyone no matter how good they are at solving “straight” crosswords.
Last week’s session had an added obstacle: a fully functioning pub all around us, meaning I had to shout and move through the lesson quickly. I think all participants got something out of the time and two of them made the effort to email and thank me. Maybe given time they’ll be weekly visitors here.