Guardian 25,992 – Tramp

37 comments on “Guardian 25,992 – Tramp”

1. Andrew

   Thanks for the blog. One hour, eleven minutes? It would take me that long just to write up the blog! “One or two of the names may be unfamiliar…” indeed. For a start, Redwood as well as Wood; as a lucky guess I googled “wood comedian”; after Roy Jr, Andy and Scott came “Why Victoria Wood is the funniest British comedian you’ve never heard of”which sums it up rather well (not that I have come across Roy Jr,Andy or Scott, yet alone whoever follows). I was even more astonished when “eclair comedian” turned up the goods.
   All this was well on in the solution, as 16A came fairly late; like you, 15, 1, 9 came early and easily, on the strength of the G and K. I agree that most such clues are more impressive than satisfying.
   Product placement does seem to be catching on, does it not?
   I always feel that Murphy’s Law says that “if it can go wrong, it will”, and Sod’s lLaw, that “if it can go wrong, it has”.

2. Tramp has always been a particular favourite, so thank-you, and to Andrew for the blog.

   I’ve heard of all of the comedians and liked the clue ‘Sweet 16’.

   I remember once taking an age to get out after an Athletic Bilbao match, the stewards only opened one gate. They should have known better than to put all their Basques in one exit.

   Overall a long but enjoyable solve.

3. I can’t say that I found this puzzle very witty but I liked 22a, 12a, 18d.

   I failed to solve 8d, and I needed help to parse many of the clues: 4d, 3d, 11a, 17d, 22/10, 7d, 21d.

   New for me was the minister (John) Redwood. And after reading this blog, Victoria Wood, Jenny Eclair and Jimmy Tarbuck. Perhaps the puzzle was “entertaining” if one was familiar with these comedians. Or, this puzzle is one of those that I think of as good for UK citizens, and less international in its appeal.

   Also I had never heard of IBS & ASBO before.

   Thanks for the blog, Andrew.

4. Enjoyable if rather quick solve. The def in 15,1,9 gave it away much too easily.

   16a took longer to fall. I thought that term covered shouty foul-mouthed unfunny young people more than folk like multi-talented Victoria Wood, whose recent play about Joyce Hatto was superb. On the basis given Flanders and Swann must have been early exponents of stand-up.

   Having got WOOD before 16 (oops) I was naturally thinking of Sir Henry anyway.

   It’s good that Tramp pushes for entertainment value and it’s also good to get away from too many highbrow allusions – it was a very pleasant solve but there seemed to be a bit of bite missing somewhere.

   Maybe it’s just the after-effect of yesterday’s Monkster – like you can’t tell what flavour the icecream is after a really hot curry.

   I had got used to Murphy’s owning the law – then Sod came along – I never understood why the heed to change. Was it a PC thing – not wanting to suggest that the Irish are particularly pessimistic – or particularly prone to their innovations and experiments going awry. Strange, in the light of the recent hoo-hah, that the latter word is regarded as such a mild swear-word, given it’s etymology.

   Thanks for the blog A and thanks for sparing us that.

5. Thanks Andrew and Tramp
   I didn’t parse WHATSIT or CAVORT, but otherwise this fell into place quite easily, helped by guessing the long anagram.
   I too had REDWOOD before I got STAND-UP COMEDIAN, but I fear that I was thinking of bits of tree rather than conductors for that then!
   CHICAGO was my favourite – it was such a nice clue that I’m surprised I haven’t seen it before.
   Another new way of clueing ABSINTHE – is that two in one week? What’s wrong with the traditional “Sailors in the drink”?

6. Good blog Andrew. Mixed bag, this. 13’s easy G quickly gave the eggs/basket answ, and 16’s anagram followed. Didn’t know some of the 16s, but got them with a shrug, esp ECLAIR. Missed the bowel syndrome in 17d, but got that, too. Not thrilled by the clues for CAVORT or WHATSIT, or the AM in 21d though the definition was nice. Still, rugged fun, thanks Tramp.

7. Thanks for the great blog, Andrew [I’m with PeterO – however do you do it?] and Tramp for the fun puzzle – yet another whose theme was right up my street.

   Commenters in other places should not complain about the inclusion of unfamiliar names but rather be thankful to have the likes of the multi-talented Victoria Wood and Jenny Eclair brought to their attention, so that they can sample the delights of their work.

   Of the four-letter words, I thought SKID and ASBO were both great clues. ASBO has proved quite a boon to setters – it crops up fairly regularly. [I’m glad you share my admiration for Linda Smith, Andrew, and saved me the trouble of mentioning her this time. ;-)] And ABSINTHE has made regular appearance [usually with reference to sailors!] for as long as I’ve been doing crosswords. This clue was a very nice variation.

   [Thanks, ToniL @2 – I know I’m not keen on Spoonerisms but I liked that!]

   Many thanks again to Tramp – as Andrew says, it’s good to see you back so soon!

8. I should, of course, have said *quoting* her [Linda Smith], since I couldn’t resist mentioning her.

9. Interesting puzzle that I found quite difficult.

   Thanks Andrew; I thought that there was a missing heads indicator in 23a until I realised that A H & W were all standard abbreviations. 🙁

   Good theme, although I got misled for my last in [STARBUCKS] by the ‘chain.’ STARBUCKS and McDonald’s – looks like Tramp is angling for some free breakfasts!

   I noticed that both Rufus and Pan previously used the ‘Sailors in the drink?’ clue. The one here was quite clever, I thought.

10. Linda Smith, God rest her. I’ll never forget her interrupting Stephen Fry waxing lyrically about Mozart’s precocious talent with her Kentish dead-pan “Special needs kid, if you ask me”.

11. Yes, I liked this variation on ABSINTHE too.

    Delay was caused with 16a due to my cussed belief that it must be something to do with TV technology. STAND-BY something? CAMERAMAN? Didn’t quite fit, but along those lines … ? Happily, TUPPERWARE came along (we still have a few bits), and that and REDWOOD led me on my way. Mr Redwood has never been known for his sense of humour and is known as the Vulcan by Private Eye, so he might have struggled with the comedians too, were he ever to open a Guardian and attempt something as frivolous as a crossword. STARBUCKS gave trouble though, till the ‘chain’ dropped.

12. Enjoyabl e stuffd from Tram,p. His work is much tightewr than it used to be, it seems to me anyway!!

    Rowly.

13. Thanks, Andrew – still the fastest blogger in the West.

    I looked at the long clue, saw Peter Kay; looked at the enumeration for 16 and put in STAND-UP COMEDIAN straight away. I know the two clues are not really related, but that’s the way it worked for me. I’m no fan of long anagrams for reasons I’ve explained before: they just seem more of a setter’s party piece than enjoyment for the solver. But I got it fairly early on and then the rest fell steadily.

    There is some witty and contemporary clueing in here, but I have enjoyed other of Tramp’s puzzles better.

14. Thanks Tramp and Andrew

    Enjoyable end to the week and quite a bit of google required to find many of the comedians.

    Last couple in were STARBUCKS (where I kept trying to fit hauberk chain/mail in) and ASBO (after giving up trying to find some relationship between Strasbourg and Oslo).

    For once seemed to have got all the parsing right – which took nearly as long as filling in the answers.

15. I got the long anagram with a couple of checkers in place, so I’m another one that the cleverness of the clue was wasted on. I knew all the comedians so those clues didn’t present a problem, but I can understand why some overseas solvers would struggle a bit with them. CAVORT went in without being parsed, and the WOLF/WHATSIT crossers were my last in.

16. Just to say – regarding sod’s law, my understanding has always been – Murphy’s Law: if it can go wrong it will. Sod’s Law:
    If it can go wrong it will and even if it can’t, it might.

17. Thanks Andrew and Tramp

    I only got properly into this clever puzzle rather late in the day. Some excellent cluing. (Jenny) Eclair was new to me but had to be the answer, while it was nice to see Jimmy Tarbuck in an excellently misleading clue.

    I fell again for ‘de-crease’ which I only recognised after solving the clue!

18. JS @4: You seem to be thanking A for sparing us the full-frontal etymology of ‘sod’ so that you can give us a glimpse of stocking. But, Heaven knows, anything goes. Well almost.

19. The definition in 15,1,9 leads to ONES EGGS not YOUR EGGS.

20. An enjoyable solve but disappointingly easy for me! Once the eggs were in the basket the stand up followed quickly! I knew all the comedians so only the SE corner held me up briefly.

    My parsing for whatsit was bizarre and flawed. Somehow I thought of “hat” as an American pronunciation of hot with W for woman, I for Italian and ST street. Well it worked for me!

    Didn’t we have a STARBUCKS chain clued very recently?

    Rhotician @19 please educate me as to why “The definition in 15,1,9 leads to ONES EGGS not YOUR EGGS”. Because it led to YOUR EGGS for me. 😉

    Thanks to AndrewO and Tramp

21. Brendan(not that one) Well, er, because it’s always ONES not YOUR.

    I’ve just done an archive search on ONES. It didn’t take long to find MEND ONES WAYS for ‘change’ and ABOVE ONES HEAD for ‘incomprehensible’. I gave up looking for YOUR after a comparable search.

    I can’t explain it in the language of grammar but I did learn a long time ago that if a phrase with YOUR in it sprang to mind
    that the answer would have ONES.

    And now I come to think of it the clue in question properly leads to NOT rather than DONT.
    I think just adding ‘your’ to the clue is better.

22. nice..save for describing Tarbuck as a comedian.

23. @DM #22 Agree – he must have had a good agent.

    I always thought that the entire population of Liverpool were natural comedians – with one exception.

24. Swagman of late has shifted his obese intellectual weight, or so it would seem, from judging clues to judging people. Bravo. But expect the same degree of accuracy.

25. What’s wrong with clueing TARBUCK as ‘stand-up comedian’?

    Oh wait.

    It’s a joke, is it?

    Oh. Very good.

26. Satisfying puzzle, again. Favourite clue: Starbucks. Should’ve trusted my initial thought on ‘Rivers’ and Joan. Took an hour before penny dropped. Thanks again, Tramp. Ingenious and thoroughly entertaining as usual.

27. Thanks Rhotician. I thought there was some point of grammar I was missing or even ignorant of!

    I know it seems to be crossword practice always to use one or ones but I’ve never known why. Where I come from using “one” in a conversation in the pub would probably lead to ostracisataion 🙂

    There probably is a rule somewhere. I’ll have to find my Oxford English Uasage. Lost for the moment as it sat in my office desk in Germany for the 9 years I was there. I soon found out that answering “Because it is!” to the many questions I received about English grammar was not acceptable to the Teutonic mind!

28. Thanks Andrew for the blog.

    I was pleased with 20d and 23d. I thought this was good and my last one was rubbish — what do I know?

    Tramp

29. There exists a convention for ONE over YOUR, but where there’s anagram fodder, I should have thought it a no-brainer, even for Guardianistas.

30. Paul B @29

    Of course there exists a convention for ONE and YOURS! But what is it? 🙂 (Still can’t find my “Fowlers”)

    However I think you’ve missed the point of our discussion!

31. Yes, Paul B, you have missed the point. As a solver going from clue to answer I got used to the convention quite early. And I had no problem spotting the “violation” in Tramp’s clue. But setters go from answer to clue and I wonder why they (which includes you of course) almost always choose ONES when, as Brendan points out, a phrase such as “above one’s head” is almost never used outside crosswords.

    I think it’s because the pronoun “one” can mean somebody or anybody (as well as the formal, and now rather risible, I). My impression is that you (or one if you prefer) can’t properly define an answer with YOUR in it without using ‘your’ in the clue, which you don’t like.

    By the way, I’ve been meaning to ask you about ‘Guardianista’. Your usage is clearly derogatory but I assume it’s more specific than, say, ‘berk’.

32. Just chiming in on the “dispute” at 15/1/9.

    First the clue – I suppose adding “Admonition to…” in front of the rest would have forced clearer grammatical solutions.

    But as far as the answer, once I got the “K” and saw no “C” to use in the fodder, BASKET fell and all I had to do was decide whether it was “ONE’S” or “YOUR” eggs that were concerned. There is a Y in the fodder and the second “4” has to cross “ONE”. Problem solved.

    As far as rules? The correct usage depends on who the phrase is about. This puzzle was a bit “over my head”, but, dear Andrew, it seems like it was not “over your head”. Many may find early forays into cryptic solving to be “over their head”. In a news item, it might be written that the recent floodwaters could be found to be “over one’s head” so stay on high ground!

    That is all 🙂

33. If you can solve a clue from its cryptic bits, then what’s the problem? That’s my point. For the convention, don’t ask me, I just ‘know’ it in the same way you do.

    There have been one or two instances, IIRC, where compilers (in The Guardian, again IIRC) have used ‘your’ instead of ‘one’s’ in cryptic definition clues, and as a result ruined everyone’s enjoyment. But hey, so what: break new ground, whatever the cost.

34. No problem, especially not with Tramp’s clue.

    But I reckon you could lose your marbles thinking too much about this stuff. As a setter, I imagine one could go mad. What’s weird is that setters and solvers alike feel uneasy about ‘go mad’ indicating LOSE YOUR MARBLES. I suppose the convention serves simply to resolve the ambiguity in the absence of any indication in the wordplay.

35. Well yes. One’s marbles could be scrambled. But with Tramp’s clue I don’t think that convention really applies, do you? KEEP ALL ONE’S EGGS IN ONE BASKET would sound a bit strange, whereas DO ONE’S NUT for example would not. X ONE’S Y seems to be the right format for all that sort of thing, though it’s not an exact science. Re setter’s POV, since having the chance to set for a certain publication, I’ve been advised not to have any X ONE’S Ys, as they are thought to be a bit of a gimme.

    Sorry Tramp! I did not wish to impute anything re your clue, which is a jolly fine one.

36. Interesting. I vaguely recall reading something about the Times crossword. The only thing I remember is that you were restricted to five anagrams. I’d always thought Everyman was anagram-heavy, as sometimes was the Guardian, and five feels about right. I noticed once a Times puzzle with none, which was impressive. There seems to be a general convention that more than two hidden answers is bad form, and even with two one should be reverse.
    Also in the Times there seems never to be more than one clue linked to another. I can remember when the Times always had one quotation to fill in. Very tedious.

37. No quotations allowed, at least not in that format, as I understand it, and one hidden (I think). But you are right about the anagrams, and if you have but four (partial and/or full) so much the better. That, plus the required strict adherence to a relatively short list of single-letter indicators, makes the compiling considerably more difficult, but it forces you to think of other ways of doing things. And so, hopefully, you grow and grow until you become a Bannsider or a Nestor.

Comments are closed.