Comments on: Financial Times 13,814 – Crux

By: Agentzero

Agentzero — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 19:42:10 +0000

Hi Sil, I’m coming very late to this puzzle (just printed it out and solved it during a late lunch).

Thanks for these well done and nicely organised blog posts.

I had the same reaction as you to EARTHLING, and a similar reaction to 20 across, ROMANTICALLY. Is that all there is to it? Meaning, is there no subsidiary indication for “-TICALLY”?

By: Sil van den Hoek

Sil van den Hoek — Sat, 15 Oct 2011 13:52:09 +0000

Thanks, Rishi and PB, for the posts.

I still find EARTHLING a very strange clue, but so was ET it(?)self.

PB’s justification of dropping the D in 16d is an OK one, I think – and one I would go with now. So many thanks for that.

By: Pelham Barton

Pelham Barton — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:51:11 +0000

Further on 15ac: ET would not naturally speak English, so his term for a human would need to be translated – hence “In translation” in the clue. I think that is all there is to this clue, but would happily be persuaded otherwise.

By: Pelham Barton

Pelham Barton — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:04:15 +0000

Thanks Crux for the puzzle and Sil for this blog. I would justify 16dn by forming the anagram as ITALICISED and then dropping the last letter.

By: Rishi

Rishi — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 03:28:46 +0000

Re 15a

Let’s say that an ET, an alien, living on some remote planet, wants to refer, while speaking or writing, to a “human being”. The alien may, probably with some contempt, call the human being an EARTHLING. Is this how Crux wants us to interpret the clue?