I get a slight sinking feeling, when scanning a puzzle before starting to solve it, when I see several long clues, especially when they also turn out to refer to each other. Either they remain intractable for too long or they prove to be write-ins, so that, suddenly, half the grid is filled in and there isn’t much of a challenge left.
That didn’t really happen with this puzzle, which turned out to be based on a clever interlinking of two book titles and their authors, although that wasn’t immediately apparent to me, as the first across clue was cryptic, with no wordplay involved, and so I failed to see that one, initially, [but, having said that, I often get [for instance] Araucaria’s tortuous anagrams or constructions intuitively and then have to work on deconstructing the wordplay].
My first entries were the crossing 6dn and 15ac – as so often, in both cases, Shakespeare to the rescue! – which led to a bit of a flurry in the top right corner, including ORWELL and ?N? O?T for 7dn, which then took care of 26dn etc. And thence to 9ac etc, with a satisfied ‘aha’ at such a clever link and a faint ringing of distant bells, which I followed up later.*
[*I have often had reason to bless the wonderful ‘search’ facility on this site. When I’d finished the puzzle, I typed in A TALE OF TWO CITIES and up came this blog of a puzzle by Virgilius [our Brendan] on the same theme. Unfortunately, the Independent, unlike the Guardian, doesn’t have an archive and the clues are not included in the blog, but both books and both authors are there in the answers, but with, obviously, quite different clues. A very clever exploitation by both setters.]
[PS: And then, on Wednesday, this week, in the FT, we had a Dickens-themed puzzle from Cinephile [Araucaria] with the clue, ” At a sign, measure one beast going back to links (1,4,2,3,6)”]. Spooky!]
Apart from the linked clues, there was lots to enjoy in this puzzle [but I have to say that few of the surfaces – important to me but, I know, not to all – made any real sense]. Many thanks, Brummie!
Across
9,20,23 In which Sydney features prominently (though neither of those alluded to)
A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Cryptic definition, which I didn’t get on the first run through. Although I’m familiar with the story and the ”It is a far, far better thing than I have ever done’ hero Carton, I confess to never having read the book, so I wasn’t aware of the less usual spelling [I’m used to Sidney] of his forename – cleverly exploited by Brummie.
If – perish the thought – I were wanting to be really niggardly, I might say that a cryptic clue, with no wordplay, for the first [long] answer might be off-putting but this is simply an excuse to direct you to an interesting article by the brilliant setter Anax on his website, including advice given to him by Roger Squires [Rufus] re the first clue in a puzzle. [I’m always fascinated by these glimpses into the mind of a setter].
10 Carrier‘s fan carrier almost capsized
AIR FRANCE
Anagram [capsized] of FAN CARRIE{r}
11 Month one: gets quaintly drunk on approx. a sixth of a pint
DECILITRE
DEC [month] + I [one] + LIT [drunk – but why ‘quaintly, I wonder? I thought this was a quite common definition in Crosswordland] + RE [on]
12 Tobacco in can — lots rejected (contains uranium)
SNOUT
Reversal [rejected] of TONS [lots] round U [chemical symbol for uranium]
Snout is prison slang for a cigarette or tobacco, hence ‘in can’
15 Shakespeare character’s earliest manifestation lacks independence
LAERTES
Anagram [manifestation] of EARL[i]EST minus i [independence]
17 Score on date, with internal covering
LINED
LINE [score] + D [date]
18 Period hack, good for Times
AGE
AxE [hack] with X [times] replaced by G [good]
22 Devil responsible for 9 20 23
DICKENS
Double definition: euphemism for devil – Charles, writer of A TALE OF TWO CITIES
25 Frank might show it’s paid, getting job to get on
POSTAGE
POST [job] + AGE [get on]
26 Carbon-14 measurer, say, who’s arranged a partner?
DATER
Double definition
30 Overheard description of Don Quixote’s end of a working day?
WEEKNIGHT
Sounds like [overheard] ‘weak knight’ = Don Quixote
31 Anxious about unarticled Native Americans
SIOUX
Anagram [about] of [an]XIOUS [minus ‘an’ – ‘unarticled’]
Down
1,3 Aggressive pitch (not the padded sort it’s said?)
HARD SELL
Double / cryptic definition – sounds like ‘hard cell’ [not the padded sort]
2 Brass slate often seen on the range
SAUCEPAN
SAUCE [brass] + PAN [slate – both as verbs]
4 Musical composition, if a satnav turned volume off
FANTASIA
Anagram [turned] of IF A SATNA[v] minus [turned off] v [volume]
5 Blair originally: “Zero tolerance at the heart, I say”
ORWELL
O [zero] + R [middle letter – heart – of toleRance] + WELL [I say – and I know this dates me but I can’t write this without thinking of Dan Maskell]
George Orwell’s real name was Eric Blair
6 Guardian supporting Shakespearean character faring well
PROSPEROUS
US [Guardian] after [supporting, in a down clue] PROSPERO [Shakespearean character]
8 Old sporting hero Coe over time
BEST
Reversal [over] of SEB[astian Coe] + T [time] for old sporting hero George.
13 Went furtively topless but did nothing?
IDLED
[s]IDLED [went furtively, ‘topless’]
14 Devious clue: “Following from French uprising: German chap wearing girdle”
RED HERRING
Reversal [uprising] of DE [from French] + HERR [German chap] in [wearing] RING [girdle]
16 Rock scorer’s “Stumped” single
STONE
ST [cricket scorer’s abbreviation, I believe, for ‘stumped’ + ONE [single]
19 No longer number one comprehending depth computer technology? Speed up!
EXPEDITE
EX [no longer] + PEE [number one!] round [comprehending] D [depth] and IT [computer technology]
21 Cross piece over entrance to cellar?
TRAP DOOR
Reversal [over] of PART [piece] + ROOD [cross]: I think I’ve seen this more than once before.
24 Unkempt as a cormorant?
SHAGGY
A Rufus-like double / cryptic definition: cormorants, I find, are like shags
26,7,13across,27 9 20 23 by 5, comprehensively losing a couple of capital boxing bouts?
DOWN AND OUT IN PARIS AND LONDON
Double / cryptic definition: a memoir in two parts by George Orwell on the theme of poverty in the two cties and, if a boxer was knocked down and out for the count in London and Paris, he would have comprehensively lost two ‘capital’ bouts.
28 City’s permission to seize document
OMSK
OK [permission] round [to seize] MS [document]
29 Succeeding when planting kiss in lacy material
NEXT
X [kiss] in NET [lacy material]
Thanks Eileen. I wrote 9,20,23 straight in, helped by the letter disribution. Sydney is the way it is spelt in my copy. 19 was my last and shows it has been a long time since I had anything to do with the care of infants. I look forward to a clue that incorporates number two.
A TALE OF TWO CITIES came to mind on seeing the letter spacing, and I was delighted to see the clue made sense of this, so it was my first entry. Strangely, later on the spaces for the other title suggested to me DOWN AND OUT IN PARIS AND LONDON, although I didn’t consciously know the book, and once again parts of the clue corresponded. One of my last entries was ORWELL, and I was amazed to then find the title was one of his. Isn’t it odd how one’s mind sometimes works? Thanks to Brummie and Eileen for an enjoyable workout.
Thanks for the blog, Eileen. I agree that few of the surfaces made sense! It always lessens my enjoyment somewhat.
I failed to solve 12a and I couldn’t parse 18a, 19d (hmmm, PEE is very funny!).
I liked 1/3, 9/20/23, 14d & 26/7/13a/27, and my favourite was 24d SHAGGY.
Thanks Eileen. I agree: the enjoyment of these things often comes afterwards, going back for a parsing or more often to get the background on a divined answer. Like the 26 etc opus which I got very early, after the even earlier Dickens one. But I’d forgotten it was by Orwell: if remembered, 5d might not have been my last in. Though its ‘quote’ went on baffling me, until your parsing of it now. Ditto AGE/axe.
Thanks, Eileen. A curiosity this – an easy Brummie as a prize. (Admittedly, it does require the solver to have at least a passing acquaintance with the two books; if not, I would imagine it would be a lot tougher.)
re DECILITRE and “quaintly drunk”, I guess the answer to your question is, “Because he could.” 🙂 He gets away with calling LIT a quaint expression (just, I agree) and certainly succeeded on leading me down the garden path on the first pass, trying to construct a charade including an anagram (drunk) of quaintly!
Thanks Eileen
Rapid correct guesses (from letter count) of the long ones made this the most rapid solve of a prize crossword ever for me – somewhat disappointing; I felt a bit cheated.
Just about to start today’s – let us hope for a better challenge.
btw misprint in 28d – Q instead of O (though I doubt if anyone would be confused)
Many thanks Eileen & Brummie
I hereby declare that this was THE EASIEST PRIZE PUZZLE EVER!
As soon as I saw ‘Blair’ I knew instinctively that ORWELL was being indicated.
Nevertheless Very Enjoyable.
THanks, muffin @7 – corrected.
Thanks Eileen for an excellent blog and Brummie for a fun puzzle.
Lots of ticks – 1,3d, 9a etc, 17a, 19a, 25a, 30a, 31a, 2d, 19d, 21d.
I didn’t feel the surfaces were all that worrisome and I liked several of them.
Thanks for the blog Eileen. I think I spent longer reading it than solving the crossword 🙂
I knew both of the books so this was a relatively easy solve, but that didn’t lessen my enjoyment of the puzzle. I never pay much attention to the quality of surface readings.
I rarely comment on whether I find a puzzle difficult or not, as it is not easy to measure and it is very relative – “one man’s meat is another man’s poison” and all that. Obviously several people above found Brummie’s puzzle very easy.
If I was to compare last week’s with today’s Prize: Brummie’s 26005 – I failed to solve 1 clue (12a) and I couldn’t parse 2 answers; in Paul’s 26006 I have solved all, and I have only one left to parse. So does that mean Paul’s is easier than Brummie’s 26005? Well, yes I suppose – for me at least. And it was certainly a lot of fun!
Sorry, I meant Paul’s Prize 26011 in my post above.
Thanks Eileen.
Some books you read and some you immerse in and both for me were in this puzzle. In DAOIP&L I always wondered if Orwell had put in an Etonian gag – there’s a ‘screever’ (pavement artist) who is a central character in the London bit in the book called Bozo, the archetypal tramp – and Dicken’s first book was ‘Sketches by Boz’. A Tale of Two Cities and Down and Out in Paris and London? Was Orwell one jump ahead in the cryptic? Probably not – he was light on gags at that period of his life. He memorably tries to discuss Thomas a Kempis and The Imitation of Christ with Bozo who replies “Now why would they want to go imitatin’ ‘ im fer?”, which causes much sad shaking of the old Etonian noodle. Paxman meeting Johnny Vegas.
I agree with the general feeling that the letter-counts sold the farm too easily and I wonder if RCW’s sensible suggestion that a lot of this problem could be addressed by Prizes and tougher puzzles be tightened up by using word-counts rather than letter-counts? ‘Seven words’ and ‘five words’ would be a small but significant change to the ‘collapsing theme’ problem. Araucaria has been known to use word-counts rather than letter-counts in his bank-holiday specials, so why not Prizes?
I did enjoy it but I felt Brummie gifted too much.
That’s for Azed stuff (he uses the form ’13, 2 words’) and the like, and I can’t recall any occasion where a Grauniad Prize puzzle has used that kind of styling. I’m not saying it’s never happened (although an example would be nice to see): I am saying it must be very rare indeed.
Prize or not, the Saturday is still a daily puzzle. Plus, of course, Prizes are not necessarily harder than weekday offerings, and that goes for all the ‘qualities’. I’m against this silly idea.
Which silly idea would that be, Paul B?
Paul B @16.
As I say, an Araucaria bank holiday special but I can’t off the top of my head say which one it was. It was a similar problem – book-titles which Araucaria probably felt were too easy given the letter-counts. I seem to remember many favourable comments on the puzzle at the time for giving the rather easy counts in words rather than letters. Rather than it being a ‘silly idea’, I think it made common sense to me when I read RCW’s observation. A Shakespeare quote (2,2,2,3,2,2) is considerably chewier as (6 words). It needn’t be a hard and fast rule, surely, if , say, book play and film titles were disguised by word-counts? It’s a Mad Mad World My Masters if we can’t be sensible and blindly stick to ‘rules’ that detract from the pleasure of a solve.
Thanks, Eileen.
I don’t lose a lot of sleep over letter count v word count, but I’d love to know if there’s any logical thought behind the summary dismissal of something perfectly reasonable as silly.
It’s a no-brainer that some people might need to think through.
Has it crossed your mind that it might be a good thing in a daily puzzle to allow for answers to be arrived at via a combination of routes, the clue itself (a good idea always to read these), crossing letters and the enumeration? (2,2,2,3,2,2) might be a wee bit of a giveaway, but still.
What ‘rule’ will be after transgressing next week, Guardianites?
I’ve been doing cryptic crosswords since I was knee high to a grasshopper so I think you can take it I know how crosswords work. It also crosses my mind that azto has a very good suggestion which is used in barred crosswords and could be tested in dailies. BTW, our transatlantic cousins use that system, and the French let you count the letters yourself.
Enumeration is disguised in harder puzzles (the clue is in the word ‘harder’), such as Azed, to make them more challenging to solve. Because they’re for more advanced solvers, aren’t they, even where those solvers may also enjoy the (usually) less challenging experience of solving a daily.
So, in that it’s a practice that makes puzzles more difficult just for the sake of it, acceptable though it might be in the super-cryptic world of barred puzzles, doctoring the numbers in easier blocked puzzles (which have, as you also might have considered, a far wider audience with a much greater range of ability) is very much not a practice that would be welcomed. I say again, you’re being silly: you haven’t thought it through.
I thought azto was being silly, but I’m quite happy to be included in the list of sillybillies.
I sometimes have a lot more trouble with a blocked than a barred puzzle. All those crossers in the barred ones, you see.
I’m delighted to learn that you have your finger on the pulse of the whole crosswording community and are thus able to affirm that “[it] is very much not a practice that would be welcomed”.
I’m able to read and classify posts that refer to an agenda: some genuine crossword people may want a change in blocked puzzle enumeration, but I strongly doubt it. All the best with your Grauniad trolling.
In the space of a few posts I’ve moved from one of two people who wondered about “silly” being used to describe a perfectly sane idea, moderately expressed by azto, to a person in a group of trolls with an agenda who are probably not genuine crossword people, whatever they may be. Quite a feat.
Glad to see this; had failed to complete the last couple I tried. Wondered if I’d completely lost the plot. Nice puzzle, good fun. Didn’t know who Laertes was, but got TOTC early and it all came together. Once again an easier puzzle is necessary to keep us relative beginners on board.
Well, that’s a slightly shocking reaction to what I thought was a gentle suggestion.
I feel I should point out that the original suggestor of alternative clue enumeration was your own RCW (hope you’re well, sir) – who is not, as far as I’m aware, a card-carrying member of the Popular Front for the Stalinisation of the Cryptic Crossword. Paul B seems to be finding trolls under the bed everywhere these days.
I was hoping it might generate a small but interesting debate. Fat chance now.
I enjoyed this crossword although it was a little too easy for a prize for me.
The letter enumeration was rather a giveaway.
However thanks to Eileen and Brummie.
With regard to the debate, surely common sense should rule here. It’s been mentioned already but can’t the setter use his judgement with multi word answers and decide which enumeration is most suitable.
While I’m at it I’ll throw a suggestion into the ring re puzzle difficulty. Why doesn’t The Guardian introduce a two level Cryptic. (i.e. graded puzzles e.g. Mindbending, Very Difficult, Difficult, Standard, Easier, Trivial) Both could still use the 15^2 format. Let the setters, who want to, spread their wings.
We could have 2 puzzles a day one from the lower end of the spectrum and one from the top.
I know this would be more expensive so perhaps the more trying puzzle could be accessible online only via subscription (free in the paper as after all you pay for that!). Then somebody could be paid to edit this more rigorously!
I’m not quite sure what you mean (different sets of clues maybe, or extra puzzles?) but they already have the Genius puzzle, which is reckoned to be harder (though again, it never usually is) than the daily.
My suggestion is that if the dailies are too easy for you, 1) congrats, you’re obviously a tip-top solver, and 2) now move on to Geniuses, Azeds, Enigmatic Variations and Listeners.
I was actually referring to an extra full puzzle. Either daily or just at the weekend
There have been several comments on here that a lot of the recent puzzles have been a little too easy. This was just a suggestion that might be of interest to some solvers.
By the way I already do the other crosswords you mentioned with varying degrees of success. However as you are aware the frequency of these puzzles varies from 1 a month to one a week which isn’t a great deal of material.
By the way I can honestly say that I have never found the Genius puzzle as easy as a standard weekly. Occasionly it is about the same as a difficult mid-weeker
People are always moaning about something. It was too hard, too easy, was themed and the gateway clue was too hard, or too easy, had a crap grid, should have been edited properly or at least edited, or had too many black squares and hurt my eyes a bit. I’m just of the view that dailies are what they are, and are fine: enumeration will remain as it is I’m sure, and we’ll soon find something else which certain people, like me, will regard as peripheral or even inane, but which others will find the energy to go on almost endlessly about. That’s for next week though.
Paul B @31
In the light of your comment I don’t really understand why you read this blog? However your opinions are all part of the mix.
One man’s analysis or commentary is another man’s moan.
“About Fifteensquared
The purpose of this site is to provide a daily analysis of, and commentary on, the cryptic puzzles published in the Financial Times, Guardian and Independent (Enigmatic Variations in the Sunday Telegraph and Cyclops in Private Eye are covered as well).
The site was inspired by the ‘Times for the Times‘ blog and it is maintained by a team of solvers, all addicted in various degrees to the black art of the cryptic crossword. We want to appeal to all types of solvers, those new to cryptic puzzles and those with more experience, and we welcome your comments and feedback.”
You seem to be saying that (a) I should not participate here, and (b) I should participate here. I know it’s good to keep your options open in a debate or conversation, but really!
Thanks also for the heads up on what 15^2 is about.
No I didn’t say either of those things. You are most welcome on here.
I was suggesting that your post @31 seemed to show total indifference to many of the things which this site is about. i.e. people expressing their opinions about the dailies’ crosswords. So I wondered why you read it?
Well BNTO, in light of current site circumstances I’m sure we should not dwell unduly in the matter. My sense of humour … well, it helps if you know me, I suggest, and I really wasn’t being as dismissive as you think. I just object to padding in threads, which is how I have interpreted some recent exchanges in Guardian. So, whether I’m right about that or not, slàinte mhath old bean.