The puzzle may be found at https://www.theguardian.com/crosswords/cryptic/27284.
The numerous ‘actors’ are best known for their film work. I generally (to exaggerate slightly) breeze through Paul’s crosswords, pausing only to admire their wit and artistry, but this one was a struggle from start to finish. Still, I managed to turn out the blog in reasonable time. Bravo, Paul.
| Across | ||
| 8 | TEMPLATE | Actor grabs at model (8) |
| An envelope (‘grabs’) of ‘at’ in TEMPLE (Shirley, ‘actor’). | ||
| 9 | ALIGHT | A fair land (6) |
| A charade of ‘a’ plus LIGHT (‘fair’ of hair). | ||
| 10 | DIET | Actor on rich food regimen (4) |
| DIET[rich] (Marlene, ‘actor’). The ‘on’ is questionable; I think it just about works, but I would have been happier with perhaps “Actor with no rich food regimen”. | ||
| 11 | BAKED BEANS | Execrable starter in kebabs and processed food from cans (5,5) |
| An envelope (‘in’) of E (‘Execrable starter’) in BAKDBEANS, an anagram (‘processed’) of ‘kebabs and’. | ||
| 12 | BRANDO | Actor Bardot’s odd characters? (6) |
| The ‘odd characters’ of ‘BaRdOt’ are B, R AND O, for the actor Marlon. | ||
| 14 | SINGABLE | Like a simple tune? Wrong actor (8) |
| A charade of SIN (‘wrong’) plus GABLE (Clark, ‘actor’). | ||
| 15 | DENSITY | How solid is refuse around squat? (7) |
| An envelope (‘around’) of SIT (‘squat’) in DENY (‘refuse’). ‘How solid’ is a very loose definition. | ||
| 17 | FONDANT | Actor not vacuous, sweet (7) |
| A charade of FONDA (Henry, Peter or Jane, ‘actor’) plus ‘n[o]t’ minus its middle letter (‘vacuous’). | ||
| 20 | CHAPLAIN | Actor punched by a clergyman (8) |
| An envelope (‘punched by’) of ‘a’ in CHAPLIN (Charlie, ‘actor’). | ||
| 22 | SLEIGH | Actor after small slipper for Father Christmas? (6) |
| A charade of S(‘small’) plus LEIGH (Janet or others, ‘actor’). | ||
| 23 | FLORENTINE | Wonderful outstanding actor beginning in theatre, Italian (10) |
| An envelope (‘outstanding’) of LOREN (Sophia, ‘actor’) plus T (‘beginning in Theatre’) in FINE(‘wonderful’). | ||
| 24 | See 2 | |
| 25 | DEMEAN | Put down setter, entertained by actor (6) |
| An enveloe (‘entertained by’) of ME (‘setter’) in DEAN (James, ‘actor’). | ||
| 26 | GRANTHAM | Lincolnshire town actor, overactor? (8) |
| A charade of GRANT (Cary or Hugh, ‘actor’) plus HAM (‘overactor?’). | ||
| Down | ||
| 1 | PEDIGREE | Crack big, but not black, with deeper descent (8) |
| An anagram (‘crack’) of ‘[b]ig’ minus the B (‘but not black’) plus ‘deeper’. | ||
| 2, 24 across | SPIT CURL | Culprits thrown out, lock flat? (4,4) |
| An anagram (‘thrown out’) of ‘culprits’. | ||
| 3 | BAMBOO | In leaving child, love hollow stuff (6) |
| A charade of BAMB[in]O (‘child’) minus the IN (‘in leaving’) plus O (‘love’). | ||
| 4 | PECKISH | Hungry like an actor? (7) |
| PECK-ISH (‘like an actor’, Gregory Peck). | ||
| 5 | FANDANGO | Dance cool and bursting with energy (8) |
| A charade of FAN (‘cool’, verb) plus DAN, an anagram (‘bursting’) of ‘and’ plus GO (‘energy’). | ||
| 6 | SIDESADDLE | Teams go off riding in unorthodox manner (10) |
| A charade of SIDES (‘teams’) plus ADDLE (‘go off’). | ||
| 7 | CHANEL | Heart of course absent in Scent of a Woman (6) |
| CHA[n]NEL (‘course’) minus its middle letter (‘heart … missing’). | ||
| 13 | NOSY PARKER | Snoop or pry and sneak off (4,6) |
| An anagram (‘off’) of ‘or pry’ plus ‘sneak’. | ||
| 16 | TRAINING | Instruction leaflet ultimately wet (8) |
| A charde of T (‘leafleT ultimately’) plus RAINING (‘wet’). | ||
| 18 | NIGERIAN | One inspired by high earning African (8) |
| An envelope (‘inspired by’) of I (‘one’) in NIGERAN, an anagram (‘high’) of ‘earning’. | ||
| 19 | INNINGS | Knock top prize money (7) |
| [w]INNINGS (‘prize money’) minus its first letter (‘top’, verb). | ||
| 21 | HOLDEN | Antique possessed by female actor (6) |
| An envelope (‘possessed by’) of OLD (‘antique’) in HEN (‘female’), for the actor William. | ||
| 22 | SEESAW | Deep wound reported as plank sat upon (6) |
| Sounds like (‘reported’) SEA (‘deep’) SAW (‘wound’). | ||
| 24 | CATS | Musical — characters associated, primarily, with Eliot (4) |
| A charade of CA (‘Characters Associated, primarily’) plus TS (Thomas Stearns ‘Eliot’). As the Musical Cats is based on Eliot’s Old Possum’s Book of Practical Cats, the clue has an extended definition. |
||
Thanks Paul and PeterO.
New word for me was SPIT CURL, and the theme helped a lot with an unfamiliar word – GRANTHAM, which maybe I know from crosswords but nowhere else.
I thought of Vivien Leigh for 22a. Just as well I know of all these old (mostly dead, now apart from Jane Fonda + Sophia Loren) actors 🙂
My favourite was FLORENTINE.
Thanks Peter. No trouble at all with this though I did pick ‘Pitt’ first for 10A and only fixed it at the end – like you I reckon it’s a bit wrong and would prefer the ‘on’ and the ‘rich’ to be swapped. Good all the actors were household names: the best for me was in Santa’s slipper.
After romping through yesterday’s Vlad I was mentally patting myself on the back but today’s Paul dispelled any smugness – DNF for me. I couldn’t get any of the clues requiring an actor’s name as a component, and that left me with too few clues remaining to get a decent foothold and make progress. Not a complaint as the clues were all fair, but I was obviously not on Paul’s wavelength. Thanks to Paul and PeterO.
Michelle, given the timeframe for the other actors, I’d guess that Henry rather than his daughter Jane was the intended Fonda. Most, although well known, were just enough before my time to make this a bit of a struggle.
A delight. I struggled at first, but then realised that the actors came from… well, not my era but the era of films I most enjoy.
That said, I was puzzled by DIET which I thought must be right. I even tried putting RICH behind and still didn’t see it as Marlene! Thank goodness for the 225 bloggers, I say.
Cheers, Paul and PeterO.
Like matrixmania@3 I have to admit DNF and concur with everything he (?) wrote. Thanks to Paul and PeterO but also thank goodness for the reveal button!
Anyone else tempted (before checkers) by CANOODLE at 5d?
I thought the grid was impressively compiled. I thought Sean Bean could have made an appearance at 11, though he is not of a particular era.
Grantham, of course, is a better known Licolnshire town, being the birthplace of Margaret Thatcher.
Interesting anagrinds: high, bursting and crack. Agree with PeterO about the wordplay for DIET and the definition for DENSITY.
Favourites were non themed clues PEDIGREE, CHANEL, and SEESAW.
I don’t get why innings is knock and I’m not sure why wound is saw. I can’t say I enjoyed this much at all.
Gladys @4 and Pentman @8 or anyone … Could you enlighten me as to what is the timeframe/era for the actors here?
Malcolm @10. Innings is a cricket reference, the batsman’s knock is his or her innings. Wound = sore , both nouns.
@Malcolm
I parsed SEESAW as a double homophone of see=sea(deep) and saw=sore (wound, although Chambers doesn’t quite support this).
In cricket, a batsman’s innings is described informally as a “knock”
HTH
@ Malcolm , I should say that ‘reported’ is the homophone indicator for a synonym of ‘wound’.
Crossing posts baerchen. Agree. In the land of Oz, if we have a sore, we’re likely to have a wound of the flesh in some form.
I thought this was a very elegant puzzle though annoyingly I failed to solve CHANEL. Perhaps my enjoyment was enhanced by the fact that I knew of all the actors included in the clues. My favourite was BRANDO which elicited a smile after quite a lot of thinking time.
Malcolm @10 “Knock” is a slang word for innings often used by the cricketing fraternity, as in “Joe had a good knock today”. SAW is a homophone for “sore”
lancsolver @16, I tried for a while to delete ‘ur’ .. the heart of course, from something, until I got CHANEL from the def and crossers, then couldn’t parse it.
Back to the homophone for ‘sore’ , I suppose it depends on whether one speaks a rhotic language, where the ‘r’ is pronounced.
I set off with a downer on this puzzle thinking we were looking for actors as the answer rather and not expecting to get very far. After getting 25a, 4d and 22a I started to be more positive as it became clear the actors were fodder (except for 12). I didn’t parse 10a and 23a. SLEIGH was my favourite theme clue and NOSY PARKER as a non-theme – great surface.
After the comments on the grid yesterday I think this is a more difficult one – few starters and four quadrants.
I ended up feeling chuffed and thinking it was a great crossword – thanks Paul and PeterO.
And yes, barker@7 I had CANOODLE in the margin for a while.
Pentman @8 – Grantham is also the birthplace of Isaac Newton & Nicholas Parsons (of ‘Just a Minute’). Newton is probably better known than the dreadful Mrs T – he does (I think) have a statue in Grantham. And a pub in Cambridge…
Nice one from Paul. I liked the way that Gable, Dean, Temple, Leigh, Fonda were used.Definitely one for the oldies. Classic ones at that! Knowing Paul, hoped to find Bogey: sadly missing!
Thank you Paul and bravo PeterO.
Hard going for me, but I enjoyed the challenge. I failed to parse DIET and did not understand INNINGS. My favourites were the clues for SLEIGH, BAMBOO, FLORENTINE and CHANEL.
My favourite setter; I always think Paul’s clues are witty and full of misdirection but always scrupulously fair. 10A today didn’t meet the usual standard though. It’s just plain wrong in my book “actor loses rich food…” would work but not “on”!?!
Very rare for me to start, let alone complete, a puzzle early in the day (it is just after 8 am here). I really enjoyed the theme, even more so as Paul’s many creative uses of actors’ names became evident. I can see that this puzzle would be vastly more difficult for solvers who aren’t familiar with most of these actors. I also began 5d with “canoodle”, but wouldn’t write it in because that’s not a dance, to my knowledge. As the crossers went in (up to and including the last of them), I remained convinced that the letters of “canoodle” needed to be anagrammed into the right answer. Only when I shook myself of that notion was I able to spot the correct answer from the crossers.
While I recognized many of the actor names as being more or less from the 1930s through 1970s, it did not occur to me that all of them needed to be from that era. For GRANT I thought of Hugh before Cary, for FONDA I thought of Jane, Henry, Peter and Bridget more or less equally, for LEIGH I thought of Janet, then Vivien, then Jennifer Jason, and for 21d I thought of William Holden but then decided that Geoffrey HOLDER was the better answer (I guess I was wrong). Favorite was BRANDO, with a nod to Gregory Peck in 4d because he’s one of my favorite actors!
Many thanks to Paul and PeterO (and fellow contributors).
michelle @1
Yes, in 22A Vivian Leigh deserves better than being lumped into “or others”. It just happens that I have recently watched Psycho again, and Janet came to mind first.
malcolm @10 et al
In 22D I took saw – cut – wound as the tenuous link, meaning to return for another look, which never happened. Sore is better, if not ideal: Chambers gives n a painful or tender injured or diseased spot … adj wounded …
What, no Lillian Gish?
Found this one a bit of a struggle – with Paul it is often very much a case of being on the right wavelength, and the grid wasn’t the most helpful. Nothing too obscure though SPIT CURL was unfamiliar. I couldn’t see any particular connection between the actors.
Thanks to Paul and PeterO
@beeryhiker
Glad you popped in (as always, my dear sir of course).
I have the suspicion that Paul uses this grid a lot.
It is quite an easy grid to fill because it has no long lights and very few crossers at the beginning of lights, so is in this sense quite “solver unfriendly”. It’s pretty much the perfect grid for alhpabetical jigsaws (the last across light being numbered 26, in a grid with only two pairs having common starts).
I wouldn’t mind betting that the Revd. gentleman designed it for that purpose.
Thanks Paul and PeterO
As having gone on record as not liking puzzles where the same word appears in lots of clues, I was surprised by how much I enjoyed this one. BRANDO was FOI, which I liked; also BAKED BEANS, FONDANT and PECKISH. I think “Italian child” would have better in 3d. Other points have already been made.
I was relieved that the “Check” facility showed me that CANOODLE was wrong, and stopped me from agonising over finding an actor called LEDGE for 22a!
You have to assume RP in British crosswords.
baerchen @27 – so presumably it makes a jigsaw with a perimeter nina possible, though that might be a pretty tricky gridfill!
Thanks to Paul and PeterO. I much enjoyed this puzzle (for once the fodder of actors’ names were all familiar) though I needed help parsing DIET and took a while catching on to GRANTHAM. I needed Google to confirm that knock = INNINGS (though I had no trouble parsing it) and for some reason SPIT CURL was lodged in my memory. LOI was PEDIGREE..
Unusually for us, we sailed through this one. Baked beans first in then fairly steady progress. Finished with pedigree, a nicely clued ending. Thanks Paul and everyone.
Hard going at first but once I got into it and realised that the actors were of the classic variety,things improved. I’m ashamed to say that I couldn’t parse FLORENTINE- not even getting the LOREN bit which presumably means that my unconscious is more astute than I am. I loved BRANDO and PECKISH-which reminded me of Barry Cryer on “I’m sorry I haven’t a clue”
Thanks Paul
I got stuck in the NW, failing to read 1 correctly and missing a couple of others as a result. Quite liked all the actor clues in the end, especially BRANDO and SLEIGH. Other favourites were NIGERIAN and CATS.
I think the DENSITY clue might be better as, say, “How solid substance is refuse around squat?” to make the definition a bit plainer.
Another high quality puzzle from Paul.
Thanks to him and to PeterO.
Highly enjoyable. My first two were FONDA and LOREN so I was spotting a little Guardian in-joke where other papers might use actress. Was a bit disappointed when the next was GABLE, not GRABLE. Last in was DIET, the “on” seems odd though I can’t see how it might be improved. Certainly the actors were all familiar names of the fifties and even earlier.
I recall seeing a 1930’s movie with Clark Gable called “China Seas” which had me hiding under the seat as a steam-roller thunder round the deck of a typhoon-struck ship. Must have been fun to shoot before CGI.
Thanks both. I enjoyed this.
26a is the surname of the actor who played (twice killed) “Dirty Den” in the soap EastEnders – a coincidence I’m sure
@Max @20. Indeed. Coincidently, I visited Woolsthorpe Manor in July this year and tried to get tickets for Nicholas Parsons at the Edinburgh Fringe this year but missed the boat there as he was sold out.
Recently, we had a lot of discussion on the topic of too much ‘general knowledge’ in crosswords.
With one or two setters severely criticised for it.
Today nobody (so far) seems to be bothered by Paul’s puzzle which relies heavily on what you know about films.
OK, it wasn’t a problem for us but if you’re not very much interested in film (and/or born after, say, 1980) then this one’s not for you.
The crossword as such was nice, despite a couple of loose definitions (14ac,15ac) and despite some pretty meaningless surfaces (like 3d).
Wonder what Taylor Swift would make of 8ac.
Indeed, amusing to see a clue (5d) that can lead to two different answers (although, ‘canoodle’ doesn’t fit the definition, of course).
Anyway, we liked it but found it also harder than the usual Paul.
At the same time, we think Paul should not be exempt from the GK discussion.
Thanks, PeterO for the blog.
Sil
That’s an interesting point you made about GK in crosswords.
I don’t know much about actors and films, but I knew all the actors that appear here in the clues and answers, and incidentally I find that Paul usually does strive to use familiar names or words for his themes. (But of course, what is ‘familiar’? And to whom?)
Yesterday, I found that my lack of GK and TV knowledge was a hindrance to solving some of Vlad’s clues yesterday – so that made that puzzle less enjoyable for me.
Of course, this is just me – others may have similar or completely opposite perspectives on these two days’ crosswords.
Surely “General Knowledge” is what we all have – Specialised Knowledge might be deemed unfair…
southofnonorth @40
If only! There is of course no defined body of knowledge that we can all call General Knowledge.
In the context of these crosswords, I sometimes used to comment that a setter has resorted to Specialised (or Specialist) Knowledge when the answer (or something in the clue) is something I’ve never heard of.
Now I usually comment in a different way – more along the lines that if the clue is free of the dreaded ‘double obscurity’ (something obscure or unfamiliar in both the answer and the wordplay), having only one component that is unfamiliar, then I call it fair, and I welcome the addition to my GK.
Well, this would have been easier if the Grauniad dropped their pointless taboo on the word “actress” (is anyone on their editorial staff reading this?). A toughie for sure.
I think DIET was the craftiest clue, although it wasn’t my LOI. Incidentally, I think the wordplay does work, just about.
I suppose I was lucky in a way, that all the ‘actors’ involved were ones I’d heard of. There are so many new names in the business……
The usual thanks to Paul and Peter.
I am completely with you, Alan, and – beware – do not want to start a major discussion (or did I?) on the subject.
Last week, there were commenters who thought it was unfair for Puck to use the name ‘Laban’.
His name was part of a normal word, ‘Alabamian’, so why worry?
‘Laban’ sounds plausible, learned something today.
Most of today’s actors were part of the construction and, yes, there weren’t many ‘obscure’ solutions if at all.
But do you [in general, not you, Alan] really think those born, as I said, after 1980 know who Gregory Peck was, or Marlene Dietrich, let alone Sophia Loren?
I’m not so sure.
Perhaps, the lack of comments on using all these ‘old’ actors says quite a lot about the Fifteensquared generation – who knows?
I’m only saying that if you want to attract a new group of young solvers, I think this crossword is a non-starter.
GK is all about what you know.
I mentioned Taylor Swift in my post @38.
It wouldn’t surprise me that most people here only know her because of this court case.
It’s all about what you know.
If Paul had used classical composers instead of actors, had it been different?
Or famous football greats [Paul would like to do that, I’m sure].
Personally, I think, it would have.
Not for me, but in general.
Those who say Puck’s ‘Der Freischutz’ is an obscure opera, have no knowledge of opera because this opera isn’t obscure.
That’s fair enough but no reason to complain.
Last week some poster had never heard of Sting (defined as ‘songwriter’).
Again, fair enough, but Sting is just as well-known today as James Dean was in his short-lived days.
It’s all about what you know and whether you’re open to know a bit more.
All this, by the way, is no criticism on the crossword itself which was good.
I am just a bit puzzled by why some setters get the stick and others do not.
A most enjoyable puzzle.
I carelessly bunged in HOLDER at 21dn, reckoning that Noddy could just about be counted as an actor, but if I’d thought of HOLDEN (which I definitely should have done), I’d certainly have opted for him instead.
Sil
I honestly thought that all the actors whose names have been used here – in the clues and in the solutions – have achieved fame and would be known to typical crossword solvers of all ages.
The only opera that I didn’t know in Puck’s recent crossword was Albert Herring. The clue was fair, so that was something to learn. There were probably some who didn’t know Der Freischütz but still accepted it – as well as those who didn’t know it and were frustrated by it.
Perhaps today’s crossword was not ideal for a solver of cryptics coming to the Guardian for the first time. Guardian cryptic crosswords often have themes, as the editor allows them, but they may typically be a bit of a stretch for newbies who are are used to non-themed puzzles. I welcome themes as a kind of extra dimension both to the solving process and to the appreciation of a puzzle after completion. I believe you are of a different persuasion. But solvers always have a choice, including the choice of doing them all!
No, I don’t want a major discussion! I was partly to blame for an extended discussion that strayed from the point in a recent thread, and I need to live that down rather than repeat the experience.
I honestly thought that all the actors whose names have been used here – in the clues and in the solutions – have achieved fame and would be known to typical crossword solvers of all ages.
That’s where we disagree.
I’m not so sure.
I, for one, like to see Emma Stone in a crossword rather than Vivian Leigh.
This crossword, although technically quite good, was just a bit stuffy.
As, at times, I think Fifteensquared regulars are.
Oops, oops and oops again.
Sil @46
Your oops, my ouch. But I shall choose to take what you said in the right spirit. (If the cap fits, wear it.)
No need for the discussions on GK.
We already have the arbiters of what should (and by implication what needn’t) be known.
Just consult with Muffin or Cookie as they obviously have the list 😉
BNTO, and others, here is something fantastic about mathematics that I cannot resist posting…
I savour variety in clue surfaces and cryptic constructions, so a puzzle in which two thirds of the across clues are based around an actor is very dull fare for me.
I’ve come to expect and accept some looseness in Guardian clues, but I fail to see how the clue to DIET works. It appears to be a clue to DIETRICH rather than DIET. Nor do I see how ‘descent’ woks as an anagram indicator. I’m obviously being very thick. Can someone tell me what dictionary meaning supports it?
On the positive side, a number of definitions were well chosen to suit the surface without strain,and there were some well-crafted anagrams (eg.13 and 18).
Andy Stewart@50. “descent” in Peter O’s solution above is underlined as the definition. “crack” is the anagram indicator.
I am reluctant to go back to the GK vs SK discussion, but Sil makes some excellent points. I might quibble about the operas – not all of us are familiar with the minor works of G&S but I did know Albert Herring. On the whole this was a lot easier than the Paul puzzle that required us to construct unfamiliar aria titles in French and Italian. No problems with any of today’s actors, and I am not a film expert.
21 down works as well with HOLDER. If you don\’t know Geoffrey Holder, know him. The greatest laugh in show business.