<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Guardian Quiptic Nº 605 by Arachne</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fifteensquared.net/2011/06/20/guardian-quiptic-n%C2%BA-605-by-arachne/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fifteensquared.net/2011/06/20/guardian-quiptic-n%c2%ba-605-by-arachne/</link>
	<description>Never knowingly undersolved.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 21:20:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ethel</title>
		<link>http://www.fifteensquared.net/2011/06/20/guardian-quiptic-n%c2%ba-605-by-arachne/#comment-162402</link>
		<dc:creator>Ethel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jun 2011 02:47:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fifteensquared.net/?p=30871#comment-162402</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks so much, Peter. I&#039;ll copy your post and leave it on my desktop so I can remember all its parts, which you strung together to form the answer to my question.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks so much, Peter. I&#8217;ll copy your post and leave it on my desktop so I can remember all its parts, which you strung together to form the answer to my question.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PeterO</title>
		<link>http://www.fifteensquared.net/2011/06/20/guardian-quiptic-n%c2%ba-605-by-arachne/#comment-162333</link>
		<dc:creator>PeterO</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 13:47:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fifteensquared.net/?p=30871#comment-162333</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hello Ethel

In rhyming slang, the word that actually rhymes is frequently dropped; in this case it is china plate/mate. See, for example, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aldertons.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.aldertons.com/&lt;/a&gt;.
A charade is a type of cryptic clue in which the answer is divided into parts, with each part being indicated in the clue by a definition. Thus in 10A the answer MATERIAL id divided into MATE and RIAL. The part definitions are often strung together, just as the parts are strung together to form the answer, but in this case there is included the indication that MATE &#039;needs&#039; RIAL to form MATERIAL.
Dickey, or more commonly dicky, does not come up in this crossword, but as it means in poor condition or defective, it is often used to indicate an anagram. Sometimes the surface of the clue - that is, the meaning you would take it if you did not treat it as cryptic - suggests the childish name for a bird. Dicky-bird, incidentally, is rhyming slang for word.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Ethel</p>
<p>In rhyming slang, the word that actually rhymes is frequently dropped; in this case it is china plate/mate. See, for example, <a href="http://www.aldertons.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.aldertons.com/</a>.<br />
A charade is a type of cryptic clue in which the answer is divided into parts, with each part being indicated in the clue by a definition. Thus in 10A the answer MATERIAL id divided into MATE and RIAL. The part definitions are often strung together, just as the parts are strung together to form the answer, but in this case there is included the indication that MATE &#8216;needs&#8217; RIAL to form MATERIAL.<br />
Dickey, or more commonly dicky, does not come up in this crossword, but as it means in poor condition or defective, it is often used to indicate an anagram. Sometimes the surface of the clue &#8211; that is, the meaning you would take it if you did not treat it as cryptic &#8211; suggests the childish name for a bird. Dicky-bird, incidentally, is rhyming slang for word.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ethel</title>
		<link>http://www.fifteensquared.net/2011/06/20/guardian-quiptic-n%c2%ba-605-by-arachne/#comment-162262</link>
		<dc:creator>Ethel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 01:56:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fifteensquared.net/?p=30871#comment-162262</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have no idea what china could rhyme with that means mate or am I misunderstanding? I don&#039;t really know what a charade is in a cryptic.
While I&#039;ve got your attention,what is this dickey that comes into so many clues?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have no idea what china could rhyme with that means mate or am I misunderstanding? I don&#8217;t really know what a charade is in a cryptic.<br />
While I&#8217;ve got your attention,what is this dickey that comes into so many clues?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PeterO</title>
		<link>http://www.fifteensquared.net/2011/06/20/guardian-quiptic-n%c2%ba-605-by-arachne/#comment-161838</link>
		<dc:creator>PeterO</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2011 18:01:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fifteensquared.net/?p=30871#comment-161838</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I had not looked up LAPIDARY before Robi brought up the question, and then I could not find a really definitive answer. The word originally  referred to gem cutting, which is a good start for &quot;beautifully clear&quot;; but I assume the meaning is the metaphorical one, describing writing style. There seem to be a variety of opinions as to just what style it describes - suitable for engraving, concise, stylish, crisp, accurate, lucid... &quot;Beautifully clear&quot; would thus be in the right general area, but I could not locate a source which nailed this definition. Perhaps the nearest is &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapidary&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapidary&lt;/a&gt;, in the section Secondary Meanings.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I had not looked up LAPIDARY before Robi brought up the question, and then I could not find a really definitive answer. The word originally  referred to gem cutting, which is a good start for &#8220;beautifully clear&#8221;; but I assume the meaning is the metaphorical one, describing writing style. There seem to be a variety of opinions as to just what style it describes &#8211; suitable for engraving, concise, stylish, crisp, accurate, lucid&#8230; &#8220;Beautifully clear&#8221; would thus be in the right general area, but I could not locate a source which nailed this definition. Perhaps the nearest is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapidary" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapidary</a>, in the section Secondary Meanings.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: crosser</title>
		<link>http://www.fifteensquared.net/2011/06/20/guardian-quiptic-n%c2%ba-605-by-arachne/#comment-161800</link>
		<dc:creator>crosser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2011 10:27:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fifteensquared.net/?p=30871#comment-161800</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Robi@5
I was a bit doubtful about LAPIDARY but decided it was OK because it means &quot;concise&quot;, which I suppose could mean &quot;clearly expresed&quot;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Robi@5<br />
I was a bit doubtful about LAPIDARY but decided it was OK because it means &#8220;concise&#8221;, which I suppose could mean &#8220;clearly expresed&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robi</title>
		<link>http://www.fifteensquared.net/2011/06/20/guardian-quiptic-n%c2%ba-605-by-arachne/#comment-161735</link>
		<dc:creator>Robi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:55:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fifteensquared.net/?p=30871#comment-161735</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks PeterO; marginally more difficult than today&#039;s Rufus.

I&#039;m not sure about LAPIDARY=beautifully clear; Chambers gives polished. Am I missing something?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks PeterO; marginally more difficult than today&#8217;s Rufus.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not sure about LAPIDARY=beautifully clear; Chambers gives polished. Am I missing something?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PeterO</title>
		<link>http://www.fifteensquared.net/2011/06/20/guardian-quiptic-n%c2%ba-605-by-arachne/#comment-161728</link>
		<dc:creator>PeterO</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 12:48:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fifteensquared.net/?p=30871#comment-161728</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Make that &quot;at least as good a surface&quot;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Make that &#8220;at least as good a surface&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PeterO</title>
		<link>http://www.fifteensquared.net/2011/06/20/guardian-quiptic-n%c2%ba-605-by-arachne/#comment-161727</link>
		<dc:creator>PeterO</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 12:44:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fifteensquared.net/?p=30871#comment-161727</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[K&#039;s D

I agree with you about 6A - the parts are all there, but your organisation points up the wordplay more clearly, and offers at least a good surface. However, I do think Arachne&#039;s version works, read as &quot;(With) English student rejected, clumsy (is) embrace&quot;.

Stella

Looking back over the blog, I only spot a couple of typos, which is about par for the course. Anyway, in 16D, what is a &quot;definition definition&quot; but a double definition? It&#039;s just that I cannot claim that was quite what I intended to write (or, at least, I can, but you might feel a touch of scepticism). I understand what you mean about unfair/dishonest, but Chambers, for example, does define UNFAIR as:

inequitable, unjust; involving deception or fraud and leading to undue advantage over business rivals; not fair, ugly.

That would seem to make unfair business practices definitely dishonest.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>K&#8217;s D</p>
<p>I agree with you about 6A &#8211; the parts are all there, but your organisation points up the wordplay more clearly, and offers at least a good surface. However, I do think Arachne&#8217;s version works, read as &#8220;(With) English student rejected, clumsy (is) embrace&#8221;.</p>
<p>Stella</p>
<p>Looking back over the blog, I only spot a couple of typos, which is about par for the course. Anyway, in 16D, what is a &#8220;definition definition&#8221; but a double definition? It&#8217;s just that I cannot claim that was quite what I intended to write (or, at least, I can, but you might feel a touch of scepticism). I understand what you mean about unfair/dishonest, but Chambers, for example, does define UNFAIR as:</p>
<p>inequitable, unjust; involving deception or fraud and leading to undue advantage over business rivals; not fair, ugly.</p>
<p>That would seem to make unfair business practices definitely dishonest.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stella Heath</title>
		<link>http://www.fifteensquared.net/2011/06/20/guardian-quiptic-n%c2%ba-605-by-arachne/#comment-161722</link>
		<dc:creator>Stella Heath</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 09:46:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fifteensquared.net/?p=30871#comment-161722</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks PeterO, though I&#039;m afraid you might like to edit, as you have a few slips - not just typos. No doubt you were in a hurry to post the blog :)

I plumped for &quot;brocades&quot; at first, too, and annoyingly gave up on the NE corner. For some reason, I was unable to see the well-known dd in 7d, and I&#039;m not familiar with the expression DES-RES - in fact, I find it quite obnoxious; it doesn&#039;t sound in the least desirable IMO. I read 6ac wrongly, expecting to find &#039;el&#039; reversed in the answer, rather than excluded :(

Maybe it&#039;s Monday morning syndrome, or the fact that I have things to do today. It was an enjoyable puzzle, with a few smiles, as usual with the Spider Woman, my thanks to her.

Just one quibble - I wouldn&#039;t quite equate UNFAIR and &#039;dishonest&#039;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks PeterO, though I&#8217;m afraid you might like to edit, as you have a few slips &#8211; not just typos. No doubt you were in a hurry to post the blog <img src='http://www.fifteensquared.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>I plumped for &#8220;brocades&#8221; at first, too, and annoyingly gave up on the NE corner. For some reason, I was unable to see the well-known dd in 7d, and I&#8217;m not familiar with the expression DES-RES &#8211; in fact, I find it quite obnoxious; it doesn&#8217;t sound in the least desirable IMO. I read 6ac wrongly, expecting to find &#8216;el&#8217; reversed in the answer, rather than excluded <img src='http://www.fifteensquared.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':(' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Maybe it&#8217;s Monday morning syndrome, or the fact that I have things to do today. It was an enjoyable puzzle, with a few smiles, as usual with the Spider Woman, my thanks to her.</p>
<p>Just one quibble &#8211; I wouldn&#8217;t quite equate UNFAIR and &#8216;dishonest&#8217;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kathryn's Dad</title>
		<link>http://www.fifteensquared.net/2011/06/20/guardian-quiptic-n%c2%ba-605-by-arachne/#comment-161707</link>
		<dc:creator>Kathryn's Dad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 06:29:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fifteensquared.net/?p=30871#comment-161707</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Many thanks, Peter.

Arachne&#039;s Quiptic offerings are usually enjoyable, and this was no exception.  Just got held up on a couple: I too was trying to make BROCADES work, and I struggled with CARESS.  The latter is slightly flawed, I think, since there&#039;s no real indicator that you have to remove the EL from CARELESS.  Would &#039;Clumsy English student rejected embrace&#039; have worked better?

I liked the nicely hidden SESAME and ADVERB today.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Many thanks, Peter.</p>
<p>Arachne&#8217;s Quiptic offerings are usually enjoyable, and this was no exception.  Just got held up on a couple: I too was trying to make BROCADES work, and I struggled with CARESS.  The latter is slightly flawed, I think, since there&#8217;s no real indicator that you have to remove the EL from CARELESS.  Would &#8216;Clumsy English student rejected embrace&#8217; have worked better?</p>
<p>I liked the nicely hidden SESAME and ADVERB today.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
