Sarah Lolley
  • Mailbox Missions
  • NDG Walks
  • What's New
  • Intro to Cryptic Crosswords
  • CBC/QWF Writer-in-Residence
  • Contact Me
  • Puzzle Tutorial
  • Practice Puzzles

On Seeing Your Hero's Early Work

4/18/2014

10 Comments

 
Picture
A friend of mine recently gave me a book of Fraser Simpson's old cryptic crossword puzzles: a collection he published in 1995. I was thrilled to crack it open. Fraser Simpson's puzzles appear in the Saturday edition of The Globe and Mail and it's a long wait from one weekend to the next.

In case you weren't already aware, I adore Fraser Simpson's work. His puzzles are clever, precise, and succinct. They have defined my own style as a setter. So you can imagine what a shock it was when I made the following discovery:


        His early work isn't that good.

Don't get me wrong; they are perfectly serviceable puzzles. There are no technical mistakes, and there are the right number of clues per puzzle. But the clues lack sophistication. Here's a recent example: Mend socks, blast it! (4)
"I could have written this," I often find myself thinking.

And that, it turns out, is an immensely comforting thought.

In a talk about storytelling, Ira Glass describes the awkward and humbling period that all creative people must endure when their taste level is high enough to recognize good work but they, themselves, are incapable of producing it.
Picture
We rarely see this period because we tend to only hear about creative people once their work is sufficiently good that it has garnered recognition. Because of this it's easy to think that the creative people we admire were somehow born with the level of skill we see from them.
It's easy to get discouraged by the fact that we weren't.

So getting to see Fraser Simpson's early work is actually a fantastic gift. If, twenty years ago, his puzzles were comparable to mine, it stands to reason that if I stick with it, my puzzles, twenty years hence, could be as clever and sophisticated as his. And if The Globe and Mail was willing to publish him when he was early in his career as a setter, who knows: I might be in with a chance at a comparable publication.

I've heard enough novice writers respond positively to Ira Glass's talk to know that most of us feel sure, at some point or another, that our heroes are just innately better in a way that we will never be.

But what I'm curious to know (and you might be able to help answer) is whether this happens in other professions, too. Do young doctors look at their much more experienced peers and think "she's so good; she must have just been born with more raw talent in medicine than me"? Do young researchers? Video game developers? Or do they recognize that so much of what we assume is raw ability actually turns out to be experience? Is there something about being in a profession with more technical aspects, and thus more formal training, that deflates this mistaken assumption?

- Sarah
10 Comments
James Lolley
4/18/2014 07:05:09 am

Darn...

Reply
Constantina Kalimeris link
4/18/2014 08:52:39 am

I think that when we realize that "all" our work is actually a work in progress, that is when we acquire the confidence to really begin doing our best work and that's the work people remember. We are not always proud of our baby steps but their value is just as great. When you have drawn 100 crappy giraffes then you know how to draw nicer giraffes. Nice too see your new blog Sarah :)

Reply
Sarah
4/24/2014 01:12:38 am

That's a great point, Constantina. Appreciating the value of our baby steps is certainly a kinder way of developing in our crafts or professions. I'll keep that in mind, moving forward.

Reply
Gina link
4/24/2014 01:24:41 am

Most long-establish writers cringe when you discuss their early work even when their first book was a breakthrough. The trick, I think, is to keep going and not waste time looking back.

Reply
anax
4/24/2014 03:15:56 am

To my mind the worst thing to say about the “Mend socks...” clue is that it doesn’t break new cryptic ground, but we can only say that if we take the clue in isolation. The trick to setting a good cryptic is to see how an individual clue sits within the typical 28-32 offerings, and to pitch it in such a way that the solver isn’t going to get irretrievably stuck. There are two things to take into account; how difficult are the clues to the intersecting answers and, with those clues solved, what sort of cross-checking letters are going to be available? If the solver is going to be left with W-X- then we’re free to make the clue fairly tough as there’s only one possible answer (providing those intersecting clues aren’t also tough). S-A- on the other hand would present tons of possibilities; D-R- has at least 10 common word answers, so it’s wise to ease up on the difficulty.
While the clue is far from adventurous, I think it’s been well pitched.

Reply
Sarah
4/28/2014 11:11:12 pm

Thank you, Anax! It's wonderful to hear observations from a pro. You're right: I hadn't previously considered how the clue sits within the grid and how the letters it offers, once solved, help guide the solver as she tackles other clues. I will pay more attention to this going forward.

The first puzzles I made were gifts for family members and friends with mostly personalized clues and answers (i.e., clues/answers that would make sense only to them). As such, my focus was on fitting as many of those personalized answers into the puzzle as possible without much attention to the rest of the grid. (To give you a sense of how rudimentary this was, I was also working with pencil and grid paper... I didn't realize Crossword Compiler software existed.) What is fascinating (and humbling) is how many things a setter must weigh up simultaneously: a good variety of clue types, cleverly written clues, and good pitch within the puzzle. I imagine that for very experienced setters this comes naturally. For a novice like myself, it borders on overwhelming (but, like all challenges related to cryptics, is also highly motivating).

How long did it take for you before juggling all these elements became second nature? Any tips you can impart to a beginner?

Reply
anax
4/29/2014 01:06:31 am

To be honest I’m not sure if it ever becomes second nature, but if I was qualified to give a tip it would be the same one I was given a long time ago; a cryptic doesn’t get better as it gets harder – the reverse is often true. I guess you could view it this way; a brilliant but tortured and complex clue won’t be appreciated if no-one can solve it, so the very least you can do is let the solver guess an answer from very, very few possible entries. If the clue is tough, then they do still have the chance of unravelling how it works based on a guessed answer.
Still, Sod’s Law does come into play. I’ve had “This answer was a write-in” for clues I thought were on the hard side, and “I’d never have got that” to clues based on straight anagrams (I even had that sort of response to a ‘hidden’ clue, and you can’t get more answer-in-your-face than that!). I can call it Sod’s Law, but the simple truth is every solver is different and you really can’t predict how a clue will be received.
I really can’t give much of a tip when it comes to balancing the clue types. Yes, it does come with experience, but a major factor is whether you’re trying to complete a puzzle in one sitting or spreading it over several days. Clueing a one-day puzzle will let you memorise clues as you’re working, so you’ll quickly see if you’ve used too many anagrams or initial letters or (especially) hidden answers. If, instead, you’re grabbing an hour or two to write a handful of clues then coming back a day later, the memory isn’t quite as fresh. Hey, my experience is this; an editor will come back requesting a few tweaks before publication, and I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve changed a clue and ended up repeating (for example) a wordplay indicator that’s been used elsewhere in the same clue set.

Reply
Don H
7/19/2014 02:09:03 am

I've been solving Fraser Simpson's cryptics for all of his twenty years at the Globe, plus some umpteen years before that with the previous constructor (whose name I have sadly forgotten). My father introduced me to them in my twenties, and my family used to puzzle over them together - long distance for many of those years.

While his early work is not nearly as artful as his newer work, the puzzles are no less fun to solve. In recalling his work, there was a period (a poor one to me) where he would use certain clue words to define a single letter - and not in a way that is in current usage (C for Celsius would be "good", but C for College would not pass muster). Mercifully, he has moved beyond that.

My wife and I now do Fraser's cryptics regularly; we are about six months behind the current ones --- though with retirement, we are catching up. We consider the solving of these "sidewise thinking". While some are straightforward - anagrams always provide a great and easy start to a puzzle - the hidden words/phrases are somewhat less obvious, though for reasons which elude us, my wife rarely "sees" them. I see them through the patterning of letters, and being a math / accounting / structure person that is somewhat logical.

The rest, though, these are excellent ways to build new neural networks, new connections, healthy brain tissue. As you suggest, certain of the meanings of words provide the flavour for a clue -- but sometimes it's just an intimation, a hint, and frequently highly obscure. Those are where the growth is. For anyone.

I'm hoping that doing these will keep my brain working "sidewise" for the next many years and appreciate the non-linear, non-logical and challenging thoughts they produce!

And what makes us both crazy? Hashing over a clue for hours one day, only to sit down another day to the cryptic and promptly fill it in, almost without thinking.....and wonder why the heck we couldn't see it so obviously the previous day.

Reply
Sarah Lolley
7/20/2014 11:20:45 pm

I, too, learned how to solve cryptics from my father and the family often puzzles over them together, sometimes long-distance. Isn't it wonderful to have something so clever and fun to bring everyone together? Also, like your wife, I have the hardest time with Hidden Word clues, despite these potentially being the "most obvious". For some reason (my tendency to overcomplicate things in life?), I very rarely see them.

I've been trying to track down research on cryptic crossword puzzle solving, the "sidewise" working of the brain, and long-term neuropsychological outcomes but so far I've come up short. There is some good research on regular crosswords but nothing specific to cryptics. Regardless, it stands to reason that any positive benefits from regular crossword solving would only be greater in a cyptic aficionado. Perhaps I should do a blog entry on the subject. Would that be of any interest?

The "crazy-making" process you describe of having the clues stand out to you after a good night's sleep is the result of what my father calls "The Committee of Sleep". The rich imagery makes it one of my favourite of his expressions.

Thanks for reading and for commenting, Don. If you have a little time, try one of my practice puzzles! Any feedback is welcome.

Reply
James Lolley
7/19/2014 03:24:19 am

Don H: that's the Committee of Sleep at work!

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Picture

    About Sarah

    I'm a writer, adventurer, amateur setter of cryptic crosswords, lover of "ah-ha!" moments, and exhausted mom.

    Archives

    November 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    April 2019
    May 2018
    April 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    March 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    February 2016
    December 2015
    September 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    December 2013

    Categories

    All
    Accents
    Acrostics
    Amazement
    Bob Dylan
    Books
    Brain
    Certainty
    Choose Your Own Adventure
    Chris Hadfield
    Christmas
    Coincidence
    Creativity
    Cryptic Crossword Tutorial
    Editing Puzzles
    ELLE Magazine
    Epiphany
    Escape Room
    Family
    Finding Your Way
    Fraser Simpson
    Globe And Mail
    Group Solving
    Hero
    Hidden Messages
    Homophone Clues
    Horcrux
    Leonard Cohen
    Love
    Making Mistakes
    Maps
    Marriage
    Memory
    #MeToo
    Momentum
    Montreal Review Of Books
    Motherhood
    Music
    Mystery
    Nabokov
    Natural Phenomena
    Oliver Sacks
    Personal Essay
    Personalized Cryptics
    Politics
    Puzzles In Print
    Renovation
    Secrets
    Setting Puzzles
    The Committee Of Sleep
    The Coriolis Effect
    Travel
    Wes Anderson
    Wordplay
    Writer-in-Residence
    Writing
    Yoga

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.