This previous December, I threw a celebration to have fun a significant milestone in my life: the 1,000th day of my New York Instances crossword-solving streak. My pals, none of them fellow cruciverbalists, poured in carrying their black-and-white greatest, armed with outsize reward for my presumed intelligence: How good I should be to finish the Instances puzzle day-after-day! Their feedback affirmed that the crossword—and notably the Instances one—carries a sure mystique. For 1,000 consecutive days, I had handed this bourgeois aptitude check, proving my linguistic and cultural acumen in my company’ eyes.
Since its invention in 1913, the trendy American crossword puzzle has undergone one thing of a reputational shift, from frivolous distraction to standing image. In actuality, the crossword is many issues: a web site of play, a cultural discussion board, a day by day pleasure. And, as a result of it traffics in language—the stuff folks use to type id, sign belonging, and ostracize others—it’s additionally a political entity. The author and crossword constructor Anna Shechtman is aware of that casting such a pastime as political may sound ridiculous. As she writes in her new ebook, The Riddles of the Sphinx: Inheriting the Feminist Legacy of the Crossword, the suggestion “dangers a double embarrassment: trivializing the intense stuff of politics or, perhaps worse, taking trivia too significantly.”
However Shechtman, who beforehand labored as an assistant to the longtime Instances crossword editor Will Shortz, argues that crosswords are inevitably politicized by the individuals who make them. On the Instances, whose crosswords have lengthy been thought of a gold commonplace, Shortz and his steady of check solvers and freelance constructors try to provide puzzles that adhere to a shared sense of “widespread information.” Certainly, some folks consider that the Instances puzzle arbitrates which information and public figures each American ought to know—or, alternatively, what sorts of esoteric trivia are particularly spectacular to have in a single’s again pocket. However in a nation as heterogeneous because the U.S., the very thought of widespread information is a false one. And since principally white males have determined what results in the Instances crossword, its content material is commonly circumscribed by the biases of these doing the setting up.
Shechtman has spent the higher a part of the previous decade agitating for larger range amongst puzzle makers and for crosswords that mirror a extra capacious sense of widespread information, a challenge she expands upon and complicates in The Riddles of the Sphinx. Her advocacy first took root throughout her time working beneath Shortz (who not too long ago introduced that he’s recovering from a stroke), with whom she typically clashed over what was “puzzle-worthy.” In one in every of Shechtman’s personal puzzles, as an example, he vetoed the reply MALE GAZE; they disagreed over whether or not the time period fell inside the bounds of widespread information. In Shechtman’s estimation, Shortz probably “pictured an viewers that seemed like him” when it got here to deciding what counted as “related” information.
These conflicts underscored Shechtman’s position as a lady in a male-dominated area. Girls have lengthy made up the minority of puzzle makers. Based on knowledge compiled by the constructor David Steinberg, beneath the 2 editors earlier than Shortz, Will Weng and Eugene T. Maleska, ladies made simply over a 3rd of the Instances’ crosswords. Within the first twenty years of Shortz’s tenure, per Steinberg, that proportion fell to 19 %.
This isn’t essentially an indictment of Shortz, who turned editor in 1993. (Notably, the previous 5 years beneath Shortz have seen an incredible uptick inpuzzles constructed by ladies, who as soon as once more symbolize near one-third of bylines.) The ’90s noticed the confluence of two forces that hindered many ladies constructors: the evaporation of their free time, which had been on the decline as an increasing number of ladies entered the workforce beginning within the ’70s, and the arrival of now-ubiquitous crossword-constructing software program. The software program, which usurped the standard technique of creating puzzles by hand, introduced extra laptop programmers, who tended to be male, to puzzle-making. This inflow, Shechtman suggests, gave rise to a Silicon Valley–esque “brogrammer tradition” within the crosswording world which will have pushed out or repelled many ladies.
However in Riddles, Shechtman locations herself inside a wealthy lineage of feminine cruciverbalists who helped pioneer the shape, organizing the ebook round 4 of them: Ruth Hale, who co-founded the Novice Cross Phrase Puzzle League of America in 1924; Margaret Farrar, who was appointed the inaugural crossword editor at The New York Instances in 1942; Julia Penelope, creator of the 1995 feminist ebook Crossword Puzzles for Girls; and Ruth von Phul, winner of the first-ever crossword match in 1924. She additionally notes that it was ladies constructors—lots of them housewives and homemakers with spare time—who created the first bylined puzzle, the first puzzle with a rebus, and crossword-solving contests.
Girls had been additionally a few of the puzzle’s earliest and most keen adopters, notably through the “crossword craze” of the Nineteen Twenties, through which crosswording quickly turned the nation’s pastime du jour. Due to ladies’s preliminary curiosity within the exercise, it earned a fame as senseless froth that lacked “any mental worth,” as one acerbic Pittsburgh pastor put it in 1924. However within the intervening years, the puzzle developed into an American ritual, notably as folks sought out distractions from the stresses of World Struggle II. (That the Instances, which had initially decried crosswords as a fad, launched its personal puzzle in 1942 was no coincidence.) Within the postwar period, a rising male presence within the crosswording world helped the pastime purchase the celebrated sheen it retains at the moment. When the exacting Maleska turned the Instances’ crossword editor in 1977, he helped burnish the puzzle’s fame for good. As Adrienne Raphel writes in her 2020 ebook, Pondering Contained in the Field, Maleska rejected “clues that relied on popular culture or used overly colloquial phrases” and eschewed “common accessibility,” thus turning the paper’s crossword into “a marker of a sure elite cultural standing.”
When Shortz took over, he reoriented the puzzle towards widespread information and “made it his specific mission to introduce extra various vocabulary—together with model names, well-liked tradition, neologisms, and slang,” Shechtman writes. As Shortz informed Vainness Truthful final 12 months, “My feeling was, if youthful solvers must know older tradition, older solvers ought to must know youthful tradition.” However Shechtman and others have voiced considerations that these democratizing efforts haven’t gone far sufficient; she stays pissed off by the puzzle’s slowness to include language with origins in tradition produced by folks of coloration, queer folks, and girls. Promisingly, some phrases that Shechtman says had been rejected by Shortz have since made their method into Instances puzzles, together with tidying whiz Marie KONDO, Okay-pop band BTS, and the green-tea powder MATCHA.
The crossword neighborhood’s disagreements over the boundaries of widespread information are usually not as area of interest—or as new—as they might seem. In his 1987 ebook, Cultural Literacy: What Each American Must Know, the English professor E. D. Hirsch argued for the significance of a shared cultural vocabulary amongst Individuals. Within the ebook, Hirsch included an inventory of about 5,000 folks, dates, and phrases—considerably just like the “wordlists” that almost all crossword constructors draw from to populate their puzzles—which may qualify. The purpose of the record isn’t in contrast to what Shechtman hopes to realize within the crosswording world: to create and embrace a canon of shared information that has house for everybody. As Eric Liu wrote on this publication in 2015, responding to Hirsch’s ebook, this “cultural core” should be “radically reimagined if it’s to be worthy of America’s precise and accelerating range.”
The lexicon of crosswords, notably extremely seen ones just like the Instances’, is a public-facing compendium of that shared vocabulary. As each a pastime and a public good, the best crossword puzzle isn’t a check of intellectual sensibilities however, to make use of Hirsch’s time period, a chance to enhance one’s cultural literacy. It ought to encourage and reward familiarity with a variety of cultures, preoccupations, and ephemera. On this method, crosswords may additionally serve a pedagogical perform: to not simply affirm what one already is aware of however beget new information. Shechtman calls out one notable constructor who’s doing this sort of work: Elizabeth Gorski, since making her Instances debut in 1995, has launched greater than 1,500 phrases to the paper’s crossword vocabulary, together with ANNE SEXTON, QUEEN IDA, JOYCELYN ELDERS, GEORGE CLINTON, PURPLE RAIN, NATURAL HAIR, and ANDROGYNY.
In my three transient years fixing the Each day Instances crossword, I’ve seen a veritable shift towards extra well timed and wide-ranging clues, in addition to extra range amongst constructors, particularly in age and gender. After all, blind spots stay: I nonetheless cringe each time I see a clue reminiscent of “12 meses” and must enter ANO—a Spanish phrase that, with out the required tilde, means “anus.” However above all, with this modification beneath method, I’ve seen that the puzzles have gotten extra enjoyable—drawing on extra various matters, spotlighting icons and concepts which have lengthy gone neglected, pushing the boundaries of the English language in thrilling new instructions. Taking the crossword significantly ends in a greater puzzle—one which challenges and teaches, surprises and delights, day after day.
Whenever you purchase a ebook utilizing a hyperlink on this web page, we obtain a fee. Thanks for supporting The Atlantic.
