Loosening Up

Loosening Up

A more permissive approach could give cryptic crosswords the popularity they deserve.

 

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

[First off, links to the current puzzle and solving guidelines]

We’ve been writing a lot on this blog about the world of British cryptics, particularly in contrast with the American scene. There are a couple of interrelated reasons for that. One is that cryptics are more widespread and more popular on the other side of the Atlantic; they’re found in five daily newspapers and in other periodicals. Even people who may not solve them regularly are often familiar with their workings. (It’s no accident that cryptics are often referred to over here as “British-style” crosswords.)

The second reason is that there’s a vibrant and ongoing discussion among British enthusiasts about the art of cryptic clueing—innovative approaches to wordplay, debates over the aesthetic merits of this clue or that. These are the hallmarks of a living and developing culture.

In the United States, by contrast, that conversation is largely absent. Instead, the world of cryptic crosswords is dominated by a rule-bound approach that declares anything not officially sanctioned to be off-limits. This has the virtue of giving solvers a solid framework to operate in, but it also excludes a vast array of possible avenues for pleasure and discovery.

To take just one simple example, a standard requirement in American cryptics is that the wordplay and definition must be etymologically unrelated; double definitions and the separation of long entries into chunks are similarly expected to be based on distinct etymologies. Yet breaking those rules at times has allowed us to sneak in a joke or pun of some sort, which in turn makes for a more entertaining and enjoyable clue.

Furthermore, making a strict adherence to rules take priority over the pleasure principle is hardly a recipe for popular success. (Who knows, the American Puritan tradition may be subtly at work here.) We maintain that a freer approach to cryptics can only help increase their popularity in the United States.

One reason we believe this is that the world of crosswords has been down this path before, with standard American crosswords. Until the advent of a new generation of constructors a couple of decades ago—and a revolution in style spearheaded by Will Shortz at Games magazine and then in the New York Times—standard crosswords were mired in a constricted range of vocabulary and approaches, and had a shrinking and aging audience to go with it.

The decline of the “Celebes ox” (an infamous classic example of the kind of deadly “crosswordese” that used to infest crossword grids), and an infusion of fresh entries, interesting themes and lively clueing helped American crosswords reach a wider, younger and more open-minded audience. There’s no reason why American cryptics couldn’t make a similar transition.

Please share your thoughts below, where you can also post comments, questions, kudos, or complaints about last week’s puzzle or any previous puzzle.

Disobey authoritarians, support The Nation

Over the past year you’ve read Nation writers like Elie Mystal, Kaveh Akbar, John Nichols, Joan Walsh, Bryce Covert, Dave Zirin, Jeet Heer, Michael T. Klare, Katha Pollitt, Amy Littlefield, Gregg Gonsalves, and Sasha Abramsky take on the Trump family’s corruption, set the record straight about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s catastrophic Make America Healthy Again movement, survey the fallout and human cost of the DOGE wrecking ball, anticipate the Supreme Court’s dangerous antidemocratic rulings, and amplify successful tactics of resistance on the streets and in Congress.

We publish these stories because when members of our communities are being abducted, household debt is climbing, and AI data centers are causing water and electricity shortages, we have a duty as journalists to do all we can to inform the public.

In 2026, our aim is to do more than ever before—but we need your support to make that happen. 

Through December 31, a generous donor will match all donations up to $75,000. That means that your contribution will be doubled, dollar for dollar. If we hit the full match, we’ll be starting 2026 with $150,000 to invest in the stories that impact real people’s lives—the kinds of stories that billionaire-owned, corporate-backed outlets aren’t covering. 

With your support, our team will publish major stories that the president and his allies won’t want you to read. We’ll cover the emerging military-tech industrial complex and matters of war, peace, and surveillance, as well as the affordability crisis, hunger, housing, healthcare, the environment, attacks on reproductive rights, and much more. At the same time, we’ll imagine alternatives to Trumpian rule and uplift efforts to create a better world, here and now. 

While your gift has twice the impact, I’m asking you to support The Nation with a donation today. You’ll empower the journalists, editors, and fact-checkers best equipped to hold this authoritarian administration to account. 

I hope you won’t miss this moment—donate to The Nation today.

Onward,

Katrina vanden Heuvel 

Editor and publisher, The Nation

Ad Policy
x