John Graham, R.I.P. (Sunday brunch: December 1, 2013)

“Any clue is legitimate which leads, by whatever route, to an answer which, 

80 per cent of the time, can be known to be correct as soon as it appears to the mind.”

John Graham (1921-2013)

Sad news from across the pond.  The Reverend John Graham MBE (Araucaria in The Guardian; Cinephile in the Financial Times) succumbed to the cancer that he informed his fans of last December of via a puzzle.  His final opus was published just two weeks ago, including another message.

At The Guardian, Simon Hoggart, Hugh Stevenson, David McKie, and Christopher Howse share their recollections and insights, and Alan Conner posted a selection of his favorite Araucaria clues.

Cinephile’s last FT puzzle, published this weekend was No. 14,484 (for the FT, not Graham: the British style [adopted by Frank Lewis at The Nation] is to give each puzzle a serial number).  The obituary in the FT is by Colin Inman, and there’s also a comment by Christopher Caldwell linked: Caldwell is senior editor and columnist at the Weekly Standard, a newer (but no less worthy) conservative counterpart to The Nation, showing that crosswords are indeed something to undo the divisions that come up in the rest of our lives.

A virtual wake is being held at Fifteensquared should you wish to share your thoughts and condolences.  Finally, a interview filmed in 2012 is posted below the fold, in which Araucaria shares thoughts on his craft.

So the weekend’s brunch menu starts with a tribute puzzle from the Guardian, No. 26,118.  The creators sign their work at 24d.  Even if you don’t normally try and solve British puzzles, give this one a go along with the rest of us.

The Wall Street Journal has a variety cryptic by Hex called “In the Shop.”  Commenter Meg warns you to pay attention to the instructions.  Hex’s straight cryptic is in the National Post as usual, blogged by Falcon.

The prolific Kevin Wald gets invited to lots of parties because he always brings tasty puzzles.  “Evening Out” and “More Flippin’ Games” are his latest.  The constructor warns of “inside references” in the latter, but if you figure out the rest of the themework, just trust your instincts: there’s really only one letter that can’t be worked out from the theme.

This weekend’s New York Times variety puzzle (behind the paywall) is an acrostic by Hex.

If you’re a Puzzazz user, check out their sale going on this weekend.  There are two free word puzzle books if you follow the directions at the link, there are two free books of your choice (up to $5.00 each) if you buy The Year of Puzzles ($19.95), and everything else is buy one, get one free.

So let’s have Reverend Graham have the last word...

Wall Street Journal hint (November 30, 2013)

Here’s a hint for the Wall Street Journal puzzle this weekend.  As the instructions note, twelve answers have to be altered before entry in the grid.  The unaltered answers should help you figure out what’s been done to them.  As far as I can tell, the altered answers are not necessarily valid words.

Below the fold is a table of which answers are altered and which are unaltered.  Drag your cursor to highlight the answer you aren’t sure of.

At Sunday brunch this weekend, we’ll remember the late John Graham: Araucaria in The Guardian, Cinephile in the Financial Times, and mentor and friend to many other cryptic setters.  Join us, won’t you?

Printer’s Devilry (Puzzle No. 3,305)

Well if you noticed that last week’s The Nation was not a double issue, and we have a holiday coming up tomorrow, and those pieces of information led you to look for a new cryptic from Hot and Trazom on Wednesday and not Thursday, congratulations, you were right!

Link to puzzle: http://www.thenation.com/article/177353/puzzle-no-3305

Degree of difficulty (by standards of this weekly puzzle): mostly easy.

Hozom’s comment: “Sending a Letter Off” in which Hot and Trazom show how versatile the deletion element is in cryptic cluing.  I would have spread this theme over several blog posts, since there are so many kinds of deletions: beginning, end, both ends, middle, a specific letter, and much more.  They’re simple enough, and frequently easy enough, that they work well when compounded with other clue types like reversals or anagrams.


This week I’ve been working on one of the original Stephen Sondheim puzzles from New York Magazine: “Printer’s Devilry” (I’ll have to locate my original scan from the microfilm to confirm the date).  Printer’s Devilry is a notoriously difficult kind of clue, usually found not in the normal cryptic mix, but in standalone puzzles where all the clues are of this type.  That’s because there really isn’t a good indicator for the clue type, or even an acceptable direct indication like we have for Spoonerisms.  Further, it needs a pretty lengthy set of instructions plus an example, unless you’re writing for the narrowest of solving audiences.  Afrit is credited with inventing the clue type in 1937, and is duly acknowledged by Sondheim here.

The concept is a variant on the simple hidden word clue, except you aren’t given a definition and the answer is already taken out of the wordplay fodder.  So not only do you have to figure out the answer, you have to figure out where it belongs in the clue.  Both the original phrase and the phrase with the answer removed have to make sense, and if the modified phrase reads smoothly, it’s incredibly difficult.  But if the clue has a fairly obvious scar in it, you can guess that that’s where the answer goes, and get the beginning or end of the answer from the surrounding string.

Since it’d be a spoiler to those working this puzzle, I’ll put the examples and how I figured them out below the fold.

I’m of mixed feelings about seeing more of these in American cryptics.  From what I’ve gotten of the Sondheim so far (9 out of the 36 clues and a handful of additional partials), the results can be really clever or really boring.  So I think the key is to select only the good ones for your puzzle.  But if you need to build an entire grid of these, some of the fill is going to be the kind of stuff that only can be done awfully.  And from there, you get a puzzle that’s neither solvable nor entertaining.  So maybe the way to introduce these is as the theme answers in a grid: selected to be good examples of the clue type, asterisked so you don’t need to try and fit an indicator into the clue.

Richard Maltby?  Mark Halpin?  Other variety cryptic constructors?  How about it?

Spiced cranberry and zinfandfel sauce (Solution No. 3,304)

The solution to The Nation puzzle No. 3,304 is below the recipe and the fold.

This recipe was from Cooking Light about a decade ago, and given how much I like zin, this quickly became an obligatory part of the Mitchell Thanksgiving table.  This is best made two or three days ahead.  The best wine for this is an inexpensive one from one of the wineries that’s known for good zinfandels, like Cline or Ravenswood or Rosenblum (I’ve met the winemakers of all three).  You need the brambly, peppery character of a good quality zinfandel, but the nuances of a more expensive wine are going to get lost among the other flavors.

2 cups zinfandel wine

3⁄4 cup sugar

5 (2-inch) orange rind strips

1⁄2 cup fresh orange juice

6 whole cloves

4 slices peeled fresh ginger

2 cinnamon sticks

12-ounce package fresh cranberries

Combine the first 7 ingredients in a medium saucepan; bring to a boil over high heat. Reduce heat to medium, and cook 15 minutes or until mixture begins to thicken and sugar dissolves, stirring occasionally. Strain the mixture through a sieve into a bowl, and discard the solids.  Return mixture to pan.  Add cranberries to pan; cook over high heat 10 minutes or until berries pop. Reduce heat to low and simmer 30 minutes or until mixture is slightly thick. Pour into a bowl and let cool.

New York Times solution (November 24, 2013)

Below the fold is the solution to this weekend’s New York Times variety puzzle, a diagramless by Paula Gamache.

Want some more interesting crosswords?  Check out our Sunday brunch menu this weekend and every weekend.  Today we link to a great new kind of variety puzzle: a Hex Pathfinder by Nathan Curtis, plus a Rows Garden by Patrick Berry.  Give them a try!

Positively speaking (Sunday brunch: November 24, 2013)

It happens a lot in a hockey game: a winger gaining the puck along the boards and skating over the blue line with the defense in pursuit.  If you’re the ref, you’re watching the play closely, maybe thinking: “don’t hook, don’t hook, keep skating, don’t hook” because the natural inclination of the players is to try and go for the puck as soon as they think it’s in reach.  Then that leaves us officials with a marginal call one way or the other: was it a clean play for the puck or was it hooking or holding?

This time, the defender tipped the puck off the winger’s stick and down into the corner, giving her teammates time to get back into position while the two chased the puck.  Smart hockey. 

After the game, I spotted the player and said: “you’re number 15?”  She nodded.  I continued: “the play where you were chasing the puck carrier and tipped the puck down into the corner?  Good idea.”  I added that I had been a defenseman in my playing days and one of the most satisfying parts of the game was learning tricks like that.  It’s best to play defense with your skates and your brain first. 

And in that same vein, I’ve learned that it’s best to officiate with positive reinforcement first rather than starting from a hostile or antagonistic position with the players.  You don’t want to be like NFL umpire Roy Ellison, who’s been given a week off after he lost his temper and cursed at Washington lineman Trent Williams.  Even though Williams (who himself is black) reportedly directed a racial slur at Ellison, Ellison’s actions reflected poorly on the league and on our profession.  

On the field or online, it’s always best to conduct yourself as though you’re miked up and other people will hear everything you say.

Puzzle-wise, it's definitely a weekend for variety.  The New York Times puzzle (behind the paywall) is a diagramless by Paula Gamache.  Look for the solution here Sunday afternoon.

This week’s puzzle from Nathan Curtis is a cool new hexagonal Pathfinder.  Give it a try and share your thoughts on it with Nathan.

The Wall Street Journal has a Patrick Berry Rows Garden for us this weekend.  If you’re having trouble with it, I have the enumerations for you in an earlier post.  If you’re stuck on the last dark bloom, just trust the force, Luke.  One thing I noticed about this puzzle was that the row answers were all about the same length, so there wasn’t much interlock between the left and right halves of the puzzle, making it harder.  If you you have a couple of longer (13-14 letter) answers in consecutive rows, then the one you get can help you with the intersecting blooms, which in turn help with the long answer in the next row.  But nearly all these were 10s and 11s.  

Don’t expect a Thanksgiving theme in this weekend’s National Post puzzle by Hex.  The NP is a Canadian paper, and Falcon and our other neighbors to the north celebrated Thanksgiving a month ago.  I found part of it easy and part hard.

If you want a suitably themed cryptic to solve while the turkey is in the oven, try this 2008 puzzle by Ucaoimhu.

LizR’s promised Doctor Who extravaganza isn’t up yet.   I’ll keep an eye out.  If you’re a fan of the show, this might be your perfect introduction to Brit cryptics, since you’ll get more answers from definitions and intersecting letters.  When you get them, you can then try to sort out the wordplay.

Finally, when you’re ready to put down your pencil, enjoy this article about constructing in the old days.

Wall Street Journal hint (Nov. 23, 2013)

Below the fold is a hint for this weekend’s Wall Street Journal variety puzzle, a Rows Garden by Patrick Berry.

Highlight the row you need to see the enumeration for just that row.

Happy solving, and see you at Sunday brunch

--Braze