Words and Puzzles Conference

We are in Oxford for a few days at the moment, primarily so I could attend the Word and Puzzles Conference at Magdalen College today.

It was an excellent event - both educational and entertaining. This was the announcement.

This was the agenda

Here is a short summary with some of my photos.

The first talk from Christopher Spathis gave us an insight into the ongoing work to maintain the Oxford English Dictionary.

I was particularly interested in the examples of how the meanings of words have evolved and the related quotes. "A lot of OED's definitions might have made perfect sense at the time but are unclear, unhelpful or even puzzling to the modern reader."

I liked the "addicted" examples - "Tea-faced, adj. Having a sallow or effeminate countenance like one addicted to tea-drinking" and "Ginghammy, adj. Addicted to wearing gingham". I also liked the examples of the word "turgid" being used in new ways that don't match the dictionary definition ("Swollen, distended, puffed out" or "figurative in reference to language: Inflated, grandiloquent, pompous, bombastic") , such as "The second half of the season so far has been turgid. Slow ponderous and weak."

Chris finished with telling us his favourite word is "Perhaps, adv. Expressing a hypothetical, contingent, conjectural or uncertain possibility: it may be (that), maybe, possibly, likely". Nice one.

Next up was Dennis Duncan.

His talk was based on the conversation in Oulipo on the 11th May 1978 between Georges Perec and Italo Calvino about whether the self-imposed constraints in Perec's La Vie mode d'emploi (Life: A User's Manual) should be revealed. Georges was against it, limiting his explanation in the book to a list, in parentheses, at the end of the book of people quoted in the text. Dennis explained the clever structure and then went on to talk about the difference between reading prose as prose or as a puzzle, showing a section of Paradise Lost which has the acrostic SATAN in the text. He showed us a quote from Joseph Addison from 1711 stating "The acrostic was probably invented about the same time as the anagram tho' it is impossible to decide whether the Inventor of one or the other was the greater Blockhead." and that any form of wordplay (e.g. anagrams, chronograms, lipograms, acrostics and doggerel rhymes" is "false Wit". I don't think that got much agreement from the audience!

Then came Jennifer Neville whose talk was entitled "The Case for Irresolution in the Exeter Book Riddles".

She introduced us to  Old English poetry, including the use of Kennings, metaphors in the form of a compound noun, such as  "ban-hus - bone-house -> body". We were then treated to a case study in the form of an analysis of Riddle 19 : Bright-Headed from the 10th century Exeter Book.

Here it is translated after deciphering the runes and reversing them...

But there was a twist. The last sentence should say "Say what I am called". I won't spoil the mystery by explaining Jennifer's answer!

Sam Caleb was next giving a talk entitled "Le Roman-Puzzle: Francophone Postwar Experimentalism and the Implied Solution".

He talked in particular about Alain Robbe-Grille. He was one of the figures most associated with the Nouveau Roman (lit. 'new novel') trend of the 1960s. Rejecting many of the established features of the novel to date, Robbe-Grillet regarded many earlier novelists as old-fashioned in their focus on plot, action, narrative, ideas, and character. Instead, he put forward a theory of the novel as focused on objects: the ideal nouveau roman would be an individual version and vision of things, subordinating plot and character to the details of the world rather than enlisting the world in their service.

The film Last Year at Marienbad was described as a particularly interesting example.  

After the coffee break we had an entertaining keynote address by comedy writer and actor John Finnemore.

He talked about puzzles and literature and told the story behind his own book The Researcher's First Murder, which is a novel presented as a puzzle.

"A body is found stabbed to death in a locked room. The police find no weapon, no motive and no suspects. However, the murderer has in their possession a box of one hundred cryptic picture postcards which – if properly understood – would explain not just this murder, but nine others. These are those cards. Solvers must rearrange the pages of text to unravel the story and identify the murderer, victim and location for each of the ten murders. They must also consider the separate puzzles presented by the curious images on the other sides."

I've told my wife that's what I want for my birthday. You can find John's personal blog here.

The conference continued with a talk "‘Cross (with) Words - Negotiating Form and Meaning in the Crossword" given by Iris Greaney.

Iris gave us some examples of what I would describe as the difference between the surface reading and cryptic reading of a crossword clues, and how lateral thinking plays a part. I liked "Screw driver? (6)" for LIBIDO.  She quoted "Language is a system of interdependent terms in which the value of each term results solely from the simultaneous presence of the others". In the case of the crossword it is the crossing words that provide the context. She also raised the questions of "What is common knowledge?". and "Common for whom?" Good questions! 

Iris was followed by Johannes Hamre who talked about riddling language.

Griphos, he explained, was a Greek term meaning "An intricate or ensnaring saying or riddle". He illustrated this with the work of Aeschylus, in particular Agamemnon as analysed (in 3 volumes) by Eduard Fraenkel and then the riddling language in Shakespeare's Macbeth. It was interesting to compare this with Jennifer's talk earlier.

Last before lunch was Andy McCarroll on "What Makes a Good Cryptic Clue?".

I've met Andy a few times at crossword get-togethers and enjoy solving his puzzles in the Independent which he sets under the pseudonym Eccles. He said a good clue must consist of at least one of "An amusing or intriguing surface" and "A large penny-drop moment" and suggested it also should be grammatically correct. He gave some entertaining examples, including "Half of Elon Musk's head is wood". He finished by saying "I've run out of time, so I can't include what I was going to tell you how to make your fortune from cryptic crosswords.", which raised a laugh, particularly from the crossword setters in the audience.

Lunch was a buffet served in Magdalen College Hall. 

I was surprised to find there was a herd of deer in the grounds.

The afternoon started with a Q&A session with Susie Dent.

The conversation included talk about her book Guilty by Definition, which is set in Oxford. She told us there will be a sequel as she has a 2-book deal.

Drew Basile then talked about ‘The Narrative Function of Puzzles on Television‘. He illustrated this with clips from  his appearances on the TV shows Jeopardy! and Survivor.

After a tea break, we had our final keynote address from Alan Connor. Alan is an author and screenwriter. He has written about crosswords for the Guardian since 2011 and sets the Everyman puzzle for the Observer He is also the Guardian crossword editor

He talked about "Story in Puzzles and Puzzles in Story". He got the audience to complete this crossword...

...which features a quote from John Le Carré  "The cat sat on the mat is not a story. The cat sat on the dog's mat is a story", which reinforces the point made earlier by Andy that a crossword clue should have a surface meaning that is interesting. He went on to explain how text created by AI models is not interesting and that when a crossword compiler says "Would you like me to waste your time?", the solver should be saying "yes".

Next up was the double act of Cracking the Cryptic's Simon Anthony and Mark Goodliffe solving a crossword set especially for the occasion featuring clues by 19 different setters - most of which, if not all, were in the audience.

You can find the crossword to have a go at yourself here.

The conference finished with a Q&A session with Simon and Mark being joined by Charlie Methvin, Rachel Playforth, Ashley Knowles and Mick Hodgkin

I had to smile when, at one point, the audience was asked who was a crossword compiler or editor and something like half (or even more) of the audience put their hands up. Has there ever been a gathering of so many crossword setters, I wondered? One of those hands was mine, of course.. You can find an index to the series of Weekend Quick Cryptics, of which I am one of the compilers and the editor, here. And, for those who are reading this who don't know already, I built and maintain the current TimesForTheTimes website, where I am, as Johninterred, also a blogger of Quick Cryptics, Jumbo Cryptics and the Monthly Club Special.

All in all a great day! Thank-you to Roddy and Simon for organising and hosting, to all the speakers, and to the sponsors Oxford Dictionaries and Magdalen College.

You can see more of my photos here on Flickr