Recent Posts91
General Discussion / Yore Puzzles! Discussion Thread
« Last post by Glenn9999 on January 02, 2025, 08:00:49 PM »If anyone didn't notice, our @admin posted some PUZ files from the Minneapolis Journal from October 1934. I wanted to start a thread for discussion, as I enjoy having a look at these things, and collect them (I could post a ton of them I moved to PUZ, though not sure about copyright on some of it, especially some of the Simon & Schuster efforts. You'll find three of their crossword books on the Project Gutenberg site so you'll have those to play with, though no answers provided as you were supposed to send a letter to them to get those and evidently they didn't have those preserved).
First off, thank you @admin for sharing these (and would love to see more).
Overall, you'll find differing characters for a lot of older puzzles, depending on the editor. Sadly a lot of puzzles these days have tried to echo what Will Shortz does, so you don't find a lot of difference in editing, character, and outlook across venues as you did back then. It's almost a different experience to get acquainted with a puzzle that takes things on in a lot different way than another one.
Then, you'll see a different outlook given the cultural time, plus scientific differences. (My favorite one of those is a clue [Individisible part of matter] with answer of ATOM. Of course, a more recent example is a reference to nine planets as opposed to eight.) Plus there will be geographical naming differences depending on the time (Prussia or Siam).
And, I got to have an attempt at solving all of them now (they remind me a lot of early Simon & Schuster):
mj19341001.puz: This one will be near impossible for most of us. It qualifies as a "stunt construction", and uses a lot of esoteric words. It's a challenge, but if you aren't up on those, you'll be throwing in the towel quick enough.
mj19341002.puz: Very thoughtful, you'll get reminded a lot of the Newsday Saturday Stumpers. It'll be a lot harder than what you're used to, generally, but reasonably solveable. Only had trouble with the points that crossed with terms I didn't know. Lower right will be the worst section on that point.
mj19341008.puz: Like #2, weird words abound but mostly solvable. I got reminded of the other things to watch on these older puzzles. Two-letter entries are common and it gets obvious pretty quickly doing these puzzles as to why they got abolished in most circles today. Also, there's often duh obvious things that will stump you if you get too far afield in thinking. Expect repetition as well in the clues and sometimes the entries.
mj19341009.puz: Solution not provided on this one in the PUZ. I'm thinking, though, it's probably going to be near impossible for most for certain sections. I spent a fair amount of time Googling to try to answer the parts I didn't just because of some of the words and arcane stuff. Got my answers I can provide if people want 'em.
mj19341026.puz: Probably the easiest of the set and the one I'd recommend to try if you did just one. A couple of sections are going to go weird, especially on the left side, but nothing 100% unmanageable.
Anyway, hopefully this turns into a bit of "wayback" fun for everyone.
First off, thank you @admin for sharing these (and would love to see more).
Overall, you'll find differing characters for a lot of older puzzles, depending on the editor. Sadly a lot of puzzles these days have tried to echo what Will Shortz does, so you don't find a lot of difference in editing, character, and outlook across venues as you did back then. It's almost a different experience to get acquainted with a puzzle that takes things on in a lot different way than another one.
Then, you'll see a different outlook given the cultural time, plus scientific differences. (My favorite one of those is a clue [Individisible part of matter] with answer of ATOM. Of course, a more recent example is a reference to nine planets as opposed to eight.) Plus there will be geographical naming differences depending on the time (Prussia or Siam).
And, I got to have an attempt at solving all of them now (they remind me a lot of early Simon & Schuster):
mj19341001.puz: This one will be near impossible for most of us. It qualifies as a "stunt construction", and uses a lot of esoteric words. It's a challenge, but if you aren't up on those, you'll be throwing in the towel quick enough.
mj19341002.puz: Very thoughtful, you'll get reminded a lot of the Newsday Saturday Stumpers. It'll be a lot harder than what you're used to, generally, but reasonably solveable. Only had trouble with the points that crossed with terms I didn't know. Lower right will be the worst section on that point.
mj19341008.puz: Like #2, weird words abound but mostly solvable. I got reminded of the other things to watch on these older puzzles. Two-letter entries are common and it gets obvious pretty quickly doing these puzzles as to why they got abolished in most circles today. Also, there's often duh obvious things that will stump you if you get too far afield in thinking. Expect repetition as well in the clues and sometimes the entries.
mj19341009.puz: Solution not provided on this one in the PUZ. I'm thinking, though, it's probably going to be near impossible for most for certain sections. I spent a fair amount of time Googling to try to answer the parts I didn't just because of some of the words and arcane stuff. Got my answers I can provide if people want 'em.
mj19341026.puz: Probably the easiest of the set and the one I'd recommend to try if you did just one. A couple of sections are going to go weird, especially on the left side, but nothing 100% unmanageable.
Anyway, hopefully this turns into a bit of "wayback" fun for everyone.