What is a Nina?
The concept of Ninas comes from the
American caricaturist Al Hirschfeld (1903 – 2003), who was in the
habit of hiding his daughter’s name, Nina, in his pictures. You can
read more about him here.
In crosswords a Nina is a hidden message which
appears in the grid, but is not indicated in any way by the clues or a
preamble. Ninas often appear at the edges of a grid, if those edges
consist of unchecked letters; sometimes it will run round the whole
perimeter of the grid. At ot
her times the Nina may be spotted in horizontal
or vertical columns of unchecked letters. You can see this
illustrated in the example grid on the left. We have MONTY PYTHON’S FLYING CIRCUS (in blue) running anticlockwise
around the grid; BLAZING SADDLES (in red) running down columns 3 and
13, and BASIL BRUSH (in green) in rows 7 and 9. Such a grid with
three Ninas is unfillable – it is simply to show where you’re most
likely to find them.
Ninas can also appear as actual answers in the grid.
The first example I remember of this was many years ago, when I used
to do the Telegraph cryptic. Someone pointed out to
me that the first two across answers of the quick crossword were
always linked pairs of homophones such as KNIGHT/MAYOR or
COLLIE/FLOUR. After that I always used to do enough of the quick
puzzle necessary to get the first two answers, and I was full of
admiration that the setter could think one of these up every
day.
What is the difference between
a Nina and a theme?
That’s very much
a matter of opinion. My own is that it is (or should be) possible
to solve the puzzle without even noticing a Nina. Judging by
the comments on message boards, Ninas pass quite a few solvers
by (me too, sometimes). A couple of linked answers or a message
hidden in the unchecked letters clearly satisfies this criterion. But
what about a puzzle in which, for example, book titles are spread
about the grid but not indicated as such? Perhaps GREAT and
EXPECTATIONS appear in different places in the grid, along with OLIVER and
TWIST, BLEAK and HOUSE, and DAVID and COPPER and FIELD, but all of
these are clued as words in their own right with no reference to
Dickens. It’s still possible to solve the puzzle without seeing the
connection, which suggests a Nina, but there’s so much going on that
such a puzzle surely deserves to be considered themed, even if the
theme is an unstated or “ghost” theme. I would say that the same
applies to a puzzle in which all the clues’ surface readings have an
obvious connection: that is a theme too.
Here’s an example. I was very honoured to be asked to write a puzzle for the Independent to celebrate the
200th anniversary of Wagner’s birth in May 2013. I may have been the only
setter on the Independent team with a Wagnerian
pseudonym at the time, but there were (at least) two other fellow setters who know and
love Wagner, and either of them could have done an equally good job
as I did. I rejected the idea of Wagner-related answers early on, as
(a) his operas’ names are very long (like the operas themselves!) so
are hard to fit into the grid and (b) I am aware that some solvers
grumble if anything more than the most rudimentary knowledge of
classical music is required. (Don’t get me started on philistinism
in modern times!) So I decided to use a grid in which I could put
RICHARD WAGNER BICENTENARY round the perimeter, and the surface readings of
the clues were all connected with the great
man in some way. The perimeter message on its own would have been a
Nina, but taken with the clues, the puzzle became
themed.
Why do setters put Ninas in
puzzles?
I can only speak
for myself with certainty here, of course. I have put Ninas in
puzzles for three reasons: I really want to say something, or I want
to give solvers a bit of extra diversion, or I’m bored. Perhaps I
should explain the last one first.
When I was writing puzzles for an agency, I pretty much had to restrict
my clueing to tabloid level of difficulty, and what’s more, I had to
use the same 14 grids in rotation over and over again. I’m certainly
not ungrateful for the experience I gained, but it did become
a bit tedious sometimes, as in essence I was mass-producing puzzles. Sometimes
I would try to liven things up by putting messages in
the grid, and there were one or two grids which allowed for perimeter messages.
After the fascistic smoking laws came into effect in
the UK in 2007, I put LIGHT UP DEFY THE SMOKING BAN round the perimeter
of one of the puzzles. I never saw more than a few of
the puzzles in the final print version, but the editorial process often involved changing
clues and answers for no discernible reason, so for all
I know the Nina in the published version read
something like FIGHT UM DENY THE STOKING PAN. That one was more than
boredom though – I really meant it.
I wonder if that’s
how the linked across answers in the Telegraph started? It’s not
hard to imagine a setter finding it stultifyingly dull writing clues
like “River in Africa” and “Girl’s name”, and deciding to make
things a bit more interesting by finding pairs of words which
sounded like another word when combined. We’ll never know,
probably.
There are more positive reasons for including Ninas, and one of
these, as I’ve said above, is to give the solver a bit more of
a diversion. I’ll refer back to the example grid at the start of
this article. Let’s take
Basil Brush. What’s he doing there in the grid? Are we to infer that the
setter is a Basil Brush fan? Perhaps that’s true, but it’s more
likely that the setter put Mr Brush in there simply because
he fitted into the symmetrically placed rows of 5 letters.
If the solver’s wondering about it, and maybe remembering those
dreadful jokes – Boom! Boom! – the setter’s detained the solver a
little longer, and perhaps given him or her some extra satisfaction for
noticing the Nina. And what if the solver didn’t see the Nina? It
doesn’t matter at all, so long as he or she enjoyed the
crossword!
I’ve said
that the setter really may want to say something when putting in a
Nina. I was very touched when Anax included my pseudonyms
Alberich and Klingsor as a Nina in a puzzle he’d written that came out on
my 50th birthday. Another of my favourite
setters, Monk, included a moving tribute to his late dog in one
puzzle, and a Nina to celebrate his 100th appearance as
an Independent
setter in another.
This latter puzzle rightly attracted almost universal high
praise on the Fifteen Squared site, but one commenter was
incredibly rude and made accusations of self-indulgence. Monk's Nina was
more than justified, and the crossword itself was superb; in any case,
that commenter's mercifully few postings are all spiteful rants against setters,
so his comment can safely be dismissed as an example of the trolling
that sadly affects all Internet forums. There are times, however, when a Nina can
have a detrimental effect on a puzzle, and I’d like to look at that
now.
Are Ninas ever a bad
thing?
As already stated,
it should be possible to solve a puzzle without even noticing the
Nina, and in most cases that’s what happens. A Nina is a bit of
harmless fun added by the setter for whatever reason; if you spot
it, great, but it doesn’t matter if you don’t. Now that Ninas are
relatively common – most of all in the Independent, quite often in
the FT, and you get a few in the Guardian
too – it is certain that pretty well any Nina will be
spotted by someone. Indeed, whenever a setter uses a grid with
unchecked letters around the perimeter in the Independent, the feedback
suggests that many people look for a Nina, especially when the
setter is known for putting them in.
No setter would ever
be stupid enough to put in a Nina that includes obscenities,
extremist political slogans or other offensive stuff; even if they
wanted to (and I’m sure they wouldn’t) the editor would pretty
likely pick it up. There are other, more realistic reasons why a
Nina might adversely affect a crossword and I draw on my own
experiences here.
A while ago I wanted to
include a message that showed my feelings of strong affection for a
female friend in Prague in one of my puzzles. I knew how soppy it would
look so I had the bright idea of writing it in Czech – after all,
the girl in question is Czech and there’s always the chance she’ll
learn English, start doing cryptic puzzles and discover how I feel about
her… yeah, right. But at least by putting it in Czech I could say
what I wanted to say without anyone noticing. So I wrote a message
around the perimeter of the grid and started to fill
it.
My compiling
program, Sympathy (no longer available), makes the tedious task of gridfill pretty
easy, but even Sympathy drew the line at filling the grid with
relatively common words when many of them had to end in J, V or
Z (letters which only score one or two points in the Czech
Scrabble). I managed to fill the grid, but the result was that many
of the words were the sort of thing you’d expect to find in Azed or
Listener puzzles and certainly weren’t suitable for a broadsheet,
even in a prize puzzle. I had to give up, though I did manage to
create a slightly watered down version which I’ve used on this site.
It really would have been self-indulgence to publish such a puzzle
in the Independent or FT
– always assuming the editors didn’t reject it – and that’s a far
cry from the Monk puzzle I’ve mentioned above, which only contained
one word likely to be unknown to any crossword solver with a
half-decent vocabulary.
There have been times that
Ninas in puzzles have annoyed me. And I’ll admit, without an ounce
of shame, that I’m in no way impartial on this. Let’s say, for example,
that I’m struggling through a daily broadsheet puzzle with words
like FAUCHION, KYTHE and NAUPLIOID as answers, and worse still, there
is a non-dictionary phrase like MY CAT SMELLS and also I’ve had
to look up the name of a footballer whose greatest achievement to
date is to score two goals for Baku in the Azerbaijan Football League.
(I exaggerate deliberately to avoid resemblance to any real
puzzles!) I notice that the structure of the grid suggests a Nina,
and the weird grid entries point to this, so I assume that the Nina
must be pretty special to necessitate such obscurities. Eventually I
finish the puzzle and the Nina turns out to be… the title of
an album by some bloody pop group from the 1990s about which I
know nothing and care even less. I’m going to be pretty narked
off.
Now let’s suppose
that instead of that, the setter’s cleverly managed to include
Jenůfa, Káťa Kabanová
and Liška Bystrouška (The Cunning Little
Vixen), three of my
favourite Janáček operas, as a Nina in the grid. I
can imagine that would make for a horrible gridfill, but in this
case I’d quite happily kythe my fauchion and remove all smelly
nauplioid creatures from my cat while cheering on the Baku footballer.
The point is, of course, that just because I happen to appreciate the
Janáček Nina and
not the pop one, that doesn’t mean everyone else will or should. As
I’ve already said, a crossword should be solvable with or without
noticing the Nina, and if the Nina forces ridiculous obscurities
into a grid, that Nina has to go.
Sure, but usually a Nina is just harmless
fun?
Of course! In the previous section
I’ve outlined how Ninas can spoil puzzles, but occurrences of this
are relatively rare. There’s nothing wrong with the setter putting
in a little extra something, so long as it doesn’t adversely affect
the words in the grid. A well-placed Nina can be a
lot of fun to spot, and if it’s a heartfelt message conveying sincere feelings
of respect, one would have to be a real killjoy to object
to that. There’s no doubt that noticing a Nina early on can
help the solver, too, in the way that noticing that a puzzle is a
pangram (uses all the letters of the alphabet) does. Let’s say you’re
halfway through solving a puzzle that has a Nina-friendly grid –
with a series of unchecked letters around the outside – and
the setter’s known for including Ninas from time to time. You notice
that, starting from the top left, the perimeter reads GR_ATMIN_ _TH_
_KA_ _KE. There’s a very good chance that there is a Nina
which reads GREAT MINDS THINK ALIKE, and if you pencil that in, and
you're right, you’ve got more letters towards the remaining answers.
Certainly a Nina which gives you first letters to answers is a
bonus, as the first letter of an answer is usually the most useful
you can get.
As I’ve said, a Nina
ideally should be neutral; a puzzle should be solvable with or
without noticing it. The solver shouldn’t be expected to look for
something that isn’t indicated. And so long as this basic
requirement is fulfilled, a Nina is indeed a bit of harmless fun
that, if spotted in good time, can actually help the
solver.
What did Ximenes have to say about Ninas?
As far as I know, nothing. The
popularity of Ninas in crosswords started well after his time,
although there is a touching story about the Times
including a Nina in 1967 to mark the retirement of an avid
Times
crossword fan – read more here on
the excellent Crossword Unclued site. Since then,
Ninas have appeared in the Times cryptic crossword relatively
rarely.
When and where do I use
Ninas?
As I’ve said, I used to stick them into the
puzzles I produced for the agency to make things more interesting.
Since I finished with them and got a regular gig on the FT and
Independent, I almost never put Ninas in my broadsheet puzzles, though the Wagner
bicentenary puzzle is a notable exception. It’s not that I
disapprove or anything like that – I hope that should be obvious
from the foregoing – it’s more that I don’t really feel the urge to
include hidden messages in my puzzles. I like to get the gridfill
done as quickly as possible so I can get started on writing the
clues! The puzzles on this site do contain a few, and they tend to
be personal messages or expressions of love or admiration which are
fine on a free
crosswords site but might be out of place in a puzzle intended for
wide public consumption. What’s more, the Ninas in the puzzles on
this site have sometimes meant that I’ve needed to use one or two
obscurities for the gridfill. I’ve railed above about Ninas which
give rise to “dictionary” words in broadsheet puzzles, but I like to
think that people who seek out a site like this are probably keen,
and therefore reasonably advanced, solvers who are more likely to
take such things in their stride and even relish the
challenge.
What about unintended
Ninas?
I’m sure
I’m not the only solver to think I’ve found a Nina because a
plausible series of letters has started to appear around the outside of
the grid, only to find later that I was mistaken and there’s no
message there after all. For example, you might have _THE_ in one
place and _NATIO_ elsewhere, and you can certainly be forgiven for
thinking that there is a Nina. However, the laws of probability are
such that the chances of a coherent phrase appearing by coincidence are
very small indeed. That said, I remember that back in my teaching
days the younger children used to love wordsearches. I liked them too
as they were easy to make up – write 20 or so subject-related
words into a grid and fill the rest with random letters. I’d given one
of these to a class and after a short time some of them
started sniggering. When I asked what the joke was, the kids told me
that they’d found the word “crap” and indeed, they were right.
Worse still, they had found a far more offensive four-letter word
too!
I just hope that a
similar thing doesn’t happen to me or any of my setting colleagues,
but I’m sure it will, one day.
Haven’t I gone on long enough
now?
Definitely. I hope
this has been useful for those who are interested in the
subject of Ninas!