XWord Muggles Forum

The answer to this puzzle is a 20th century novel.

Pete is only posting the PDF for this one as there are shaded squares and the .puz file does not play well. If you want the .puz file, you can contact him and he will email it to you.

Man, there's a lot going on here. Have at it, kids; I'm off to golf.

Wow, there WAS a lot going on, but I'm confident that I have it. Amazing and satisfying.

Got it! Note that PGW posted an updated version with some clue fixes. If you downloaded the PDF and then (for example) went golfing, make sure to get the latest!

Edit: Also I wanted to remind everyone that Google is not infallible, maybe try to get multiple sources if you search for something :-) This one was very cool but a bit of work!

Got it as well. Such a great meta. Some distracting issues though.

Edit: he fixed the issues in the corrected version.

O. M. G.

I am now Peter's greatest fan ever. Because not only is this is an amazing puzzle, the solution is possibly my single favorite piece of writing.

Thanks, Professor Washington!

All I can say is thank God for Google.

Well that was a lot of information. Whew! But I got it in the end. With some help.

oldjudge wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:45 pm All I can say is thank God for Google.

You needed Google? Not me, not at all, nada, nix, zilch ... ... ... KIDDING!

Yes, as much as I loved this puzzle, it DOES require Googling -- for anyone other than maybe ... oh, wait, I don't want to give anything away.

Still, I hope the need to Google doesn't discourage anyone from tackling this puzzle. The Googling is very do-able, don't you think?

Sent in my answer (we're not going to talk about golf). It fits and it fits, but I won't know until I know.

Hector wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 4:17 pm Got it as well. Such a great meta. Some distracting issues though.

Edit: he fixed the issues in the corrected version.

I did spend a lot of time trying to make sense of the... misprints. Still I didn't want to bring them up here or even ask him, because --with Peter -- you never know if it's all part of the trick. In fact, I wonder if there's still another level (a pgw trademark) that we won't know until the reveal. I had one idea (I was not going to let him get one by me again!)... but it didn't pan out. Cool idea though...

I think some Googling is fine. This puzzle requires a lot of Googling, at least it did for me, which I think takes away from its elegance. It may be more of a reflection of my poor education, but I never heard of the answer.

oldjudge wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 8:05 pm I think some Googling is fine. This puzzle requires a lot of Googling, at least it did for me, which I think takes away from its elegance. It may be more of a reflection of my poor education, but I never heard of the answer.

Well, I think I was so excited about seeing one of my favorite novels as the solution, that I was inclined to love everything about the puzzle!

The solution is NOT a household name; when I've mentioned it to, for example, my Old Guys' Book Club, the other readers have collectively scratched their heads. None have read it, or had even heard of it, before hearing of it from me. (And promptly forgetting about it!)

I'm seeing that the amount of Googling required would indeed limit people's enjoyment of the puzzle. It may be that this is something of a cult-favorite puzzle -- of limited appeal -- like the novel of the solution itself.

Hmmm.......talk of excess Googling to do the Meta doesn't sound very encouraging. Almost discouraging.

Al, it seems to me fine to ask if the puzzle is as intended. A "no comment" or "yes it is" wouldn't have provided any advantage over solvers who just assume it's all as intended. And you just might save fellow solvers some hair-pulling time. Plus I bet pgw would prefer that he has the chance to fix any slip-ups, as he did so promptly today.

oldjudge, the meta does have an internet-heavy aspect, which I didn't mind at all (googling, though, might be an unnecessarily tedious approach).

While I prefer not having to Google, there are definitely some puzzles where I find it more annoying than others. If I know exactly what I'm looking for...say, if a puzzle requires me to look up zip codes for certain cities or middle initials of presidents...I'm okay with that. I can be systematic and make my list and check it twice. I'm less satisfied with puzzles where I just don't know the topic very well and my searching is more vague. Like if I need to understand the rules of a sport or know a lot of geography that isn't clearly specified. If that makes any sense. I didn't mind googling for this one.

RPardoe wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 8:33 pm Hmmm.......talk of excess Googling to do the Meta doesn't sound very encouraging. Almost discouraging.

Google is your friend. Repeat. I love Google! How did I ever get by as a kid without the internet?? IDK.

Don’t get me wrong, I think the puzzle was brilliant. In my limited experience, I think Peter’s best puzzles are the best ever. For example, for anyone who hasn’t tried it, look at Peter’s puzzle #5 (Can You Give Me Directions?) or Puzzle #34 (What’s the Takeaway?). Those are absolutely incredible. I would just prefer to keep the Googling to a minimum.

Talk about a post and solve! No sooner do I get discouraged then I see the light.

This is the sort of googling I don't mind.
And like Chris - I knew the title. In fact, it was a subject of a jr high (guess middle school is the term now) book report I wrote.

Despite my misgivings above, nothing to be afraid of. Nothing at all.

Great puzzle! I learned a lot for sure.

To Al’s question, there is another level but it’s more of a theme-consistency than a level. Will keep looking to see if there’s more.