Worked some more on the “simple” (unlinked etc.) clues Saturday, got a few written in, took a break and enjoyed Paul’s Prize for a couple of hours. Filed that and got back to the Reverend.

Spent most of the afternoon, on and off, picking off a clue here, a clue there, slapping myself for ones that should have been easy… 11 and 22a both sent me in wrong directions, since I was thinking of the magazine and the lumberjack.

Eventually after an inkless hour I used onelook to decipher 13d from one checking letter. I have different standards for different setters on how long I will struggle before using various tools – with anyone I’ll go to wikipedia to verify a person’s name I have worked out, say. And with heavily themed puzzles I don’t mind doing the research after an hour or two’s immersion – one that comes to mind was a Waterloo/Nelson themed puzzle a while ago – having the hard clues in mind, I had to spend a good hour or two reading encyclopedia articles on the topic, with the occasional “aha!” coming along the way. On the other hand, I’d always at least hope to finish a Rufus or an Everyman on my own.

I got about half the parsing of 8/20 – tried to research “PG” and this meaning, sadly, is not on the wikipedia page.

Whew.

Peter @ 12, I suspect “in full fig” might be a Biblical derivation.

Derek @ 50, while I feel your pain – yes, these three, Enigmatist (hated), Boatman (loved), and this one (loved) could all easily have been run on a Saturday – there is a delicate balance between providing fifteen minutes of scribbling in answers and 5 hours of delightful challenge. I might suggest that on tough days (especially runs of tough days) either hitting the archives or another paper like the Herald (on line or at the newsstand). And they were all harder than this week’s Prize (liked).

So… Stella, thanks for the hard-working blog, and Duncan (and others) for filling in some of the blanks, and especially to Araucaria for continuing to come up with new ways to monkey up the structure of a puzzle.

Really enjoyed reading these comments though now we’re back.

I’m definitely on the ‘for Araucaria’ side as he’s always been the compiler that I’m most in tune with although I rarely understand all his wordplay. I knew that PILGRIM’S PROGRESS was right but I couldn’t for the life of me see why.

This puzzle is also the first one that I’ve finished this week. I will hang on to Boatman and Enigmatist and finish them eventually.

I think tomorrow’s puzzle will almost certainly be Paul or if not I would guess Pasquale. Either way I’ll be happy.

Two hundred years and thirty
Ere Armageddon came
His single hand portrayed it,
And Bunyan was his name!

tupu @49. One of 8,20 in isolation would have been ridiculously unfair, together, especially with the run on into 22a, they were gettable. I can picture A with a sly grin. I haven’t been back doing cryptics long enough to have any particular preferences so name of setter doesn’t sway me. Maybe it’s just that E’s puzzle baffled me