How true! Once a clue of mine needed some such instruction. I added a PS on hard copy; as I happened to work then in the very newspaper that published the crossword, I went to the section the previous evening and checked the proof myself to ensure that the instruction had been carried out. I slept well that night but the next morning as I opened the paper and saw the crossword… someone at some stage had authorisedly or unauthorisedly intervened and messed it up! The morning did not seem bright anymore.

Gaufrid: to clarify my blog comment on 22A. I was playfully suggesting that the clue might be appreciated (like 18A) by the sexists of this world. As Eileen gently pointed out, that’s a bit tenuous. I should try to contain my innuendo-detecting skills to the realms of Cyclops/Private Eye.

If the word ‘what’ were in bold type, we might conclude that it represents EH in BOLD.

(Just a theory, you understand.)

Cheers for the feedback – particularly as, with hindsight, it appears that I was a little stingier than intended with the plaudits today (I also didn’t noticed the ambiguity in 13A).

Gaufrid will be picking up the blogging reins again tomorrow and Friday (I usurped his usual spot today).

Agentzero: I had exactly the same thought as you re FIANCE! [Although the name-dropping doesn't always apply, especially these days.]

Gaufrid; I simply meant that I didn’t read anything other than your interpretation into 22ac and couldn’t see what Smiffy was implying.

Eileen, I don’t follow your comment about 22a, nor smiffy’s original blog. It is simply TIT (bird) AN.

Agentzero, 20a mystifies me as well with regard to the ‘what?’.

I noticed that in 1d “the name-dropping business” can be read as having two senses: not only does it signify FINANCE minus N, but it could refer to the act of marriage to which the fiance is committed (because marriage often leads to one spouse taking the other’s name).

Still mystified by 20a.