Comments on: Independent 7892/Anax

By: nmsindy

nmsindy — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 13:28:12 +0000

It’s most useful to have these comments from the experts. I agree ‘double duty’ is never justified. IMHO, apart from their primary purpose (to entertain), crosswords have to be fair and logical. Again with my setting hat on, I’d see myself in the Xim school and, while I cannot speak for him obviously, I get the feeling Brian Greer (Virgilius) also is.

Also re JS’s final comment at #24, it would be wonderful if cryptic puzzles were significant enough to be a weapon in a circulation war but I somehow doubt it.

By: Quixote

Quixote — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 06:47:50 +0000

The editor (eimi) must have the last word about the Indy puzzles and I respect that, but this veteran is not so sure that the all-out libertarians won’t make crosswords too difficult for those who want to learn. Crossowrds can be hard AND fair! On these blogs I sometimes feel like Elijah (‘I alone am left..’). But it’s time for me to shut up! In the meantime I shall still maintain my view that double duty is absolutely wrong and that nounal indicators are very dicey (one of the few things where my esteemed coleague Brian Greer gets it wrong!).

By: JollySwagman

JollySwagman — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 06:28:13 +0000

“Ultimately it’s the solvers who decide what’s fair.” – well said.

Ximeneans can do what they want in their own parish but there is no earthly reason why all cryptic puzzles should defer to one set of rules, particularly not those ones. If anything it would be nice to have more diversity – as long as answers are gettable by the application of logic that’s fair to me. Nounal anagrinds – double duty – bring it on – I love it.

I am already missing Croisaire’s puzzles in the Irish Times so I have just ordered a book of the late Frank Lewis’s puzzles from “The Nation” (US mag). Apparently these too use quite varied devices compared with what we have become used to.

The Ximenes book was published at the height of the circulation war between the Observer and the Sunday Times and I often wonder whether that had anything to do with it.

By: eimi

eimi — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 01:38:47 +0000

You say tomayto and I say tomahto. It really depends whose hymn sheet you’re singing from and following on from the great Virgilius in my current role I have no reason to disagree with him. I’ve never been impressed by the argument against nounal indicators per se – surely in a cryptic (the clue’s in the word cryptic) crossword, a dolly mixture can be a mixture of the letters in dolly as surely as a river can be a flower or a currency unit a settler. Defining one part of speech with another is another matter entirely. While I’m in heretical mood, I have to admit that I don’t understand Afrit’s injuction either and I’m not alone in this. Ultimately it’s the solvers who decide what’s fair. To boldly go, and all that …

By: John

John — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 23:29:22 +0000

Re nounal anagram indicators: Azed says one thing; Brian Greer says another. Who is right? My feeling is that Azed’s pronouncements are taken as gospel by many people, but Brian Greer is also quite justifiably eminent, so perhaps we shouldn’t pooh-pooh him.

By: nmsindy

nmsindy — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 15:38:59 +0000

Re nounal anagram indicators, Azed has a detailed note in his 2006 book (pp 15-16). He says that ‘few issues divide setters so fundamentally’ as this, then after a detailed explanatory note, which I must admit I found difficult to grasp fully without quite a few readings, indicates that he would never use them. Brian Greer, former Indy and Times crossword editor and distinguished setter, however, says in his 2001 book (How to do the Times Crossword) that he sees no reason to rule out appropriate use of nouns and gives as an example ‘A pectoral disaster for her’(9). With my setter’s hat on, being cautious, but admitting my difficulty in understanding entirely all the issues involved, I avoid them completely.

By: Quixote

Quixote — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 14:36:35 +0000

I bow to the new authority

By: anax

anax — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 13:14:44 +0000

Ah – nounal anagrinds. I can understand why pure Ximeneans are unhappy with them, but it also appears that solvers generally have no objection. Ultimately, if the wordplay indicators get their message across clearly and understandably they cause no problem.
For me, nounal anagrinds are bad (in fact pretty much unusable) in front of fodder, but if a surgeon informs you that you have a bone fracture it’s pretty clear you have a fractured bone.

By: Quixote

Quixote — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 08:28:23 +0000

Pernickety. eh? I learnt my crossword grammar from a master, who (sadly) is spurned by too many of our daily setters. ‘Tis a pity that so few others of the X school now survive! Never mind!

By: MikeC

MikeC — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 08:21:46 +0000

Finally finished this. Hooray!
Agree with most of the comments – but I think Quixote is being excessively pernickety about nounal anagram indicators.
Must confess I didn’t check HOLIDAYS. Some dark recess of the so-called brain insisted there were islands called the “Holidays”. Oh dear, not a perfect round after all.