19 comments on “Inquisitor 1487: Delivery by Eclogue”

1. Apart from the bit about the ferry and google not deigning to lead me to the two soups, two bowls, your blog (for which thanks) pretty much reflects my own solve and thoughts.

2. Like kenmac I saw ‘Victor’ forming at 9d and tried to think of possible artists/authors/etc. that it could be. The penny dropped when I had IMRI- at 29 down and realising that would be Celia Imrie. From there I could fill in PRESTON and begin to look for phrases relating to soup.

   I also struggled with 26a and entered it without fully understanding. I also made things more difficult for myself by entering SANTA at 30d and BRUES at 13a.

   Very enjoyable, thanks Eclogue.

3. I could go on about this being yet another example of the dreary format we have been more and more subjected to over the last few years, namely extra or missing letters giving useful information, followed by “Only Connect” end games … but I won’t, mainly because I did love Acorn Antiques, and admired Victoria Wood … and so felt inspired to look for “Two Soups” on YouTube. My joy at then watching it was slightly tempered by the realisation that I now walk just like the waitress, and am just as clumsy.

4. I wondered why I couldn’t find the items delivered – I made a mess of 31d, and completely failed to spot the obvious. Oh well. 🙂 The rest I got without too much trouble, at least as far as these go, and found quite enjoyable. Thanks Eclogue also for reminding me of some comedy gold I’d long forgotten.

5. I think this puzzle may have been scheduled to coincide with the first anniversary of her death.

6. I liked Victoria Wood but was not familiar with her stuff(may have seen an ep of Dinner ladies-and maybe a chat with Clive James or someone)
   so a real slog for me.So many obscure answers with rather tricky clues.I had to email a friend who is better at these things than me but we both agreed that it was like pulling teeth especially If you didnt know the sketch.

   Whereas if it was “Four Candles”…..

   Bravely blogged kemnac!

7. Like some others, I’m not a fan of slapstick. (Farce can be quite funny, but that’s not the same.) However, the sketch is fairly well-known and strongly associated with Victoria Wood.

   nmsindy @5: yes, I too noticed that it was the first anniversary of her death.

   As to the clue for HAET at 26a: Chambers gives
   haet (Scot) = a whit = the smallest particle imaginable; the least bit;
   and
   tate or tait (Scot) = a small portion.
   But I was a bit puzzled by EREWASH at 20d being described as a “belt” (in the East Midlands).

   Thanks setter & blogger — I’d give the puzzle a solid three stars out of 5.

8. I didn’t realize that it was the first anniversary of VW‘s death.

   Although I was never a fan, I remember being shocked when the news alert came through on my phone.

   And, copmus @6: what do you want wiv ‘andles for forks? 😉

9. As someone who never (not deliberately) watched anything by VW, I didn’t have any idea of the theme. But enjoyed the challenge nevertheless.

   Not sure about the “dreary format” comment (Murray @3). What format(s) would you prefer?

10. I’m surprised by some of the negative comments here, but each to their own. I understand Murray Glover’s concerns about the occasional lateral thinking leaps required to make connections in some puzzles between messages and hidden items, etc., but I don’t think that is a fair comment in this instance. While acknowledging that not everyone will be familiar with the sketch, the instructions seemed perfectly fair to me and the hidden words in the grid are all directly related to the theme. I felt that the endgame was on the more straightforward end of the scale.

11. A complete outlier here:
    – found it quite easy, generally finding missing letters more obvious than extras etc
    – was familiar with all the thematic material. My in was also the forename after oddly dallying with the surely less common “Hector” for a spell
    – I replayed the sketch and very much enjoyed it

    Horses for courses indeed! Thanks to the setter.

12. Well, well! What a load of negative killjoys you are (apart from Kippax and Trebor)! My wife and I loved Victoria Wood and I got the theme from IMR?? in 29D. I had recently watched the retrospectives on the BBC and saw the three titles quite early. I searched the diagonals for Walters, who had to be there somewhere, and found the Two Soups. my only quibble was the placing of the two bowls, which were unconnected to Imrie, Preston or Walters. Otherwise one of my favourite IQs.
    Victoria Wood was one of the most innovative comediennes this country has ever produced, and wrote some stirring and funny sketches as well as some moving longer pieces. My thanks to Eclogue and to Kenmac for keeping his negativity to a minimum!

13. Enjoyed by me too. When I got the C in the right-hand column it was obviously going to be some Scot beginning with MAC, and when the first I followed it was obviously going to be MICHELANGELO, but after a couple more false trails I saw ACORN ANTIQUES in the letters below, remembered IMRIE’s frequent appearances in Victoria Wood shows, and started hunting through my books of VW sketches and playlets. No luck (either I don’t have the right book or this one wasn’t published), but web searches eventually led to the actual sketch on YouTube.

    I had a terrible cold at the time, and “Providers of snot” in 1D seemed all too pointedly appropriate.

14. I’m with Hi oh Hihoba. I was really surprised to see such stonyfaced responses to what for me was a reminder of a very funny woman (and indeed Julie Walters who I’ve always been fond of). I suppose it’s a bit like how I feel when yet another Flanders and bloody Swann themed puzzle appears….

15. chesley@9. I just meant that we now seem to be having the vast majority of so-called “ultra-cryptics” requiring us to solve nearly every clue before we can understand an instruction and start meaningful grid-filling … and even when we’ve done that, we have to discover increasingly obscure connections between “thematic” items. Not only does it make these puzzles far more of a slog than some of us have time for, but it’s almost as if new solvers and new setters assume that this, and only this, is the required format for today’s “ultra-cryptics”.

    I started doing Listeners in 1991 when the Times took them over, and Inquisitors in 2006, when a kind neighbour passed them on to me. In what I look back on as a Golden Age, we had staggeringly inventive puzzles by brilliant setters, such as Dimitry, Sabre and Arcturus. Answers pinged round grids like balls on a snooker table, grids converted into stealth bombers or maps of the UK, often codes and ciphers were used in both clues and answers, (including our old friend Playfair, from setters who had learned it during National Service ?) knights’ moves, circular puzzles … but, in all of them, you could work steadily through a series of PDMs to acquire the critical mass needed for final success. And we didn’t even have Google back then.

    Of course crosswords, like language and everything else, evolve. (I have learned to keep quiet now when I hear “a criteria” or “a phenomena”.) If this is what today’s solvers enjoy, then so be it. You may well look back on TODAY as a Golden Age, in twenty years, Chesley. Panta rhei.

    As it happens, “Delivery” was only a mild version of “hidden instruction/Only Connect”. As well as liking all Victoria Wood’s work, can I nail my colours to the mast and say how much I truly love Rising Damp, Reggie Perrin, Hi-de-Hi, Dad’s Army and MASH … the latter on every evening between 7.00 and 8.00 on Freeview Channel 61.

16. I enjoyed this, and it was good to be reminded of what a great sketch it is. And bravo to Eclogue for the use of a novel (to me at least) way of generating the extra letters. I always try to get away from the ‘extra letter in wordplay’ method, but nearly always fail miserably. It’s no mean feat to use it in every clue, and this approach was great.

17. I’m another one in the ‘Really enjoyed it’ camp! It’s the first one I’ve finished in a while, and I found it just the right side of challenging and infuriating. Many thanks to Eclogue

18. I also liked the way extra letters were generated; and I very much liked being ‘obliged’ to rewatch the sketch. As for the placement of the two bowls, it’s surely right that they are in between the two actors? Thanks to Eclogue and kenmac.

19. I enjoyed solving the clues but the rest of the puzzle passed me by completely. At least I knew of Victoria wood, and managed to insert her name OK. Just about everything else thematic I had not heard of at all. What comes from living most of my life without a TV set I suppose. No complaints, a fair puzzle, just not my bag as a theme really. Thanks all.

Comments are closed.