Comments on: Financial Times 12,986 / Cinephile

By: Ian Stark

Ian Stark — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 00:14:02 +0000

I shall explore further, then . . . ta, Smutchin.

By: smutchin

smutchin — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 23:24:27 +0000

Sorry, Virgilius is Indy of course, not FT. Shame cos I can’t bring myself to buy the Independent.

By: smutchin

smutchin — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 23:20:08 +0000

Well, on another day I might have been able to recall the names of a few more Oxford colleges, but didn’t do so well today. Brain slurry, synapses not connecting. I got 18d and 20d from the wordplay, and worked out 2d without fully understanding it, which was enough to reveal the theme. Re 2d – I know the phrase lex talionis from my days as a philosophy student, but didn’t know that leges was the plural of lex.

I read 17a as the “capital” letters of A Lot + SO for symphony orchestra. I suppose it works either way.

I got 10a, again without fully understanding it – thanks for the explanation, Gaufrid. I got “A CC or dance”, the rest was just baffling.

Ian, I think it’s just that there are more Guardian readers round here – and they’re an argumentative bunch (I should know – I am one). Setting crosswords is not a well-paid job, from what I can gather, so several setters pay the rent by contributing to both papers (not to mention Indy/Times/Telegraph/Listener as well), notably Cincinnus/Orlando, Paul/Mudd, Dante/Rufus, Pasquale/Bradman and the brilliant Brendan/Virgilius (click on the setters link at the top of the page for more info). I’ve started doing the FT recently myself because it’s available free online. Independent is also free online but not easily printable.

By: Ian Stark

Ian Stark — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 21:42:23 +0000

The setter seems to generate a lot more passionate comment in the other place! Does he come here for peace and quiet?! I don’t blame him, if that is so . . . much more civilised.

By: Ian Stark

Ian Stark — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 14:03:34 +0000

Phew! My first attempt at a Cinephile puzzle (although by no means my first with the same setter in another place). Once I had the theme (of which I am utterly ignorant) I managed to run through this reasonably quickly (with help from other sources) but I was stumped by 8d – a new word for me. 19a was great.

By: Eileen

Eileen — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:19:25 +0000

Sloppy research on my part: I did look for ‘leges’ in Chambers, Collins and SOED but, when neither of the latter couple came up with ‘lex’ I didn’t go back to Chambers!

I think objections to this clue [and perhaps 16dn, for very similar reasons] may be justified – but I still enjoyed it!

By: Gaufrid

Gaufrid — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:06:21 +0000

Hi Eileen
In my case 20d was the first thematic to go in but it didn’t mean very much until I added 16d.

My blog was somewhat delayed due to my attempts to justify LEGE[?] in 2d. Lex is in Chambers (11th Ed.) but no plural is given. However, I have belatedly consulted Collins (on-line) which does give leges as the plural of lex (something I had forgotten in the 45+ years since learning Latin at school) so thanks for steering me in the right direction.

By: Eileen

Eileen — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:47:54 +0000

I really enjoyed this one. 7,15 and 8dn [a word of which I had not heard] were the last for me, too. I had to get to 20dn before the theme dawned on me but after that it was reasonably straightforward.

2dn I took to be COL + LEGE[s] [Latin for laws] but I have been unable to find it in any of my English dictionaries – nor the singular, ‘lex’, which I thought might be there.

I agree with your parsing of 16dn and I had no problem with ‘product of’ as an an anagram indicator. ‘Result of’ is slightly more suspect!