Editing Cryptic crossword (section)

== History and development ==
Cryptic crosswords originated in the UK.  The first British crossword puzzles appeared around 1923 and were purely definitional, but from the mid-1920s they began to include cryptic material: not cryptic clues in the modern sense, but anagrams, classical allusions, incomplete quotations, and other references and wordplay. [[Edward Powys Mathers|Torquemada (Edward Powys Mathers)]], who set for ''The Saturday Westminster'' from 1925 and for ''[[The Observer]]'' from 1926 until his death in 1939, was the first setter to use cryptic clues exclusively and is often credited as the inventor of the cryptic crossword.<ref name=mathers_strange>{{cite web|last1=Millington|first1=Roger|title=The Strange World of the Crossword (excerpt)|url=http://www.crossword.org.uk/mathers.htm|access-date=23 July 2014|archive-date=13 May 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230513202613/http://www.crossword.org.uk/mathers.htm|url-status=live}}</ref>

The first newspaper crosswords appeared in the ''Sunday'' and ''[[Daily Express]]'' from about 1924. Crosswords were gradually taken up by other newspapers, appearing in the ''[[Daily Telegraph]]'' from 1925, ''[[The Manchester Guardian]]'' from 1929 and ''[[The Times]]'' from 1930.  These newspaper puzzles were almost entirely non-cryptic at first and gradually used more cryptic clues, until the fully cryptic puzzle as known today became widespread. In some papers this took until about 1960. Puzzles appeared in ''[[The Listener (magazine)|The Listener]]'' from 1930, but this was a weekly magazine rather than a newspaper, and the puzzles were much harder than the newspaper ones, though again they took a while to become entirely cryptic. Composer [[Stephen Sondheim]], a lover of puzzles, is credited with introducing cryptic crosswords to American audiences, through a series of puzzles he created for [[New York (magazine)|''New York'' magazine]] in 1968 and 1969.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/crosswords/crossword-blog/2015/apr/16/1|title=The story of how cryptic crosswords crossed the Atlantic|last=Stephenson|first=Hugh|date=April 16, 2015|work=The Guardian|access-date=27 November 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Healy |first1=Patrick |title=This Time It's Crosswords (Not Cross Words) That Surface From Sondheim |url=https://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/16/this-time-its-crosswords-not-cross-words-that-surface-from-sondheim/ |work=The New York Times |date=16 September 2011 |access-date=November 27, 2021 |archive-date=November 11, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201111223539/https://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/16/this-time-its-crosswords-not-cross-words-that-surface-from-sondheim/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Pender |first1=Rick |title=The Stephen Sondheim Encyclopedia |date=2021 |publisher=Rowman & Littlefield |location=Lanham |isbn=9781538115862 |pages=423–425 |chapter=Puzzles, Games, and Mysteries}}</ref>

Torquemada's puzzles were extremely obscure and difficult, and later setters reacted against this tendency by developing a standard for fair clues, ones that can be solved, at least in principle, by deduction, without needing leaps of faith or insights into the setter's thought processes.

The basic principle of fairness was set out by ''Listener'' setter [[Alistair Ferguson Ritchie|Afrit (Alistair Ferguson Ritchie)]] in his book ''Armchair Crosswords'' (1946), wherein he credits it to the fictional ''Book of the Crossword'':

{{Blockquote|1=We must expect the composer to play tricks, but we shall insist that he play fair. The Book of the Crossword lays this injunction upon him: "You need not mean what you say, but you must say what you mean." This is a superior way of saying that he can't have it both ways. He may attempt to mislead by employing a form of words which can be taken in more than one way, and it is your fault if you take it the wrong way, but it is his fault if you can't logically take it the right way.}}

An example of a clue which cannot logically be taken the right way:
{{Block indent|1=''Hat could be dry (5)''}}

Here the composer intends the answer to be {{sc2|DERBY}}, with "hat" the definition, "could be" the anagram indicator, and {{sc2|BE DRY}} the anagram fodder. I.e., "derby" is an anagram of "be dry". But "be" is doing double duty, and this means that any attempt to read the clue cryptically in the form "[definition] [anagram indicator] [fodder]" fails: if "be" is part of the anagram indicator, then the fodder is too short, but if it is part of the fodder, there is no anagram indicator; to be a correct clue it would have to be "Hat could '''be be''' dry (5)", which is ungrammatical. A variation might read ''Hat turns out to be dry (5)'', but this also fails because the word "to", which is necessary to make the sentence grammatical, follows the indicator ("turns out") even though it is not part of the anagram indicated.

Torquemada's successor at ''The Observer'' was [[Derrick Somerset Macnutt|Ximenes (Derrick Somerset Macnutt)]], and in his influential work, ''Ximenes on the Art of the Crossword Puzzle'' (1966), he set out more detailed guidelines for setting fair cryptic clues, now known as "Ximenean principles" and sometimes described by the phrase "square-dealing".<ref>Reissued Aug 2001: Swallowtail Books {{ISBN|1-903400-04-X}}, {{ISBN|978-1-903400-04-3}}</ref> The most important of them are tersely summed up by Ximenes' successor [[Jonathan Crowther|Azed (Jonathan Crowther)]]:

{{Block indent|1=A good cryptic clue contains three elements:
# a precise definition
# a fair subsidiary indication
# nothing else
}}

The Ximenean principles are adhered to most strictly in the subgenre of ''advanced cryptics''—difficult puzzles using barred grids and a large vocabulary. Easier puzzles often have more relaxed standards, permitting a wider array of clue types, and allowing a little flexibility. The popular ''[[The Guardian|Guardian]]'' setter [[John Galbraith Graham|Araucaria (John Galbraith Graham)]] was a noted non-Ximenean, celebrated for his witty, if occasionally unorthodox, clues.