Derrick Niederman author page

Although crossword solvers only see the finished product, most puzzles leave behind a cutting-room floor, sometimes one of substantial proportions. In this case, my search for opposites led me to places from which I would have to recede as gracefully as possible — so the cutting-room floor included such entries as WESTERN BOW TIES ("Neckwear for Wyatt Earp"), CLOSE WINDOWS ("End a PC session") and PAJAMA PANTS ("Bottoms at bedtime"). I guess the first two were considered a bit forced, while PAJAMA PANTS led to the philosophical question of whether MA and PA are opposites or merely counterparts. (Having just visited my parents this past week, I would say "both.")

But I was thrilled that KARLA BONOFF was not relegated to the discard pile . . . although I wonder whether I'll hear from solvers who think she should have been! (Note to those solvers: You're wrong. Just have a seat in your family room and listen to Linda Ronstadt's Someone to Lay Down Beside Me.)

Getting deeper into the weeds, the elimination of WESTERN BOW TIES left me with a 14-letter entry (HEART OF ROMAINE) that had no counterpart, leaving me temporarily flummoxed until the editors suggested that I make the puzzle 21 x 22. Wow — my first non-square puzzle ever! (Here's the part where I confess that I would never have thought of that. I was too busy lamenting that the 15-letter entry HEARTS OF ROMAINE wouldn't work!)

But I don't think I'll take the non-square route very often. I was stunned by just how out of balance I was for the remainder of the construction. Amazing. I already knew that crossword construction was finely calibrated, with 138 words for a 21x21 puzzle wildly different from 140 words, etc. But adding an extra column left me dazed, confused, and without any confidence that the construction would have a happy ending. At least, I think it did, and I hope that solvers agree.

The roots of this puzzle date back to the late 1970s, when I was a graduate student in mathematics. I was part of a conversation that included a question from the department chairman, a distinguished mathematician named Michael Artin, who asked "Is it possible to create a crossword puzzle with two independent solutions?" Perhaps I should explain that "independent solutions" is classic math talk, even if being applied to another realm. Anyway, I had yet to construct a crossword puzzle (my first, a Sunday Times cryptic, came out in 1981), so he clearly wasn't looking at me, but I remembered his challenge and, years later, took it to heart.

Obviously it's not possible to create a standard American crossword with two independent solutions, but I was able to create a few pairs of British-style crosswords that did the trick. They were 13x13, with alternating keyed letters a la an American cryptic. The problem was that they were difficult to solve. There was always ambiguity about which entry should go in which puzzle, and it was very difficult to have clues that were tight and descriptive enough to remove that ambiguity. I did finally make one that was nearly perfect in that regard, but I couldn't convince Will of its worthiness and had to settle for putting it in a book.

It wasn't until a few years ago (five?) that I came up with the idea that led to MIRROR REFLECTION--namely, creating a crossword whose Across entries could be clued in balanced pairs, with the entries for radially symmetric clues being identical. I knew that the demands of the puzzle were pushing it, but it's funny what happens when you keep on plugging. (And plugging, and plugging, as in this puzzle.) Some of the balanced entries had obvious clue pairings, which was great, but I got to relish the challenge of finding clues to join words that at first didn't want to seem joined at all. And if you're curious, I can say that Will got into the game, because when I saw the finished product I noticed that one particular pair of entries (RAT/DEN, jointly clued as "Occasional basement sight") had been changed in a way that worked perfectly well.

I've had maybe 50 crosswords and cryptics published at this point, but this was the most difficult construction by far. Maybe if I did things faster that figure would be much higher than 50. After all, I've been doing this off and on for 35 years!