Comments on: Inquisitor 1121 – Associates by Lato

By: kenmac

kenmac — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 18:25:08 +0000

Sorry all. Blame the Eyjafjallajokull volcano. I was supposed to have been away on Thursday/Friday but I had to go on Tuesday/Wednesday instead and I had to rush a bit on Monday night to finish the blog. Yes, ROB inside THE WARDE[n] is correct and that is how I saw it when I solved it – I just couldn’t remember in my volcano induce panic.

By: RayFolwell

RayFolwell — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 11:33:07 +0000

A very ingenious and enjoyable puzzle, it would have been much harder without the indications of which were the thematic entries. Vera, Chuck and Dave was the first set that we spotted.

By: Mike Laws

Mike Laws — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 02:58:55 +0000

Sorry about repeating HolyGhost’s point – it’s a bit late!

Who is/are the Nick Ward(s)? Should I have heard of him/them?

By: Mike Laws

Mike Laws — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 02:42:08 +0000

The correct parsing of 22 down is nothing to do with anybody called Nick Ward, but simply ROB (“nick” in the sense of “steal*) in THE WARDE(n), Trollope’s first Barchester novel.
That’s how I read it in the first place, and how Lato intended it.

By: HolyGhost

HolyGhost — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 22:19:26 +0000

Ken: re 22d, your explanation doesn’t explain “most of” in the clue, but mine does …

By: kenmac

kenmac — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 21:09:09 +0000

HolyGhost, you’re absolutely right about 22d. When I came to blog it I knew that I had found it relatively easy but I couldn’t, for the life of me, remember it. Anyway, my blogged explanation works, even if I’ve never heard of Nick Ward … !

By: HolyGhost

HolyGhost — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 20:56:01 +0000

22d: I think the wordplay for THE WARDROBE is ROB (=nick, steal) in THE WARDE(n) (=most of novel, the first of Trollope’s “Barsetshire Chronicles”).

And I didn’t see CELIA at 23a as an indirect anagram, but simply that “rejected” in the clue indicated a reversal, as in “rebuff, repel, drive back”.

As with NMS, I started with Addressees and finished with Vera, Chuck and Dave (having dallied with Dave Clark Five for a while).

And as Ken mentions, some reference to “sets of three” would have made the preamble a little clearer, but the puzzle not necessarily any easier.

By: Mike Laws

Mike Laws — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 10:54:11 +0000

The fact that the “I” is defined by “one” doesn’t make 6 down an indirect anagram as a whole. The rest of the letters – “table” and “card” – are given directly, and “one” = “I” is so obvious that it can hardly be described as indirect.

It was “third party” which suggested to me what was going on, and Vera, Chuck and Dave were the last set I twigged as well. Not because I’m not familiar with the song (I’ll be getting there myself later this year!), but because I didn’t have the correct word-lengths for the words to be replaced – they were an editorial addition to a very tricky, but very enjoyable puzzle.

By: nmsindy

nmsindy — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 09:53:09 +0000

Great blog, kenmac.

Yes, this was a super construction which took me at least as long as you to solve, maybe longer, with the theme becoming apparent only after quite a while.

My first thematic one was, I think, the addressees and the last definitely the grandchildren.

Re 6 down, I think I = one is very clear, and I think you see that from time to time rather than some other indirect anagrams which I entirely agree are unfair and a definite no-no.