Women of Letters (and Squares and Boxes and Clues and…)

Puzzles bring joy to so many of us. They’re an escape, a challenge, a satisfying little test of our wits, our dedication, our creativity, and our flexibility of thought.

In uncertain times, in times of trouble, people often turn to puzzles. Puzzles were a refuge for many during lockdown when COVID hung over our heads. And now, when so much seems uncertain, if not downright unstable, people will no doubt turn to puzzles again.

That’s not to say that puzzle solving is a mere flight of fancy, a desperate bit of escapism, a Hail Mary avoidance of difficult circumstances, hard questions, and treacherous times to come. Quite the opposite, in fact.

If you turn to puzzles now, you’ll see a road map that proves things can get better.

Because, like it or not, misogyny once dominated the world of puzzles. It was baked into crosswords from the very beginning.

Yes, Arthur Wynne created the template for crosswords. Simon & Schuster are credited with publishing the first crossword puzzle book, as well as all the bestselling puzzle books that followed, serving as the foundation that helped build their brand.

But it was women who made crosswords into something more.

Women like Richard Simon’s aunt Wixie. She insisted Simon look into publishing a limited release crossword book. (UPDATE: I originally wrote that none of the stories mentioned her name, but I later found some that included her nickname, Wixie. I later discovered her actual name is Hedwig Simon.)

Women like Margaret Farrar. While serving as “an unofficial editor of the crossword-puzzle section,” she prevented errors and helped establish some of the baselines that still stand in crosswords today.

Women like Ruth Hale. Ruth was the founding president of the Amateur Cross Word Puzzle League of America, an organization that set crossword standards like limiting black squares and symmetrical grids, building off of Farrar’s work.

Women like Nancy Schuster. Schuster (no relation to the aforementioned publisher) not only ran Dell Crosswords but was the first winner of the American Crossword Puzzle Tournament.

Women like Helen Haven. In the 1920s, Haven was the organizer of the first competitive crossword-solving contest and served as the puzzle editor for The New York Herald-Tribune.

As pointed out by Anna Shechtman in her book The Riddles of the Sphinx: Inheriting the Feminist History of the Crossword Puzzle, between 1913 and the 1960s, most crosswords were created by women.

Puzzles were literally women’s work! With all the connotations that phrase invites.

And crosswords were derided as a frivolous pastime because of it. Not only because women made crosswords, but because crosswords were predominantly solved by women.

The New York Times called the crossword “a primitive form of mental exercise” and female solvers were blamed for neglecting their families and wifely duties because of their “utterly futile finding of words the letters of which will fit into a prearranged pattern, more or less complex.”

Funny how their opinions changed just in time to profit on crosswords in the 1940s.

Much like the Beatles — who were dismissed as nothing more than a glorified boy band when thousands of women cheered at their shows, only for them to be recognized as a once-in-a-generation group of talents when men started paying attention — crosswords became “respectable” only when men took interest and took over.

The percentage of female constructors published in The New York Times went down during the Will Shortz era, as compared to the Will Weng and Eugene Maleska eras.

And like it or not, but “the average solver” concept — a problem I discussed years ago — is still using a white male yardstick for comparisons, to the detrimental of solving and constructing.

In a wonderful blog post on the subject of women in puzzles, the author of the piece opens with the line “I’ve always associated crossword puzzles with men.”

And I realized how lucky I was to NOT have that association. In fact, I don’t think I would be a puzzly guy without the women in my life.

My mother (the first female store manager in A&P history) still solves crosswords and jigsaw puzzles to this day, and encouraged my interest in puzzles in the first place. My oldest sister (a teacher) introduced me to wordplay. My older sister spent hours playing puzzle video games like Dr. Mario with me. My younger sister is not just a master jigsaw puzzle solver, but a fiend at trivia nights and escape rooms, forever challenging me to match her flow.

I was trained in crossword puzzle editing and construction by Penny Press’s crossword guru Eileen Saunders, and still lean on her creativity and wisdom every day (and marvel at her blistering speed and efficiency).

I was shepherded through the world of variety puzzles by Los Angeles Times crossword editor and puzzle badass Patti Varol. (Though it was probably more like dragging my deadweight body through molasses than “shepherding” if I’m being honest.)

And that’s not counting the undeniable and indispensable influence of Amy Roth (a shining light at Penny Press), Chris Begley, and so many other female voices that make Penny Press one of the best outlets for puzzles in the world.

I love puzzles because of those women. I have made a career in puzzles because of those women. I am better at puzzles because of those women.

The puzzle world is better because of women. It will continue to advance and innovate and thrive because of women.

How do I know this? Because women are doing incredible things in puzzles RIGHT NOW.

A small sampling of the women making puzzles better. Wyna Liu, Amanda Rafkin, Soleil Saint-Cyr, Tracy Bennett. Illustrations by Ben Kirchner.

Look at The New York Times. Tracy Bennett, Wyna Liu, and Christina Iverson are delivering great daily puzzles like Connections, Strands, and Mini Crosswords not just consistently, but brilliantly.

The aforementioned Patti Varol is absolutely crushing it at The Los Angeles Times crossword. With Katie Hale and Angela Kinsella Olsen on Patti’s team, every month since mid-April 2022 has had a minimum of 50% women constructors and often exceeds that, all while delivering topnotch puzzles.

The New Yorker, USA Today, The Slate Crossword? Liz Maynes-Aminzade, Amanda Rafkin, Quiara Vasquez. Brooke Husic runs PuzzMo (where Rachel Fabi constructed my favorite puzzle of the year!) and Amy Reynaldo co-edits Crosswords With Friends.

Rebecca Goldstein just won the Orca for constructor of the year. Smarter people than me have called Stella Zawistowski a crossword boss in every sense of the word. Ada Nicolle won the 2024 Lollapuzzoola crossword tournament.

The impact of projects like Women of Letters and The Inkubator weren’t just the tip of the iceberg, they were the tip of the spear. A spear aimed directly at the heart of outdated notions of who makes crosswords and who solves them, dismantling the idea of some mythical “average solver” that has never truly represented the crossword audience.

As constructors, editors, and solvers, women in the past shaped puzzles as we know them. And women in the present are redefining puzzles. Not just in terms of representation (both as grid answers and creators behind the scenes), but in terms of acknowledgment, respect, and appreciation.

As for women of the future? I, for one, can’t wait to see what they have in store for us.

(And thank you to several of the women mentioned above for making this post far, far better than it started.)

Let’s Try Within-onyms!

The heart of this blog is celebrating puzzles and wordplay in as many forms as possible, so for today’s blog, here’s a puzzle for you to solve!

I call this puzzle “Within-onyms” and the concept is simple. I’ll give you a combination of letters and blanks. Each blank represents a missing letter. The given letters spell out not only a word, but your clue as well. Because when you fill those blanks with the missing letters, you’ll spell out a larger word that’s a synonym of the given word.

For example, I give you this Within-onym:

G I _ A N T _ _

The given letters spell GIANT, but if you add a G, I, and C, you spell the word GIGANTIC, a synonym of GIANT!

Ready to try it for yourself? Careful, they get tougher as we go!

WITHIN-ONYMS

L A _ _ S T

_ _ N O _ _ B L E

_ _ T _ _ O M B

H _ _ _ I E S

M A _ _ _ L _ _ E

S P _ _ _ _ E D

_ _ S E _ _ E

U _ _ _ G _ _ L Y

_ _ H E _ I _ _ R

_ _ _ T A _ I N _ T _

_ R _ _ _ _ _ _ A _ I _ N

B _ _ _ _ I _ G _ _ _ _ _ _

Happy puzzling!


How many did you get? Let me know in the comment section below!

Answers to the Halloween Mashup Costume Game!

Halloween has come and gone, but the glorious costume memories remain.

That’s right, today we’ve got the answers to last week’s Mashup Costume Game!

Let’s take a look at those punny answers!


#1

Image courtesy of TDR1411 on reddit.

It’s the Batmandalorian!

#2

Image courtesy of EvolvedLurkermon on reddit.

It’s Ruth Vader Ginsburg!

#3

Image courtesy of Epbot.

It’s Stevie Wonder Woman!

#4

Image courtesy of pnuttbuttafly on reddit.

It’s SpongeBob Ross!

#5

Image courtesy of Maude Garrett.

It’s Harley Potter!

#6

Images courtesy of lithiumflame on reddit.

It’s a Van Gogh-stbuster!

#7

Image courtesy of reddit.

It’s Star Lord Voldemort!

#8

Image courtesy of EvolvedLurkermon on reddit.

It’s Salvador Dali Parton!

#9

Image courtesy of amandabomb on reddit.

It’s Willie Eilish!

#10

Image courtesy of Zacch on reddit.

It’s Carrot Toppenheimer!


How many did you get? Have you seen any great mashup costumes I missed? Let me know!

Product Review: Gravitrax Starter-Set XXL

[Note: I received a free copy of this game in exchange for a fair, unbiased review.]

There’s something immensely satisfying about building a contraption and then setting it into motion. Marble runs, Rube Goldberg devices, clockwork toys, chain reactions… they all involve a meticulous step-by-step creation process that builds anticipation as you go.

And then finally, you get to pull the string, throw the lever, drop the marble… and enjoy the clicky-clacky fruits of your labor.

But I don’t think I’ve ever encountered a game that makes it both as challenging AND as effortless as Gravitrax does.

Allow me to explain.

Gravitrax takes the traditional marble run formula — gravity x (tracks + ramps) = good times — and improves it in every way.

The hexagon matting provides a stable base that not only makes it easy to follow the instructions included for all sorts of designs, but makes the entire design perfectly steady. Every piece fits snugly into the hexagons, so there’s none of the wobbly uncertainty that can ruin a flawless marble run.

Factor in ALL of the pieces provided in the Starter-Set XXL — columns of two different thickness to raise pieces, plates to create entire new levels to build speed, curves and connectors galore, plus specialty pieces to add new tricks and challenges — and you have an amazing launchpad for creating your kinetic designs.

So much thought has been put into all of the pieces included. There’s a triple launcher so you can race multiple marbles along different paths OR set up different chain reactions all at once to dazzle the eye.

There’s even a magnetic accelerator that can launch a ball uphill to add further distance to your track!

The instruction books are another standout part of the package. Like a LEGO manual, they’re completely wordless, and yet, everything is crystal clear. The first book introduces all the pieces and how to use them, while the second (much thicker!) handbook offers all sorts of designs to try out, starting from simple to complicated and challenging ones. There are six difficulty ratings in all.

And the instructions lend themselves to puzzly minds. They show you the finished product first, so if you want to try to puzzle out how to build it yourself, you’re welcome to. If not, just keep reading, and you can follow the step-by-step instructions, complete with piece listings so you know exactly what you need for each step.

I’ve been a sucker for kinetic puzzles and games like this my whole life, and I can only imagine the crazy contraptions and high-speed runs younger me would have spent hours testing and assembling with a kit like this.

So when I say it’s both effortless and challenging, I mean it. This incredibly well-designed set can be picked up by a child immediately, and yet, there’s enough adaptability and opportunity here for new designs, more innovative builds, and limit-pushing attempts at speed and complexity.

I mean, it’s nearly 2 AM as I write this, because I spent two hours trying out a new idea I had instead of writing this review.

I’m not sure I can pay the Gravitrax Starter-Set XXL a higher compliment than that.

[The Gravitrax line of building toys is for any number of players, ages 8 and up, and it’s available from Ravensburger and participating websites (in numerous models and styles). The Gravitrax Starter-Set XXL starts at $129.99.]

A Punny Costume Mashup Challenge for Halloween!

Happy Halloween, puzzlers!

One of the best things about Halloween is guessing what people’s costumes are. Clever costumes can be great fun, and I’m a huge fan of costumes that combine humor and design because they really let your creativity shine through.

Mashup costumes offer ample opportunity to show off (and often require some fun wordplay to figure out), so it’s only appropriate that we celebrate Halloween in the puzzliest way possible — by looking at some punny mashup costumes!

I’ve compiled ten costumes for you to figure out. Let’s see how many you can get!


#1

Image courtesy of TDR1411 on reddit.

#2

Image courtesy of EvolvedLurkermon on reddit.

#3

Image courtesy of Epbot.

#4

Image courtesy of pnuttbuttafly on reddit.

#5

Image courtesy of Maude Garrett.

#6

Images courtesy of lithiumflame on reddit.

#7

Image courtesy of reddit.

#8

Image courtesy of EvolvedLurkermon on reddit.

#9

Image courtesy of amandabomb on reddit.

#10

Image courtesy of Zacch on reddit.

How many did you get? Have you seen any great mashup costumes I missed? Let me know in the comments section below. I’d love to hear from you. And Happy Halloween!

Product Review: That’s Not a Hat

[Note: I received a free copy of this game in exchange for a fair, unbiased review.]

Most memory games are pretty simple, falling into one of two categories: you either observe a pattern and repeat it, or you look at multiple items and remember where they are when hidden/concealed.

Memory games that include a social mechanic are rarer, and memory games with a social mechanic AND bluffing are rarer still.

Imagine a white elephant or Yankee swap gift exchange, except in reverse. You know what all the gifts are to start, but then they are wrapped one by one and traded around, and you need to remember what’s inside each one.

That’s the main idea behind Ravensburger’s social memory game That’s Not a Hat, and it’s brilliantly simple… until it is suddenly not so simple.

As you can see, everyone starts with a gift. The first player pulls a new gift from the stack in the center of the table, shows it to everyone, then places it facedown.

They then hand that gift to the player indicated by the arrow on the back of the card.

So the player to the right with the sloth card received the space shuttle, flipped it over, and handed it to the swizzle stick player to their left, saying “I have a nice space shuttle for you.”

The player receiving the gift has two options: accept the gift (meaning that they know it’s a space shuttle underneath and agree with the gift giver) or refuse the gift (meaning that they suspect the item underneath is NOT what the gift giver said).

In this case, the game has just started, so our swizzle stick player accepts the gift.

It would be rude to immediately regift what they were just given, so the swizzle stick player turns over their “old gift” and follows the arrow, saying “I have a nice swizzle stick for you” and giving that card to the player to the left (the sunglasses player).

The sunglasses player accepts, turns over their old gift, says their line, and follows the arrow.

In this simplified version, the arrows only go in one direction, whereas in the regular game, arrows can go left or right (or, in the advanced play style, to any player, depending on the arrows).

Now, as the cards continue moving around from player to player, can you remember what was under all those cards? You’re gonna have to, because it gets harder and harder to remember what each card represents.

Eventually, someone is going to forget, and their “I have a nice __ for you” is going to be met with a refusal. If the refusing player is correct and the gift giver has forgotten what’s under the card, the gift giver takes that card and gets a point. If the refusing player is incorrect and the gift giver correctly remembered what’s under the card, then the refusing player takes the card and gets a point.

The game then resumes with a new present and all the previous cards STILL flipped over. The game ends when one player gets three points.


This combination of memory, interaction, and bluffing (if you forget what’s under your card) makes for a very fun, very mellow play experience, one that only grows tougher and more entertaining the more you play.

On the second game, I had so many images in my head from previous rounds that I immediately forgot what was under my card and earned a point.

With up to eight players at the table, 110 cards to choose from, plus mechanics to make the game easier or harder for the players, That’s Not a Hat is instantly replayable and never feels tired.

Now, you may start to worry about your memory before too long. It’s okay, though, because you’ll quickly be distracted by the laughter (and bad bluffs) to come.

[That’s Not a Hat is for 2 to 8 players, ages 8 and up, and it’s available from Ravensburger and participating websites (in two editions) starting at only $9.99!]