Interview with Bob Klahn

Have you wondered how a puzzle goes from the constructor's hands to your local paper?

Every puzzle goes through a make-over process. On average, Rich Norris (our LA Times Crossword Editor) changes 1/3 to 1/2 of the clues, adjusting the difficulty level, avoiding the repeat, injecting freshness and playfulness to the clues, and improving the accuracy. Then every puzzle is test-solved before publishing to ensure the ultimate accuracy of each clue and answer. Bob Klahn is Rich's final clue-checker.

Bob has had 57 puzzles published by NYT since 1994. His byline also appears regularly in Washington Post/CrosSynergy (twice a month). His book "The Wrath of Klahn Crosswords" will come out in Jan 2010.

Bob is known for the wickedness of his clues, and is regarded as "The Universe's Toughest Clue Writer". But oh my God, how evocative, original, imaginative, sweet and musical those clues are.

Jerome mentioned in his interview that his idea of a perfect puzzle would have clues written by Bob Klahn. Several other LAT constructors I've interviewed (and the amazing speed solver Dan Feyer) all listed Bob as one of their favorite constructors.

I asked Bob a few questions, and was so pleased that he took time answering them. Hope you enjoy the interview.

Can you tell us a bit about your background? How did you get into crossword constructing?

See my ancient, untouched-in-years Web site for that answer: http://bobklahn.hom.comcast.net/DelToday.

What is your job responsibility as a fact-checker for Rich Norris? What kind of reference tools do you use?

I check everything I have the slightest doubt about, and I comment on everything. E.g., I'll always let Rich know when I think a clue could be worded more smoothly. He need not agree, of course.

I make heavy use of the Web, but I never rely on any single source. I also rely on my computerized base of over 35,000 published puzzles, all of which I've solved and annotated. E.g., if I'm checking a clue about an event, but the clue doesn't specify when the event occurred, I'll throw that in as an annotation.

What is the most memorable puzzle you've created? Why is it so special?

It's one of Will's favorites, my February 2nd, 1995 NYT. On New Year's Day, with bowl games in the background, I wondered if it was too late to send Will a Groundhog Day puzzle, and decided to give it a shot. I figured I needed to create the puzzle then and there and send it off to Will that day for it to have any chance of making it into the paper in time. So I started with PUNXATAWNEYPHIL across the eighth row, balanced GROUNDHOG and WOODCHUCK on either side of it, and was well along with the grid when it hit me: "Oh no, Phil isn't the 15-letter PUNXATAWNEYPHIL, he's the sixteen-letter PUNXSUTAWNEYPHIL! One letter too long!" Oh well, so much for that idea. Back to the bowl games.

But then I realized, "Wait a minute! What if I flip the grid and stick the leading P out the top? It's the perfect letter, as it looks like a head and neck! And 2-Across, echoing the 2/2 date, would then be the first Across entry. Oh yeah, I gotta do this!" So I flipped the grid, added in SHADOW balancing MARMOT, plus SIXWEEK across the middle, and completed the fill.

Now just the clues were left. The PUNXSUTAWNEYPHIL clue just had to be special, and I deliberated over that one for well over an hour. Finally I came up with what I consider to be one of my best clues ever, the triple "For the outlook, look out for his look out."

Puzzle complete! I sent it off to Will, he loved it, and expedited its processing. He told me later that getting my grid typeset was no easy matter; it just didn't fit in the Times' then-set-in-stone 15x15 space.

Your clues are always so elegant, refreshing and entertaining. What's your secret? What kind of books/magazines do you read for inspiration?

Thank you, C.C.

In early 1992 I decided that I was going to begin constructing crosswords for publication. I already knew I was good at grid-building, as I had won a number of grid-building contest back in the early '70s. But I had no idea how to write good clues. So, before submitting a single puzzle to anyone, I spent several months solving and studying published puzzles, finding what clues really appealed to me, and trying to analyze why. Only then did I submit my first puzzle.

What had I learned? What's "my secret"? Simply refusing to accept the old clues, almost always feeling I can come up with something new, hating to use "repeaters," and always trying to be as entertaining as possible. Those are my standards. As a result, I'm sure I spend a lot more time writing clues than most constructors do. I've often spent over a half hour on a single clue; I'm willing to do that any time I feel I'm close to coming up with something that I'll really like.

E.g., when preparing a puzzle for Will's annual American Crossword Puzzle Tournament, I needed to clue DPS. Any clue I'd use was sure to be boring, right? So just throw one in and get on with the rest. But I just had a feeling that I could do something fresh with DPS, and twenty minutes later I had it: "Out-and-out successes, briefly." Well worth the time it took, imo.

A better answer for you: I can boil down "my secret" to a single phrase, and there's no question what that phrase must be: word association. That's the cornerstone. I strongly advise all who aspire to write great clues to work at building the richest tapestry of words they can. Doing so should be a never-ending endeavor. Think about it: THE BEST CLUES BRING MULTIPLE IDEAS TOGETHER. That's what word association does.

A natural extension of such "tapestry weaving" is to try tying consecutive clues together. Clue "echoes." I've been working at that for a while now, and people have noticed. I do this a lot with my CrosSynergy puzzles; a number of my attempts get shot down by my CS peers as too stretchy, but I keep trying. It's FUN. And I firmly believe that the more one works at something, the better one gets.

Some of the sources I use most: RH2 (the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, Second Edition), multiple thesauruses and rhyming dictionaries, "The Master Crossword Dictionary" by Herbert Baus, Google defines, plus every Web site I can find that facilitates word association.

What do I read? More and more of what I read is right there on the Web. And a good bit of that is triggered by the fact-checking I do, either at fact-checking time, or later, using the notes I've taken while fact-checking.

Besides constructing crosswords, what else do you do for fun?

Reading (surprise!), recreational programming, and spending time with my dear wife. Right now I'm reading "Planet Google" by Randall Stross, the fellow who writes the NYT's Digital Domain column. Fascinating stuff.