Guardian Cryptic 26,952 by Tramp

48 comments on “Guardian Cryptic 26,952 by Tramp”

1. Thanks manehi and Tramp.
   Somehow didn’t enjoy this themed puzzle…though some
   non-theme clues were good 6d, 7d, 22a, 25a and 27a

2. Thanks both!! After finishing this I found that the check all button discards HYPES for 9a and gives HOPES as the answer. Has anyone else come across this error

3. Great puzzle – real slow burner.

   LOI was 24d 1a – I refused to google it and was convinced until the last minute the down was LOW – so was struggling to find the necessary number of letters. Probably spent as long doing that as doing the rest of the puzzle.

   I’m glad this isn’t T4TT – I wouldn’t want to admit how long it took altogether.

   On past form Tramp will come in and inform us that he submitted this x years ago etc. If that means HS is sitting on a pile of trampsters like this one and the recent 66-ers on the oter papers we’re in good shape – as long as it doesbn’t deter further production.

   BTW – the wiki link showed a Frank Reynolds painting (he did many illustrations for Dickens) and led me to peruse many of his humourous drawings – not easy to google as he has a namesake who is some sort of US sleb.

   Nice when one thing leads to another.

   Many thanks to both – and esp M for that extra touch.

4. Sorry about the typos – I stare at it and see what I thought I wrote – not what I wrote.

5. I know nothing about the magician and read the book over 40 years ago, but still enjoyed this. Like JollySwagman @3, 24d 1a was my last in and I eventually managed to just remember/guess the correct name without parsing the anagram. Carelessly had ‘push’ for PASS in 28. My favourites were ROOF, PSYCHO and PAIR OF SPECTACLES.

   Thanks to Tramp and manehi.

6. 7 down doesn’t quite work. ‘Unveiled’ means ‘exposed’ not ‘expose’.

7. Re Logomachist @6
   The definition is 2 + d, i.e. expose + d = exposed.
   Since there is not a 2 across the clue is referred to as 2 on its own. (The same occurs in 24, 1 across, where 3 refers to LA and “down” is part of the anagram.)

8. Thanks manehi and Tramp.

   I wrote Brazil in right away for 19, which held me up rather a lot. 🙁

9. I was held up by not having heard of the magician, though in the end the one that really sunk me was 24, 1. My mother started reading David Copperfield to me when I was little, but it’s a long book, and she never finished! Also, that was a very long time ago.

10. Thanks for a great blog, manehi.

    It’s months since I got to blog a Tramp puzzle but, for once, I didn’t envy you: I didn’t know anything about [that] David Copperfield or any of the illusions, so I would have made a pretty poor job of it.

    Great clues throughout, as ever, made all the more impressive by the explanations. Many thanks to Tramp.

11. Hats off to Mr walker ((I think) who has provided three stonking puzzles (under various names) over the last week.

12. Thank you Tramp for a fun solve and manehi for a super blog.

    At first I thought the theme was going to be Charles Dickens’ novel “David Copperfield”, but started to wonder after entering DORA SPENLOW since the following clues seemed so bizarre, then I vaguely remembered that there was a magician who used that name.

    My favourite clues were SPAWNERS, BLEEP, UNVEILED and PAIR OF SPECTACLES.

13. One of those that I was glad to get to the end of, without any great enthusiasm. If you know the book 24,1 is a write-in but if like me you don’t (at least not in that detail) it’s a struggle, working out what is going on – I had model = DO and down = LOW, so I was well off track, even though DORA was fairly obvious from the crossers. I have to own up that SPENLOW was not my first crack at a surname. Is using the check button any more of a cheat than going straight to Wikipaedia (or even the book)?

    Overall, a strange mixture of the easy and the tough. I am at least in touch with the real world enough to know of the other David Copperfield, and I suppose it was rather fun working out that Claudia Schiffer was his EX.

14. [Trailman @13, I was “lucky” to know the name DORA SPENLOW since my mother was named Dora after her, she hated it, so was called by her second name, Kathleen – it was not until she was in her 60’s, when looking through some papers, that she realised she had been using the wrong first name all her life for her passport etc..]

15. Thanks Tramp & manehi.

    Difficult to get DORA SPENLOW even with the crossers but Google came to the rescue.

    I’ve just learned how DC did the vanishing of the Statue of Liberty; interesting!

    I thought 21,5 was read-through but that didn’t work – I didn’t know the Great Wall of China trick.

    Liked DIVA among others.

16. S Panza @ 2: the Guardian on-line now says that there was an error in the solution to 9a, since corrected.

17. Thanks manehi for unravelling this nest of serpents.

    Trailman @13 Isn’t it curious what we all allow ourselves and what we consider cheating? I will only use the ‘cheat’ button in extremis but think nothing of using my crossword dictionary or other ‘look up’ references.

    Still don’t quite understand how ‘pass off’ = ‘disappear’. Can’t say I’ve ever come across that usage.

    Kicking myself (ha-ha) for not seeing ‘cross’ in the football context…hate writing things in unparsed.

    Failed on TUSK SHELL only which, for one who has never read Dickens or heard of this illusionist I didn’t think was too disgraceful.

    Tramp continues to refine his art but this was not as enjoyable as others for me.

    Many thanks both, nice week, all.

18. Robi @15 How was it done?

19. Thanks Tramp and manehi

    William @ 17: Tramp has posted on twitter that he wrote this about 3 years ago, so it’s more of an example of his older style.

20. Heavy going and so gave up.

    Appreciated the blog for explanations.

21. Found this pretty tough, but very enjoyable, but must admit to having cheated a little on a couple of the more obscure references (I’ve never read the book and didn’t remember the Great wall of China). TUSK SHELL was unfamiliar too, and SPAWNERS was last in.

    Thanks to Tramp and manehi

22. William@17

    “Still don’t quite understand how ‘pass off’ = ‘disappear’. Can’t say I’ve ever come across that usage”

    There’s a rule that many of us should stick to but don’t: always check even an ordinary word in Chambers if you don’t understand. To my surprise a) I looked it up and b) there it was.

23. Ages since I read the book but I did remember DORA SPENLOW which went in quite early. I had to Google the magician however because I didn’t know the illusions with which he is associated. That said I enjoyed this a lot. Many favourites but LILLIPUT and PSYCHO were standouts.
    Thanks Tramp.

24. Thank you Rog. Kind of you to let me know!! I thought it had to be something like that!! I’m not a fan of themed puzzles, because I can’t decide when I look up information as I did here, whether I am cheating or not!! Well actually I know I am, but if I can’t remember Dora Spenlow what can I do!!!

25. Knew nothing about the magician. However, had read the Dickens book several times, listened to the radio adaptation and I had seen the 1935 film version so Dora Spenlow was a write-in.

    Dithered over whether “source of oil” in 5dn was “well” or “shell” and eventually solved the clue as “test shell” not having spotted the obvious anagram.

26. By happy coincidence I’m reading David Copperfield at the moment, and was introduced to Dora Spenlow this very morning. This is more fortunate than it may sound since if I’d finished reading the book more than about a week ago I’d have probably forgotten her already, such is my memory. The window of opportunity for me getting that answer was very small indeed.

27. Many thanks for the splendid blog manehi. I will watch the links later.

    I wrote this puzzle way back in September 2013. There are some things I probably wouldn’t do now. I think that solving DORA SPENLOW relies too much on general knowledge. I don’t think much general knowledge is needed about the magician though: ok, you need to know that Claudia Schiffer was his ex and you needed to know, or deduce, that he once appeared to walk through the Great Wall of China — I think the enumeration and the easy definition help here though.

    I’m also not keen on the “wordplay with definition” in 22a. On the whole though, I think it’s decent.

    Thanks to all for their comments and thanks to Tyrus/Lato/Vlad for checking all of my puzzles.

    Neil

28. I knew that David Copperfield was a magician but didn’t know the specifics of his various tricks. I happen to have read the novel some time within the last five years. I misremembered Dora’s last name as Spendlow, but that was easy to sort out.

    Dora Spenlow has to be one of the most annoying characters in literature. I was positively cheering for her to die as I read the novel, which was not, I think, what Dickens intended.

    I don’t think 22 works. If “endlessly” means “remove the last letter from all of the preceding words”, then one should remove the end from “a” as well as the others, making the fodder S[o] I[s] [a] NAA[n] BREA[d], and coming up short by one A. I can’t parse it in a way that means “remove the last letters from four of the five preceding words.”

    I thought of “endlessly” as applying just to NAA[n] BREA[d], and included the full IS A in the fodder, which makes the anagram work but leaves the “So” unexplained. No doubt your parsing is the intended one.

    I particularly enjoyed the hidden definition of “Lilliput”. I also enjoyed the misdirection involving the “d” in the clue for 7d and the “down” in the clue for 24 / 1.

29. Interesting puzzle but I failed in the SW corner as where I was born, we run(s) through rather than walk through a rehearsal. ( I also never saw the illusion referred to).

30. Ted

    You’re right. I can’t believe I haven’t spotted that before. My mistake.

    Neil

31. Ted@29

    I’ve looked at what I submitted. This is my original clue:

    So is naan bread endlessly chewed with a main?

    Hugh changed main for with “water” as a main is an ocean not a small sea, apparently. I hadn’t noticed that the “a” had moved. I checked it twice and never spotted it. That explains the “with” which I didn’t like (referred to above).

    So sorry.

    Neil

32. Thanks for the reply! I confess I’m pleased with myself for having caught this. When I think I’ve spotted an error in a clue, it’s almost always my mistake.

    Thanks for a clever and entertaining puzzle.

33. Conrad Cork @22 So it is. You’re right, of course, it’s something I used to do a lot and you’ve reminded me of a good rule.

    Tramp @27 Many thanks for the puzzle and for dropping in. Interesting that this was an example of your older work – I thought it had a different ‘feel’ about it. The mea culpa was unnecessary for me – I failed to spot it!

34. Ted @28, definitely not what Dickens intended, he named one of his daughters Dora Annie Dickens after “Dora Spenlow”.

35. As others have commented, don’t quite see PASS OFF. I put PALM OFF which makes sense in view of a magician theme; but that, of course, screwed my 13d.

    I could clearly see that 24d 1a was DORA the wife of Dickens’ David but couldn’t recall her so looked her up – not cheating in my books.

    Thanks Tramp and manehi – agree with your comments (any chance I could persuade you to change your name to maheni, as I always type that in first?!)

36. Nice one Tramp

    Thank you

37. I think Dave, PASS OFF is quite clearly the right thing: PASS = hand and PASS OFF = (gradually) disappear.
    Not that we entered this in the grid.
    Beth, my solving partner, went for PUSH OFF while I wanted to enter PISS OFF (which is obviously wrong and very unlike Tramp).
    Yes, we considered PALM OFF too but Beth insisted on PUSH OFF.
    That said, true, PASS OFF is the only thing that fully makes sense.

    The puzzle was a combination of the relatively easy and the quite difficult.
    Beth: it looks like Tramp has become much harder of late.
    I: it might well be that he wrote this crossword ages ago – he had so many lying on the shelf.

    This was once more an excellent crossword, with all the typical Tramp elements.
    True, it didn’t match the 1966 puzzles (and especially the one in the FT) but good it was.
    If you can guess DORA SPENLOW from the clue, then something must be right.

    Thanks Neil & Manehi.

38. I rather disliked this.

    I know nothing at all about David Copperfield the illusionist and I am not really interested in his tawdry attempts at entertainment.

    As ever I found Tramp’s cluing rather too contrived for my liking.

    I’ve said it before but a great setter produces clues that seem impenetrable but when solved seem so easy that one can’t see what the problem had been. Sadly the usual reaction to a Tramp stinker is one of disbelief at the over complexity of the clue!

    I also disliked the need for bizarre general knowledge.

    As his last few crosswords have been like this I think this has been my last Tramp.

    Yet again a puzzle in need of an editor.

39. Bizarre general knowledge – oh absolutely. I mean you’d need to be an academic with more degrees than a thermometer to know that David Copperfield is a magician, wouldn’t you? It’s not like he’s been on the telly or anything.

    Then we’re given a clue like 21/5 which gives us WALK THROUGH from the definition and we’re supposed to deduce, if we didn’t already know, that a magician might have given the illusion of walking through a wall with only “illusion” and “wall” to help us? Great Scott, where do they get these setters from?

    Worse still, we get a clue for EXPOSE where the definition and the POSE part are clearly telegraphed but EX is totally bizarre general knowledge because how the smuck are we supposed to realise that “Claudia Schiffer to David Copperfield” might just possibly mean that the two were former partners which could be easily confirmed with the simplest of Internet searches?

    Worse still we’re expected to know the name of a character in a novel by a great English writer! I mean come on! Tramp will be expecting us to know such bizarre general knowledge as the capital of France next!

    Laboured sarcasm aside, I seriously wonder why some people bother doing crosswords at all.

40. [cookie@14 – surely your dear ma was in her 60s not her ’60s??! We’ve had a similar chat before…. x]

41. Far from more editorial intervention this pastime would be a better one with *less* editorial intervention. This isn’t the first time a last-minute editorial change has introduced an error where one previously didn’t exist.

    John Perkins didn’t (AFAIK) interfere with Araucaria’s clues. Where puzzles appear under a byline there’s no need for it at all – leave it to the setter – maybe insist that they guarantee their work to have been pre-checked.

    I read somewhere that the DT Toughie series has now fallen under the dead hand of ximeneanism. The previous puzzle editor (Kate Fassett) disappeared during the Seiken bloodbath – never to be heard of again – rather bizarre. Light-touch editorial approach was the norm in that series (which she started) under her reign. Now it’s gone ximmie – always a backward step.

    The people who plaster the online blogs with complaints about the editor don’t want really want error-checking – they want ximenisation. Look at their methods. Sock-puppetry – everyday trolling – airbrushing the greats out of their writings. A nasty and obsessive collection of people by any measure.

    Does ximeneanism make them that way – or does it just attract a certain type of person? Some seem able to play both games without a problem. Why not all?

42. BNTO@38 so long and thanks for all the advice.

43. [William F P @40, sorry, my spell check will not accept 60s, nor will it accept 1960s, it is “American” and I cannot bring up an “English” version. I take care now with dates, but this is how I was taught at school, and how many grammar books from the recent past teach, I have cited them before, e.g. Michael Swan, “Practical English Usage”, Oxford University Press, 1995…

    special plurals
    Apostrophes are used in the plurals of letters, and often of numbers and abbreviations.
    He writes b’s instead of d’s.
    It was in the early 1960’s. (OR…1960s.)
    I know two MP’s personally. (OR…MPs.)]

44. I cannot see the problem with PASS OFF, someone might say “I have a headache”, another might reply “Never mind, it will pass off in time”.

45. Sisimizi mingi sana, don’t let the ants get at you Tramp…

46. [cookie@43 Thanks for taking trouble to respond; I feel you must be a very sweet person. However, I’m surprised the OUP allowed the examples you cite. They look dreadful, and wrong, to me – I shudder. Wx]

47. Thanks manehi and Tramp.

    I too found this heavy going but nothing objectionable.

    TUSK SHELL was new to me too but clearly clued. And I too put a small query at the clue for 22ac – so appreciate Tramp’s mea culpa.

    I’m sure we all have our little criticisms and niggles, but that does not in any way diminish my admiration for the setters who continue to turn out entertaining work like this.

    Trouble for me is that a slow solve like this gets me even further behind the rest of you.

48. Thanks Tramp and manehi

    Well I guess if it takes Tramp three years to get this finished, then it should be OK for me to take four months to get to it and solve it !! Thought that it was another excellent puzzle from him and did like the theme and the different angles that he used with both David Copperfield and Claudia Schiffer throughout.

    Lots of clearly defined clues with a clever mix of word plays used, the ARABIAN SEA one, which was called out, being the only (very) minor blemish in the bunch. It was one of the two clues that I didn’t properly parse – had gone down the IS A NAA[N] BREA[D] path, with the unused ‘So’ sitting languishing. Also failed to find the wordplay with SPAWNERS which was my last one in – clearly the answer, but I didn’t make the PAWN / ‘puppet’ connection. All of the rest were well found and savoured.

    Finished with TUSK SHELL (a new term for me) and SATNAVS (which I found very tricky) before the aforementioned SPAWNERS.

Comments are closed.