Comments on: Guardian 25,377 / Rufus

By: Colin

Colin — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 13:18:24 +0000

…obviously a regional/generational thing, then – in my experience, there’s no way the two are interchangeable.

By: duncanshiell

duncanshiell — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 12:25:59 +0000

Colin @ 32

Chambers defines ‘stoned’ in this sense as ‘very drunk, or very high on drugs’

Collins refers to both drugs and alcohol – in that order.

The Shorter Oxford states ‘Drunk, extremely intoxicated. Also, in a state of drug-induced euphoria’

By: Colin

Colin — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 12:12:02 +0000

I’m not entirely satisfied with “drunk”/STONED; I’ve always understood “stoned” to mean being under the influence of …certain other substances… rather than alcohol, so I wouldn’t treat the two as synonymous.

By: Carrots

Carrots — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 22:46:25 +0000

I`m not surprised that blogging this took longer than solving it. I was barely a third down my sole lunchtime pinta when I finished it…and then had to sit and stare at it, like some lonely old codger wondering why he got up this morning.

Rufus is a setter who can do it: so why doen`t he now and again? I can only hope that he is lulling the usual suspects and sundry pit-nickers into a false state of complacency. `t would be a bit like Fifteen Squared`s Pearl Harbour, with screams of “foul” emanating from the foundering big guns.

By: Martin H

Martin H — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 17:32:13 +0000

Another exemplary commentary, duncan; thanks. You say it took longer to write than it did to solve the puzzle – possibly longer than it did to compile it too.

I agree with you that 5 and 13 down were very nicely done, but the rest was pretty dismal. I too entered ‘sitting’, and thought it poor, but at least it was better than ‘session’. Some of the surfaces today, usually Rufus’s forte, seemed pretty clunky, notably 1 (what’s ‘plea’ doing in there?), 4 and 25. Not-so-golden oldies, NATURE, ESPRIT and GREECE; not-so-cryptic definitions, REPOSSESS, THE RIVALS, and some very obvious anagrams, ENGLAND and IGNORANT.

Enough.

By: Paul B

Paul B — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 17:16:54 +0000

One right in the 2 downs there from Headteacher.

By: Headteacher

Headteacher — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 16:47:44 +0000

More proof that, when you think it’s too obvious to be right, it isn’t, it’s just a Rufus “crossword”.

By: Wolfie

Wolfie — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 16:46:50 +0000

I enjoyed this Rufus crossword very much – it’s a fine example of a puzzle that succeeds in entertaining without being unduly difficult.

To my own surprise I got Horatius immediately! I remembered reading the story of Horatius on the bridge at school fifty years ago in my basic Latin Reader – ‘Civis Romanus’ (does anyone else remember this text?) The fact that I have retained the memory of Horatius and other notable characters in Roman History is down to my childhood terror of my Latin teacher, who motivated his students by liberal use of the strap.

Thanks Duncan for the blog.

By: Geoff

Geoff — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 16:20:57 +0000

Re 16a and the fewer/less distinction, you can always tell the target demographic of a supermarket by the sign above the check-out for customers with not a lot of purchases. Most say ’10 (or however many) items or less’. Waitrose (and Booths up here in the NW) have ’10 items or fewer’.

BTW Swedish has just one word for ‘less’/'fewer’ (mindre), but separate words for ‘more’ depending on whether the noun is uncountable (mer) or countable (flera) – the opposite of English.

By: grandpuzzler

grandpuzzler — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 14:28:53 +0000

Thanks to Rufus and duncanshiell. This was a somewhat harder Monday puzzle for me. Thanks for the Horatius explanation. I also tried to make SITTING work at 18dn.

Cheers…for Darren Clarke!