Comments on: Financial Times 13,608 / Orense

By: Scarpia

Scarpia — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 23:58:33 +0000

Thanks smiffy.
I thought this was a pretty good puzzle and while I can’t argue with the technical quibbles raised,a misplaced/superfluous apostrophe and a couple of ‘loose’ definitions didn’t bother me too much.
I think 20 was fine,surely this type of clue indicates an answer that sounds similar to,but not necessarily exactly the same.
Re.the Spoonerism at 17 down – this is,as you say wrong,but strangely enough,I didn’t notice it when solving the puzzle.
6 down was,I think,the weakest clue in the whole puzzle – a bit too vague.
11 and 12 were my favourites.

By: nmsindy

nmsindy — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 19:04:03 +0000

Re 6D, I think ‘forms’ are very much still around eg sixth-form college in the UK.

By: bamberger

bamberger — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 18:36:44 +0000

First one in was 14a which must mean something.
Couldn’t get 6d which would hve opened up the rhs. All I could think of was something meaning red tape and with f?n , tried financial burden, financial return but in vain.
Hadn’t heard of noisome or osier and share the doubts about rigger.

By: Nestorius

Nestorius — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 18:03:53 +0000

Fully agree with Smiffy’s critical observations. Decidedly a lack of smoothitude. 3d was a jewel, though.

Talking about smutty minds:
It really gives me no pleasure at all to even entertain the thought of ever referring to Mr Hefner’s organ…

By: Tony Welsh

Tony Welsh — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 17:33:28 +0000

I agree with Smiffy re 9d. If the answer was LAWMAN singular, then the clue might read “officer’s material…” but this would NOT be a possessive. Rather it would be short for “officer is material…” though the surface reading might be to interpret it as a possessive. In fact, the clue would rely on this ambiguity.

So, given that the definition is LAWMEN plural, there is no equivalent ambiguity and so I am not sure what the clue should say. Certainly not the apostrophe. Maybe “officers are material…” but then the surface does not make sense. There is no absolute requirement to have a word between the definition and the cryptic part of the clue so just “officers material….” would be OK. Or maybe it should be turned around, something like “Material protecting setter for officers.”

By: Tom_I

Tom_I — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 14:25:17 +0000

Thanks Smiffy.

I couldn’t make sense of 17d either. As Dreadnought says, the Spoonerism of raindrop would be drain rop.

I’d also take issue with “sewage” being equated with “drain”. Sewage is what flows through a drain. “Sewer” or “sewerage” would have been OK, but not “sewage”.

By: Dreadnought

Dreadnought — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 07:49:17 +0000

Thanks smiffy. I’m sure Freud could read a lot from your 1a/1d comments…maybe a result of too much exposure to the beano.
Any road up: 6d, an ( old) school is made up of forms aka classes. Dunno about now, my kids have classes…
9d orense has to use “officers” plural so logically has to put apostrophe after to maintain the surface, surely?
17 yes I got it but drainrop doesn’t make sense to me either…
14 yes I just get it for the articles.