Inquisitor 1287: Tour de Farce by Eclogue

15 comments on “Inquisitor 1287: Tour de Farce by Eclogue”

1. Super blog Kenmac, and a really superb crossword from Eclogue. I loved the way the protagonists appeared only after the previous one had disappeared – and how you’ve shown that in the blog – must have needed an awful lot of .gifs to do that!!

   My only niggle was in 11A where I couldn’t really connect “Galwegian (Irish) mild check” with the chambers definition of “emotion, wonder or mild expostulation”.

   My knowledge of the Ladykiller was not up to Kenmac’s so I’m afraid I had to resort to Wikipedia for the order of killings, but no matter!

2. Something about the introduction suggested the film to me immediately, and it didn’t take long to spot The Ladykillers in the misprints after which I had to check the names of the actors in the film. Alas, I ran out of time filling in the grid before going on holiday – still had a few to get, and therefore couldn’t work out the character names in the grid.

   This film was shown to my school as an end of term treat back in the sixties when I was in my early teens. I absolutely hated it, but in retrospect I was probably far too young to appreciate it. Keep on meaning to see it again, but have only seen bits of it.

3. Like Dormouse I suspected The Ladykillers early on and this was quickly confirmed as my early solves were concentrated at the end of the down clues. Sellers emerged soon after, I remembered Guinness and Lom from the cast and the other names were pretty obvious once I had most of the letters, which helped with the final few clues.

   I think this must have been at the easier end of the scale as I all but completed the clues on a two hour train journey without any reference materials, only needing to confirm a couple of answers and the character names when I got home.

4. We also thought that this was a reaaly superb puzzle. Sorting out the grid must have been very tricky and we loved the way that the characters revealed themselves as they were eliminated.

   Another great blog too kenmac!

   Thanks Eclogue, we’d be perfectly happy with more like this!

5. @1 – 36 images in total, great fun putting it together though :):
   https://www.dropbox.com/sh/jkzu24mbezp3puh/8-clkVkcXV

6. All of the above. A great puzzle. BUT. Once again the sequential end-game was only possible if one is familiar with the work OR you Google it. Just getting the knitting needles out before someone suggests it!
   Thsnks Eclogue and kenmac.

7. Great blog to match an excellent puzzle.

   I’ve never seen the film but the title was obvious from having most of the last 11 misprints – & from that Alec Guinness was also obvious – that completely exhausted my knowledge of the film so I needed wikipedia to confirm the characters, actors & order of deaths.

   But having to resort to wiki didn’t spoil my enjoyment of a really polished puzzle.

8. Regalize at #6. I’m not sure what the answer to that is. Books on films, and film reviews, pretty much always avoid revealing the plot. So there would be no hardback source to go to – unless there was some very specialised book on this one film. So, if the Net was eschewed, puzzles with that sort of theme would also have to be avoided, which seems a pity. I’ll have to admit I never heard of the film, but am clearly in a minority there. It does not sound as if it was based on a book, but I’m open to correction there of course.

9. I was grateful for my wife’s far superior film knowledge to crack the code on this one. I’d never have solved it without this spousal nudge and indeed the consequent wiki assistance.

   Nevertheless, another great inquisitor and thoroughly enjoyed puzzling over this whilst on holiday on North Northumberland. Thanks to ecologue for a cracking teaser and kenmac for the top blogging. Nice gif artistry.

10. I think we should be less worried about the use of Google and other computer aids. I sent the following as a comment on the last Inquisitor:
    “When does using aids become “cheating”? We are all doing this for FUN, not for gain.
    It is very satisfying to complete a crossword without the use of dictionaries or other aids, but I don’t see any problem with using the internet as a library of reference books. We can’t all afford gigantic reference tomes which we use very few times and the internet is a resource like any other, but cheaper and easier to search. As a result, I think that crosswords like the Inquisitor are able to use themes which would otherwise be inaccessible. Do you have to purchase Grove (£120 +) to be able to find a composer’s name or to solve an opera-based theme? No!
    Also I admit that my vocabulary does not extend to knowing all the words in Chambers. Is it “cheating” to look them up in the dictionary – clearly not, but is it “cheating” to use Chambers CD version (now sadly unavailable in the latest edition)? Is it worse to use a computer-based anagram finder than to have a reference book of alphabetical anagrams?
    If computer use opens up the pleasure of these more difficult crosswords to myself and others, I have no problem with it!”

11. Re @10, although I started doing crosswords at school in the sixties, it wasn’t until the seventies and I discovered Azed in the Observer that I progresses to barred crosswords. (I think it was when the Sunday Times went of strike and I started reading The Observer.) And I discovered the necessity of having the latest edition of Chambers around. Many were the words in Azed that I had never heard off, and it was often necessary to search the dictionary to find something that fitted the available letters. And I entered the competition most weeks and occasionally even won something – a book token usually. (I stopped entering prize crosswords as I had too many books.)

    As time progressed, I moved from the Observer to the IoS and Beelzebub (and occasionally the Inquisitor on Saturdays, but I often can’t get into this), and then I discovered Chambers Word Wizard on the net. And yes, using that does, to my mind, feel a bit like “cheating” but I don’t know why. I suppose it is because it is easier entering the letters in the box than it is laboriously searching through entries in the book. But it is still more satisfying to complete a crossword with the use of Word Wizard than it is not to complete it at all.

    I wonder if this is going to be an evolutionary spiral – as searching the net becomes easier, the crosswords are going to get harder.

12. Interesting comments. I think the rather pejorative word ‘cheating’ often muddies debates of this kind. Ultimately, I’d say the most important question as “Did you enjoy the puzzle?”. With the daily cryptics, which use normal vocabulary, I think it’s usually possible and more enjoyable to solve by teasing out the wordplay. The other puzzles use a wider vocab – I’d usually start them, using only the Chambers dict (for verification of a possible answer or wordplay component that seemed to be there) and, sometimes can solve them entirely that way. When stuck though I’ll go to word lists eg Bradford’s, Chambers Crossword Dict and the TEA program. I’ll only be disappointed if the lists produce something felt I should have thought of.

13. Completely agree with NMS here. Enjoyment is the deciding factor for me. True, I do sometimes lazily resort to throwing anagram letters into the Chambers app on my phone and am occasionally disappointed when it results in an answer I should have been able to get unaided, but there are also countless times when it results in a word I would never reach even with all the checking letters! With barred thematics, the end always justifies the means for me.

    And there’s no way I would ever be able to set puzzles without using a computer. Having an idea is one thing. Getting it into a grid is quite another!

14. Coming late to the party, and nothing to add to the ‘electronic aids’ debate for the moment.

    I solved enough of the first 12 clues straight away to have ALEC GUINNESS and became fixated on Kind Hearts and Coronets.

    MARCUS was a little more difficult to find than the first four, but that was a case of “more haste, less speed”. And I knew immediately that the dénouement was made for kenmac to animate – he didn’t disappoint us.

    Nice work from the Eclogue partnership. My only quibble is with 15a: RESORB is to “absorb back” in a technical sense, whereas “engage” is to “absorb” figuratively, so the clue doesn’t quite work for me.

15. Many thanks to all commentators and especially to kenmac for his work-of-art GIF construction of the grid. We’re glad you liked it!

    Eclogue’s musings on this puzzle can be found at the Eclogue’s Efforts website, which can be found through the Links Tab here.

Comments are closed.