This page is for the discussion of general crossword related matters and other topics of interest.
Comments posted before 3/8/2021 can be found here.
This post is now closed. New comments can be posted here.
257 comments on “General Discussion”
Comments are closed.
As I know there are a number of fans of HMHB, I thought I would pass on that they feature in a live ‘kitchen session’ with the great Andy Kerhshaw on his latest podcast:
https://theandykershawpodcast.podbean.com/e/andy-kershawplays-some-bloody-great-records-podcast-5/
Following from the discussion on today’s Guardian cryptic (28,515 Qaos)…
It has long been a bugbear of mine that setters use so many old tropes and out-of-date cultural references. By way of addressing this, I’ve been thinking about having a go at putting together a crossword themed around 21st-century neologisms and have started compiling a few clues. Here’s one I came up with – needs refinement, but I think it more or less works and it amuses me…
Strange brew seen in tweet from fellow, usually rum, containing iron with frothy head. (7)
(A quick search of the archive reveals that this word has been clued once before, by Cyclops in Private Eye. You won’t find it in Chambers though.)
MB @1 – crikey, I didn’t know Andy Kershaw was still alive. But I’ll definitely check that out. Thanks.
widdersbel @2 – I am afraid that Picaroon got in ahead of you on contemporary neologisms back on December: 12th. Guardian cryptic # 28313.
Thanks, I missed that one – I’ll have to go back and have a look.
On the subject of out of date references: is OR (Other Ranks) still in military use for “men” (who of course may not be men these days anyway)?
Gladys, I forget what I was looking for when I found this, but gov.uk publish a list of military acronyms and abbreviations, here…
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ministry-of-defence-acronyms-and-abbreviations
…and OR is still given as ‘other ranks’ (amongst other things) consistent with the entry in Chambers. Chambers also gives men as ‘an uncommissioned soldier’ without reference to sex.
Widdersbel@2
So what’s the answer? And will I have ever heard of it?
TC @ 8 – Shame there’s no spoiler tags option, but here you go…
COVFEFE
COVE = fellow, usually rum; FE = iron; F[rothy]
Although I’ve now realised I made a massive error – I misremembered the origins of the word as a typo for “coffee” (hence “Strange brew”), but it was originally meant to be “coverage”. Oh well, back to the day job…
SC @4 – I’ve done that old Picaroon one now, and it’s superb! Thanks again for pointing it out to me.
widdersbel @9 I thought it was this but I thought your strange brew meant a strange spelling, it is not really a neologism , just a hard to imagine typo.
Roz – Agreed, it’s not really a neologism, but it came up on a list, which is why I thought of it. I don’t think I’ll use it though (I have others that I’m not sharing here because they’re definitely going in my crossword).
Save the rest. It was the source of a lot of mirth at the time and I do not really recall what Trump is supposed to have meant.
Thanks, widdersbel@9. I thought it was a typo for ‘coverage’ influenced by a pressing desire for some coffee, so maybe a bit of both? What’s “rum” for? Is it from the pairing ‘rum cove’? I don’t think it was necessary, if so, and the clue is long enough without it. Nice try, though.
Thanks, Jay@7.
Widdersbel@4
I take your point about out of date references but surely any means of preserving cultural references (even if they are by today’s more enlightened standards considered *-phobic) should be applauded? Take the two letters OR, there are many possible meanings some of
which are listed below:
1. A heraldic tincture (dated).
2. A forfeda in Ogham (very dated).
3. An alumnus of various schools including Roedean and Rugby (somewhat dated)
4. Other Ranks (usually clued by or for ‘men’ hence misogynistic – *nods condescendingly to Gladys@6 😉 *).
5. Official Receiver – an officer of the court who deals with bankruptcies. ( to the best of my knowledge specifically UK only and probably not Scotland).
6. Oregon. The state.
7. The suffix -or (creates an agent noun usually masculine as opposed to the feminine -rix more commonly -ess – again potentially misogynistic).
8. Various logic gates in computing (somewhat specific, probably qualifies as jargon).
9. Acronym for Onion Router or Routing – an anonymising network technique in computing (definitely jargon).
10. A relatively common name or component of a compound name in Hebrew, I believe it translates as light (fairly obscure I would argue).
11. Used as a regional vehicle registration somewhere in Spain or Italy – I forget exactly where.
If you’ve managed to read this far without nodding off then first off kudos, second – my point is this; which of these should be considered fair game for clueing and which not?
I should at this point explain that I knew that lot as many years ago I was challenged by my idiot manager (who had overheard us discussing coding – instead of actually working to be fair) to make an interesting list of uses of the word ‘OR’ or else! I think he thought he was being clever.
Anyway I’m reminded of Soup recently saying something along of the lines of “if I know it it’s GK and hence fair to clue”. Although Wittgenstein said it better!
Blah@15, how did Wittgenstein say it?
Tony@16
“The limits of my language mean the limits of my world”.
I should point out that I’m wilfully misapplying Wittgenstein’s intent behind this statement by taking it literally. It’s just (to me at least) so descriptive of the process of solving cryptics when taken literally.
Blah @15: to be fair to Soup, it was the other way round – “If I don’t know it, it doesn’t go in.”
Given his day job, I’m sure there are an awful lot of plant-science-y words that Soup knows but wouldn’t dream of putting in a crossword (at least I hope not! 😉 )
I’m inclined to agree that “If I don’t know it, it doesn’t go in” is actually a pretty good rule of thumb for avoiding unfairness-through-obscurity (execrable monkeys notwithstanding!).
Thanks eb@18
I agree with you about it being a good rule of thumb for setters.
I had misremembered Soup’s words and the results of the two propositions are potentially very different. I would argue that the gist of the two statements are similar in this context.
I’ll instead draw a parallel between Soup’s actual words, and another literal interpretation of Wittgenstein – “Whereof one cannot speak, one must be silent.”
I do not mind occasional obscure words or even themes, nice to learn new things. Sometimes a part of the grid will only admit an obscure word.
I do think they should be clued very precisely in the word play, Azed is the master of this, see 36AC today for example.
Blah @15 – “any means of preserving cultural references (even if they are by today’s more enlightened standards considered *-phobic) should be applauded”
Hmmm, interesting thought. I’m not entirely convinced a crossword is the appropriate vehicle for preserving them.
But my objection is mainly about terms that have fallen out of use for other reasons than being unenlightened. Probably the most common example is TAR for sailor. Even when I made my first forays into cryptic crosswords over 35 years ago, this was a hackneyed trope that you never saw outside crosswords. And my objection is perhaps more to do with the lack of imagination shown by any setter who still uses it – obviously there’s nothing objectionable about the term itself.
Personally, I would have no qualms with taboo words and phrases being included in crosswords. However…
Generally, the crossword ought to conform to the editorial guidelines of the newspaper it appears in, so should not contain anything that would be considered unacceptable/inappropriate elsewhere in the newspaper (hence the objection to Nancy=milksop in a recent Guardian crossword – either term could be used in a way that doesn’t cause offence, it was the equivalence that was slightly problematic).
Some people like to make a point about about they’re not so easily offended like these PC-gone-mad snowflakes, but this kind of response demonstrates to me their lack of empathy, rather than their worldliness.
If you’re publishing for general consumption, you do have to draw a line somewhere, so it becomes a question of where you draw that line.
“which of these should be considered fair game for clueing and which not?”
OR = “other ranks” seems fine to me. Do the armed forces still use “men” synonymously? In this case, I’d say it’s up to the person setting the crossword to find a non-misogynistic way to clue this.
OR in the heraldic sense… well, I imagine that like TAR, most of us don’t see heraldic terms used much outside of crosswords these days. If I were setting a crossword, I would try to avoid using them, though they do count as general knowledge.
OR = Oregon is fair game.
On -or as suffix, the feminised forms of agent nouns are deprecated in the Guardian style book so I would say they shouldn’t appear in Guardian crosswords, as per my earlier point. Other newspapers may have their own style guidelines that allow these terms.
Reference here, in the entry for “actor”: https://www.theguardian.com/guardian-observer-style-guide-a – but note the instruction “as always, use common sense” – or to put it another way, apply your personal judgment as to when it’s acceptable and appropriate to break the rules.
The rest of your list all seem too obscure/technical to me, whether current or not.
But I never complain about learning something new from doing the crossword, as long as it is clued fairly.
Tony Collman @13 – thanks for the feedback! Yes, ‘rum cove’ is what I was thinking of, and I agree it’s not necessary. (This attempt demonstrates why I have yet to make it professionally in the world of crosswords, but I do it for my own amusement.)
Blah @17, thanks. Thanks also for reminding @19 of “Whereof one cannot speak, one must be silent.”
Essex boy@18, Soup did require knowledge of dodder — and not just as an answer that could be derived from precise wordplay as called for by Roz@20. I had heard of it from school, so when DODDERY occurred to me as meeting the definition, it simply became a question of confirming that dodder was part of the morning glory family. That’s something I doubt many non-specialists knew, even if, like me, they’d covered dodder at school. However, for them it might have been the equally simple task of confirming that dodder was actually a thing before verifying its family connections?
Tony @23 You’re welcome.
Widersbel@21 I’m impressed you made it through the list and agree with your summation re obscurity of the items.
Re nancy/milksop: It didn’t bother me, but I was surprised at its inclusion (especially in the grauniad) and thought ‘surely that’s now considered offensive’ as a I filled in the answer with a raised eyebrow. I also wouldn’t consider the equivalence as a cultural reference, let alone one worth preserving.
However with TAR I must disagree with you. As I’m sure you’re aware there’s a G&S number “A British Tar”. I couldn’t remember the actual name of the song so just put ‘Gilbert and Sullivan tar’ into Google, the first returned link was a YouTube video of a performance that has been viewed 194K times.
Of course I have no idea how many of those viewers are crossword solvers as well as G&S fans, (thats an unusual Venn diagram to say the least) but there’s the evidence that tar=sailor is alive and kicking outside crosswordland.
Lastly when you have finished compiling your crossword I do hope you’ll post a link to it here so we can attempt it.
My potential objection to Other Ranks wasn’t because it might be sexist (the fussy insistence on describing Marilyn Monroe and Shirley Temple as actors irritates me, though Whoopi Goldberg, who has played God in her time, is clearly an actor). To me, OR feels dated, and snootily classist rather than sexist, but if it’s still in present day use then it’s fair game.
On another note, when did the correct Guardian spelling for the city I knew as Kiev become “Kyiv”, and must we now expect this spelling to be enforced in crosswords?
Gladys@25
IIRC Kiev was derived from Russian and Kyiv from Ukrainian. I think it was part of a campaign by the Ukrainian authorities.
Tony@23 DODDERY was fine for me , non-obscure definition , slightly obscure term in the word play. It is an obscure word in the answer / definition plus obscurity in the word play that is a bit much.
I think this subject has been raised before but this morning’s Guardian blog prompts my post with a friendly request to bloggers. Is it possible to avoid making a comment in the very first line – which appears under the crossword heading on the Home Page – that betrays a theme, nina or otherwise. Sorry to call out loonapick this morning for “A themed offering from Brummie” because there have been other instances in recent times (An FT blog also began with a first line announcing a theme). Other commenters, rightly, get wrist slaps for spoilers buried in the threads beneath the blogs. If it’s virtually headlined on the Home Page it’s nigh impossible to avoid. (I’d acknowledge Tuesday Independents as an exception, given the longstanding tradition of a Tuesday theme. Though, even in the Indy, I wonder if opening comments along the lines of “It’s Serpent so look for something hidden in the puzzle” are borderline.) No problem at all with the comments appearing in the preamble – if I’ve chosen to actually enter the blog, I can’t complain. It’s just that visible opener.
Thanks, Blah@26. I missed that. The change seems to have happened quite recently. I notice that the Guardian style guide still allows you to eat Chicken Kiev, though.
PostMark@28
My apologies – I will edit, although obviously too late for some visitors to the site today.
In my defence, I’m not quite sure what to write in the preamble bit.
Roz@27, it wasn’t too bad a clue. I was really countering essexboy’s statement @18 that “Given his day job, I’m sure there are an awful lot of plant-science-y words that Soup knows but wouldn’t dream of putting in a crossword”. Since I studied dodder as part of ‘O’-level Biology it’s certainly not the most obscure word a plant scientist could come up with but if you hadn’t heard of it, you would have had to find out about it to solve the clue. I didn’t know it’s family connections but at least I knew it was ‘a thing’ which would go with the only check letter I had, Y, when DODDERY popped into my head.
With regard to TAR, in the extremely unlikely event that I had done cryptic crosswords at Primary School, I would have avoided the embarrassment of belting out “Hearts of oak are our men, jolly tars are our ships” in singing lessons.
Postmark @28 – that is a good point. I often mention the theme in Gozo puzzles in the FT because every Gozo puzzle is themed. But not everyone will know that, so I should avoid mentioning it. Thank you.
Hi PostMark @28
This was an issue a few years ago and we bloggers agreed not to let slip any details about the puzzle in our opening paragraph, for the sake of solvers visiting the site looking for some other blog, whose eye might be caught by such an entry before they had a chance to solve that puzzle. Comments in subsequent paragraphs, as you say, are fair enough, since it’s reasonable to suppose that folk are only visiting the blog because they’ve finished the puzzle and / or have a query.
You mention the Tuesday Indy as always having a theme. The same applies to Qaos, whatever day he appears and he always gives a hint on his website. (Since I began this, I see that PeeDee has made a similar point about Gozo in the FT.)
Other setters occasionally have themes but certainly not always. Brummie, I think, is perhaps most notably unpredictable and I know I have often commented to that effect in my preamble but – I hope, but can’t be sure – not in the first paragraph, so I sympathise with loonapick today.
Having shared your irritation in the past, I promise to be extra-careful in future. Thank you for raising the issue again in such a friendly and courteous way.
(I have said, more than once, that I often find the preamble the most difficult part of the blog to write. 😉 )
Despite having seen Mark’s post about the theme spoiler before even starting Brummie’s crossword, I looked without success for a theme. Was there really a GODMOTHER in the SLEEPING BEAUTY? I know there was a SPINDLE and a KISS involved, but it still didn’t click. Even if I’d seen the theme, I’m not sure I’d ever have got EVER. 🙂 (This is not meant to undermine Mark’s point, merely to show how hopeless I am with themes.)
Many thanks to those who have already responded to my post @28. loonapick – apologies for you finding yourself being my trigger and it didn’t actually have an impact on my solve today but was simply an instance of something that does occasionally occur and prompted the polite request.
I can’t help you with your dilemma with regards to what to write in the preamble. The simple solution to the problem I’ve highlighted is surely a few hits of the Return key to enter some blank lines, ensuring whatever is in the preamble is not visible on the Home Page. As for content, however, I both empathise with and admire our bloggers for finding introductions. I look at my own poor efforts and find I often descend into hackneyed cliche. Which is, of course, because we get relatively few duds and a heckuva lot of really excellent puzzles between the G and the I (I’m only an occasional FT). So many preambles will begin with acclaim.
Eileen – thanks for the comment. I recall your frustration when Keats appeared above the line in a preamble. And your own contributions are always a delight.
hatter – what can I say but that I feel your pain! Roz is one of our most brilliant solvers but regularly admits to themes passing her by. muffin often confesses to blissful ignorance. I reckon I spot 2 in 3 if I’m lucky. Maybe a bit less. Plenty of others regularly admit to bafflement. You are not alone 😀
PS – I completely agree that the preamble is often the hardest bit to write. The aim is to let someone browsing the front page know if it is the sort of puzzle that they might enjoy and want to have a go at, but without giving anything away about the puzzle. Contradictory requirements!
I would just like to add my thanks to all the bloggers, since I still use pen and paper this issue did not affect me but I did see the problem. I would find any preamble very difficult to write and I do find them very interesting. More importantly I think their work explaining the clues is absolutely incredible. If I try to explain even one clue in the comments it is difficult and time consuming. I know my typing skills are very limited but they have to do it about 30 times for a puzzle.
THEMES – yes I am very poor at spotting themes , like yesterday , but I do have a question.
First we have the traditional theme with a numbered clue, Paul recently with his trees, Easy to spot.
Second we have a theme like yesterday, normal clues and no reference to the theme at all.
Third we have a theme with mainly normal clues but one sort of unifying clue- for example …… this and all other across answers. The BIRDCAGE puzzle is typical.
I was wondering who sort of invented this ? I feel it was one of the Bs ( Brendan, Brummie or Boatman )
Sorry to ramble so much, the rain has stopped , I can swim now.
PeeDee @37: with regard to the contradictory requirements, I wonder how many users of the site actually decide whether to do a puzzle based on the first couple of lines of visible preamble? I would be surprised if it were that many; I get the impression that most here are regulars. I’d be inclined to think of your readership as largely comprised of solvers who have already completed or are about to attempt – regardless – one of the puzzles covered on the site. Rather than those wondering whether to have a go and perusing your preamble as a decision-making factor.
I find the giving away of the fact that a crossword has a theme in the preamble somewhat less unhelpful than someone kindly listing the solutions to that crossword on this page. I acknowledge that not all postings here can be spoiler free, but feel there is a duty on contributors to avoid unnecessary references that could have that effect.
Roz @38 – it definitely goes back a lot further than the current crop of setters. Araucaria was already doing themed puzzles back before I first showed an interest in crosswords as a teen in the 80s. (I don’t know if they count as ‘themed’ but I always particularly enjoyed his alphabetical jigsaws.)
My preferred approach to themes is that used by Brummie yesterday, where the theme only becomes apparent once you start filling in the grid. I think if you do it this way, it avoids it becoming an exercise in remembering names of, for example, trees or birds (though I also enjoyed both of those puzzles).
Should add – I have no idea if Araucaria ‘invented’ themed crosswords, but it seems unlikely.
Thank you widdersbel, I meant the third type of theme, did not express it clearly , where all clues are normal except one , which will say something like – blah blah blah …….. and 12 other solutions here – a sort of unifying clue. See the recent Picaroon with hidden birds.
Araucaria had many themes but usually specified in a preamble or all referring to a particular clue number, see Paul recently with trees.
As for who invented the themed crossword, it must be Torquemada , maybe even his legendary ” Knock Knock ” puzzle.
Van Winkle @40. Apologies for the spoilers – I had forgotten that I was on General Discussion rather than the Guardian blog. Very careless of me and I am sorry for whatever displeasure it may have caused you.
Roz @43 – Ah! Sorry, I see what you mean now. No idea of the answer though!
We need names for each type. The first is an explicit theme I suppose. I think people call the second a “ghost ” theme, I always miss this one.
I think the third type is reasonably recent, I may be wrong, and one of the Bs introduced it to the Guardian.
Roz@38,
A fourth type of theme could be where all the clues have something in common but the answers don’t.
I seem to recall a Brendan (please correct me if anyone remembers differently) from many years ago (at least 10 I’d say) where every clue contained the word SAY.
It was at various times the definition, anagram fodder, indicating e.g., indicating homophone, etc etc.
Blah@48 yes good thinking, a clue theme rather than answers. I remember the SAY version and think you are right with Brendan. Recently we had ROCK in quite a few clues.
I nearly always visit here before deciding which puzzles to look at. I have in approximately equal measure had puzzles slightly spoiled by preambles and been nudged by intriguing ones into looking at puzzles I would otherwise have ignored.
But, my favourite preambles by a mile are PeterO’s, in the form ‘the puzzle can be found at ’. I always use the link. Apart from being helpful to solvers, wouldn’t universal adoption of this form save bloggers what is apparently an awkward bit of work?
James @50. I had exactly the same thought!
Essex boy@18 (again)
Randall has clearly been following this discussion:
https://xkcd.com/2501/
James@50, I agree.
Gotta love xkcd very hard pressed to pick my favourite but this is up there.
Calculus
Messed up the link – sorry
Arrgh and again – last try
Newton and Leibniz
My all-time favourite xkcd is one that often seems relevant to the comments section here…
Duty calls
Anyone else having trouble opening today’s prize crossword in the Guardian app? Ok on website. Other crosswords in app also ok.
A few thoughts on indirect anagrams, which have been the subject of some debate particularly on the Everyman blog recently.
As far as I know, the first person to go on record as disapproving of these was Ximenes. In “On the Art of the Crossword” (1966) he says:
I hate what I call an indirect anagram. By that I mean “Tough form of monster” for HARDY (anagram of HYDRA).
A couple of decades later, Don Manley in the Chambers Crossword Manual also condemned indirect anagrams as unfair, giving the following example:
Small pebbles possibly coming from the country (7)
in which the setter wants us to think of “shingle” as an anagram of “English”.
It’s clear that what both Ximenes and Don M meant by an indirect anagram is the “Think of a synonym for this word and make an anagram of that” type. Generally I think setters have tended to agree with them in avoiding these. On the other hand, lesser degrees of indirectness have been quite widely used and accepted – where the clue directly gives us most of the anagram fodder but we have to take an extra step to get one or two letters.
Tramp gave a robust defence of the latter type of clue – a partially indirect anagram – in his comment @32 on the blog for Guardian 28,029 (he had used “that is” to give IE for the anagram fodder). He refers back to Picaroon’s comment @17 of 27,395 on the same subject: “it’s been widely used for as long as I’ve been solving crosswords”.
Some people (eg Roz) take the view that a partially indirect anagram is acceptable if the letters for the anagram are all in the clue, as with “good” to give us G. Tramp’s “that is” for IE obviously doesn’t meet that quite strict criterion.
A perhaps rare recent example of a completely indirect anagram is 25 across in Paul’s Guardian 28,494. Is this one maybe more acceptable because that clue was part of the theme?
LJ@59
I think it’s safe to say that Ximenes would have deplored the majority of Paul’s work. The particular clue you refer to there was very difficult to parse although in the terms of the theme it was gettable. I was somewhat in awe of Eileen for unravelling it at all. ( I was ridiculously pleased that I knew something she didn’t from today’s everyman blog even though my knowledge was lacking in a different way on exactly the same subject – I really must get a life)
Re the Everyman blog today which prompted your post. Although technically unximenean (should that be non-ximenean?). Both the inclusion of a very common word indicating a letter and the enumeration of the clue made it a fairly easy clue.
We would accept those common substitutions in a charade without blinking an eye so why not in an anagram?
Lord Jim @59. Thanks for your summary of the argument and for reminding us of the example in Paul’s “capitals” themed crossword.
I’ve not analysed the responses below the line in any detail, but my impression is that a number of experienced solvers didn’t *get* the device that Paul introduced. Even among those who did, there were many who were unable to parse 25a (although the answer was clear once the crossers were in place). As well as the indirect anagram, Paul required the solver to *get* an extension of the device he’d used in the other themed clues, and then drop a letter, and then form an anagram. This proved more than one step too far for me, amongst others.
In retrospect I admire the ingenuity, and wish I had been able to solve the clue, but I still feel that what he attempted was just a little too much. So was it “more acceptable because that clue was part of the theme?” No, because it was too difficult. I think Paul saw an opportunity, presented by the theme, to attempt something dazzling, without seeing that what he was doing was going to lose most of his target audience.
I had to look up the Paul one you’re referring to… Ugh! Nope, that’s definitely unfair in my book. Not only is it an indirect anagram, it requires you to work out the theme first. I like Paul on the whole but sometimes he can be too clever by half.
The Tramp one is fine by me though. It’s a common enough abbreviation. I didn’t object to the recent copper one either.
Blah – you raise a good point. We accept a degree of indirectness in other types of clues, so we should be equally forgiving of a degree of indirectness in anagrams too. The Ximenes line makes it all sound very black and white (perhaps appropriately, since it’s crosswords we’re talking about), but there are many grey areas. Paul B often rails against those who don’t respect the conventions, but we have to remember that’s all they are – conventions. Not absolute commandments. Fairness is perhaps best judged as hoc, rather than with a blanket rule.
*ad hoc
Indirect (illegal) anagrams where a small part of the fodder is a very obvious copper (CU) or good (G) are no tougher than those legal ones which require you to place a synonym at some undefined point inside (or round the outside of) a direct anagram (“Almonds one scattered around mountains produce fruit” for Matilda’s ORANGES AND LEMONS, for instance).
I wonder if Auracaria ever did any form of indirect anagram? Does anyone know/remember?
I certainly wouldn’t fancy trying to solve any indirectness in those long winded anagrammed phrases he used to do so well.
Just as cricket works best when there is an even contest between bat and ball, crosswords are more enjoyable if there’s a fair contest between setter and solver. Tip the balance too far in one direction, and the game loses something.
My problem with ‘partially indirect anagrams’ (as defined by Lord Jim @59) is that if we accept ‘that is’ = IE, the solver really doesn’t know what may be coming next. Suppose you see the word ‘say’ in a clue. Could that be a signal that we have to add the letters E and G to the anagram fodder? How about Tyneside (N and E), smell (B and O), current (A and C, or D and C), sailor/tar/salt (A and B), soldier (G and I), city (E and C, or L and A, or N and Y), the French (L and E, or L and A, or L and E and S)?
All of these substitutions are very common in charades, which is fine, because it’s a one-step thing. Once you turn it into a two-step, the permutations become mind-boggling.
So I would bar all indirectness in anagrams, including the example highlighted by PeterO in today’s Everyman blog. Other ‘lines in the sand’ are possible (such as Roz’s principle of first-letter-visibility) but mine is simpler.
Of course there will always be times when a setter breaks the ‘rules’ for the sake of a brilliant clue, in which case the flagellation inflicted should not be too severe.
essexboy @66. I agree with most of what you say, except that *you* can’t “bar all indirectness in anagrams”. Firstly because you’re not in charge and secondly because there are no rules!
We rely on the setters having a sense of fairness, and this will vary according to the perceived ability of the solving community. As you say, “there will always be times when a setter breaks the ‘rules’ for the sake of a brilliant clue”, but the brake that is applied to the the brilliant setter is the potential disapproval of the solvers, who may find their “brilliance” unfair. The setters surely want us to enjoy their clues, and it’s through this site that we can give them the feedback they need.
Thank you Lord Jim for a very thoughtful summary.
There is basically a line joining a completely normal anagram with all letters used in the words to a completely unfair anagram such as HYDRA or ENGLISH, it is where you stand on that line ?
Personally I am with MrEssexboy and would not like to see the TWO STEPS at all, perhaps an ideal position.
Practically I would accept some substitution ( without frowning ) of standard abbreviations as long as the letters for the anagram are THERE, two examples in the EVERYMAN yesterday.
I do not like the other examples given by MrEssexboy, including some chemical symbols, CU , FE, AU etc.
As for PAUL, I had no problems with it because of the theme and the A, the second A was clearly a 5 letter capital containing B, A ,K and U .
It was a Saturday and was a theme and I got it immediately , smug-mode I am afraid.
It’s entirely possible that our reaction to and acceptance of these types of clue are linked to whether or not we solved them.
Unsolved – ranging from disgruntled to furious.
Solved but not parsed – wry shake of the head and marvel at the setter’s brilliance/perversity.
Solved and parsed – bask in the warm glow of the sunshine emitting from one’s own rear end.
Roz @68 – The Paul example is off the end of your scale beyond the “completely unfair” HYDRA or ENGLISH examples, since it is not only a completely indirect anagram, it requires the extra step of removing a letter.
Does the fact that you were able to get it via the theme absolve it of “unfairness” in your view?
Since there’s no Quiptic today to divert me before I start work, I’ve had a quick scan through a list of capitals to see if there are any other possible 5-letter capitals that can be anagrammed into 4-letter capitals if you remove the final letter… and I can’t see any (although if it’s removing any single letter, you could have Apia > Praia). So as long as you do get the theme, that’s probably gettable even without the crossing letters, which I guess does kind of absolve it of “unfairness” to some extent.
Still too convoluted for my liking though.
Don’t know why I missed this one on the day it came out – looking at the app, I seem to have started it but dropped it after 10 minutes with only a few entries filled and the theme not sussed. Must have had something more important to do that day!
Crossbar@58
Yes, likwise today for the Quiptic, as noted on the daily blog. I haveen ab,e to access via the web page, without signing into the app.
Sorry, typo: ‘able’
Thanks Lord Jim @59. I think that one has to look at the enumeration of anagram fodder. If there is a single letter missing and ‘good’ is there, I think it’s fairly obvious that that means a G. However, all the examples given by essexboy @66 have multiple answers, so should not be allowable as fodder, IMHO. I would have no problem in having ‘that is’ to indicate IE in fodder if the enumeration requires two missing letters, however. I also think it’s fine to add something like ‘first of class’ to mean a C as part of the fodder.
widdersbel@71, I never really call clues unfair , I will just frown at those I think go too far, in the end there are no rules. The setter can set and we try to solve.
PAUL – not just a theme but a very specific theme , the second A means a capital city for a country that has first letter A, it is essentially a definition that we mess about with a bit.
Your Apia and Praia do NOT work, the country does not begin with A.
Good point re Apia/Praia!
Widdersbel @71 touches on another factor in deciding the acceptability of indirect anagrams: how many synonyms there are of the indirect fodder. If there’s only one, that eliminates the difficulty. The problem with indirect anagrams is the multiplicity of possibilities. Long(ish) words can be permuted in many ways, with the number of permutations increasing geometrically (I think – Roz or some other mathematician may correct me) with each additional letter. If there are many possible synonyms it is even worse.
However there are only six possible permutations of three letters, so three letters of an answer can be clued with an indirect anagram without too much unfairness.
On the original point, I think it is perfectly acceptable to indicate parts of an anagram fodder with well-known abbreviations. The question of whether the long forms of such abbreviations have the actual letters required for the fodder seems an artificial restriction to me. I don’t see that it makes the anagram that much more gettable.
Tony@77 the increase is actually factorial, faster than geometric, I do not know how to do the symbol here.
4 letters give 24 permutations, 5 gives 120 ……….
The reason I like the abbreviation letters in the actual clue is entirely personal, if I can see the letters on the page I can do the anagram in my head, it is just how my brain works.
Roz, thanks for the correction.
I agree that having the letters on the page makes them easier to solve but I don’t think that means it should be a requirement for a ‘valid’ clue.
Here‘s a clue which pushes the envelope just a little bit further than i.e. = that is. It’s not from a published crossword but the Guardian’s clueing competition. Fair?
Greg mingles with dry group in shelter (6)
Answer and parsing followed in next comment.
Anagram (mingles with) of GREG + AA (Alcoholics Anonymous , “dry group”), def: shelter
GARAGE
Oh , come on , what other “dry group” is there?
Tony@80 Potentially TT (teetotal) as well as AA, but yes easy enough to solve.
Fair? Ok with me but I suspect not with others.
I think Widersbel@62 was right in saying each case should be judged on it’s merits.
There’s some undefined point at which the length of the anagram fodder demands that all parts of it should be clearly visible and unambiguous. The GARAGE example above is on the right side of it for me, particularly as the other candidate, TT, clearly doesn’t make a valid word, but using dry group=AA in a 10-letter anagram would be unacceptable. Setters often get round the problem by using containment indicators to separate the letter or letters they want to clue differently (Strange rituals in dry group down under = AUSTRALIA): not necessarily any easier, but technically correct.
Blah@82, on the contrary, TT could be clued by ‘dry’, but not ‘dry group’, I don’t think.
Gladys@83, I’m not sure the length would matter as long as it was clear it was an anagram and what the rest of the fodder was, so you knew you needed to find another two letters. Great clue for AUSTRALIA and nothing indirect about it as far as I can see.
No, the clue for AUSTRALIA gives an example of how the problem might be avoided. Strange rituals with dry group down under wouldn’t be so acceptable.
I have been reading Alan Connor’s “Two Girls, One On Each Knee: The Puzzling, Playful World Of The Crossword” (recommended). One of the questions on the back cover is, “Why should you always start a crossword in the bottom right-hand corner?” I don’t remember seeing the answer to that in the book and I can’t find it now. Does anybody have any idea? To me it seems counter-intuitive; I would expect solving clues which give me letters at or near the beginnings of words to be more helpful than those towards the end.
Just to add my 1/2p to this indirect anagram discussion: in the example you quote TonyCollman@80, how do we know that Greg doesn’t also require substitution before we start permuting? EG to DYKE or PECK, there may be more. If you have all the crossers then it may be clear but that would fix the order in which you have to solve (OK sometimes that is the case anyway but I would hope it is minimally so). The “fairness” of the clue in my mind would depend on this plus the relative ease of solving the clues that give those crossers.
I think unless the setter is VERY explicit about what needs to be done to get to the anagrist set this would soon lead to chaos.
So I am broadly with the “no indirect anagrams” camp but prepared to allow exceptions in the case of brilliance and/or indubitable clarity as per (I think) the consensus above. Of course the lines subsequently drawn will vary by solver!
St. Eve@86,
Many years ago I had a friend who was obsessed with his solving times. He always started a crossword with the last down clue and then worked backwards. His reasoning was that the setter would start at 1A and by the time they got to the end the clueing would be looser, less fiendish and easier to solve.
I found the below which may bear his theory out.
https://www.theguardian.com/crosswords/crossword-blog/2013/sep/30/crossword-roundup-where-do-you-start-solving
St. Eve and Blah: the relevant bit in the book is on page 166 (paperback version), in the short section “How to speed your solve”:
Start in the bottom right-hand corner. Serial champ John Sykes did so, believing that the setter may have written those clues last, when less inspired.
Would a less inspired clue necessarily be easier to solve? But if it worked for the serial champ maybe there’s something in it.
Blah@88 and Lord Jim,
Many thanks, both. With your much appreciated help I have found it.
Gazzh@87, you don’t — but if Greg was also indirect, I would definitely regard it as unfair for all the reasons that pertain to indirect anagrams in general. I agree that where anagram fodder contains indirect fragments, the setter should be very clear in their indication (but see below).
Blah@88, thanks for the link. Did you notice that the clue from Puck included no less than three indirect elements in the anagram?
12d From text I see you solve last of down clues to begin with – oddly decisive! (10)
You get ICU from “text I see you”, then direct fodder SOLVE, followed by the N given indirectly by “last of down clues” and finally a C from “clues to begin with”. (Answer at Blah’s link). And yet Manehi, who blogged the puzzle never batted an eyelid at it and the word ‘indirect’ appears nowhere in the comments.
St. Eve@90, you’re welcome.
Tony@91 I must admit I didn’t see that – my phone rang and I posted here and forgot to go back and finish the article. I shall rectify that just as soon as I have poured myself a glass of wine
Tony@91
Don’t know how I missed that given the current topic. I certainly would have needed several crossers to solve that, definitely a parsing after the fact as well.
Thanks for the intro to General Discussion from the Philistine Prize blog – very interesting. I concur with SH@67 that there are no rules, but natural selection suggests they’re unnecessary. If a setter strays from fairness (i.e. challenging but achievable), they will soon lose their audience.
Since tentatively exploring beyond Everyman I’ve encountered a range of devices previously unknown to me. Some (e.g. Vlad) aren’t for me (yet) while others (e.g. Paul) I’m really enjoying. Would such a rich variety of styles have evolved under the constraints of prescriptive rules?
EB,
Just noticed a typo on my post giving the enumeration of your French clue, said typo is actually a good hint.
Would that be a case of “Disorganised identity parades, missing data, happy coincidence? (11)”
Blah@95, no idea what you’re talking about, but I’ve solved your clue.
… although I don’t think your definition is very accurate.
Tony C @96 – Blah’s comment @95 is a reference to a discussion on yesterday’s Philistine blog. He posted here to avoid giving away the answer to a French charade I posted on that page – although I don’t think he needs to worry! Thanks Blah.
Permission to ask a stupid question, sometimes I see people mentioning the term REFRESH ? What does this do and is it easy ? SIMPLE answers please.
Roz @99 In this context it merely means to reload the web page you are viewing, in order to show any updates to that page since you arrived. Useful to avoid duplicate comments in a sequential blog for example.
The symbol you need to select will vary between browsers but will look something like images on this link
https://www.google.com/search?q=refresh+symbol+&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwjs_fjP3MTyAhUFhRoKHaV0CvAQ2-cCegQIABAB&oq=refresh+symbol+&gs_lcp=ChJtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1pbWcQAzIFCAAQgAQyBQgAEIAEMgUIABCABDIFCAAQgAQyBQgAEIAEOgQIHhAKULScAljzpAJgysMCaABwAHgAgAH7AYgBxgiSAQUzLjMuMpgBAKABAcABAQ&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-img&ei=h08iYayeAoWKaqXpqYAP&bih=548&biw=320&client=ms-android-samsung-rev2&prmd=sinv
Thank you Blah, so it is like when I go out and come back again and the numbers change. But it means I do not need to leave.
Exactly so Roz. Which means you can no longer claim technophobe status I fear 😉
I have not mastered it yet. I will ask one of our sprogs which button to use when we see them. No doubt they will find it highly amusing.
Tony@97
Oxford languages list serendipity and coincidence as similar. While not Chambers or Collins that’s good enough for me.
They (Oxford) define coincidence as a remarkable concurrence of events or circumstances without apparent causal connection.
They also define serendipity as the occurrence and development of events by chance in a happy or beneficial way.
There is of course a potential difference in that the timing of the events or circumstances is not explicitly specified in serendipity, but for me the difference between these is the beneficial nature of the latter, hence my use of happy as a qualifier.
I must admit I’m at a loss as to why you dislike my definition?
Eb@98, thanks. I should have gone there before I came here, not after. I worked out “Oh! Mes dix francs!” after the fact, but still a bit hazy about the full details (but perhaps you’ve answered me there anyway?)
Blah@04, sorry but I’d never heard serendipity defined as broadly as that, but maybe I’ve just never looked it up in an Oxford dictionary. For me, it’s well defined by Essexboy’s (indirect anagram *stir stir*) clue over on the Philistine blog, where it started. “Coming across something fortuitously while looking for something else” is how I’d give my understanding off the cuff. That’s semantically close to a happy coincidence, but not quite the same thing. Sometimes words develop new meanings when they are used loosely for some time. If it happens enough they get to the dictionary (like eb’s “slither” last week). Perhaps Oxford were just the first to spot that usage and it will be in all the dictionaries soon? Setter’s stripe for defending your clue by reference to authoritative sources.
Tony@106 Not completely convinced I’ve earned that stripe, or ever will, but I’ll wear it with pride anyway 🙂
My sister’s favourite albums when we were young were The Yes Album and the first Lindisfarne album, which she used to play alternately. I grew to like them both, though I didn’t get Yes’s follow-up album “Fragile, and “Tales from topographic oceans” is generally regarded as the most self-indulgent and pretentious album ever.
The reason I’m mentioning it, though, is that a few years ago we went to hear Lindisfarne live at the Colne Muni. Their stage set was a pub. The support act – a local group called Slack Alice – came on with obvious dismay; they had hoped that, for once, they wouldn’t be playing in a pub!
…though Fleetwood Mac’s “Tusk” would rival “Tales from topographic oceans”, perhaps?
Roz @103 – it’s usually F5
Thank you widdersbel , there is actually a button just above number 4, it has a circle with an arrow.
Roz, you should also see the refresh symbol (which you have correctly identified) within an inch either way of the top lefthand corner of the screen. If you move your cursor over it and left-click the mouse, it should reload the page. There is probably a left- and a right-arrow up there too, for back one page and forward one page respectively.
In an idle moment, I’ve just been looking at the blog for the most recent Inquisitor, which is definitely not one for those who take exception to indirectness in clueing…
From the preamble: “In twenty clues, some or all of the definition has been jumbled with an extra letter…” I won’t say any more than that, because spoilers, but click here for HolyGhost’s excellent blog to read more. (There’s a further complication that applies to several more clues, which are also unravelled in the blog.)
Fascinating, but definitely above my level – I’m not sure I would know where to start. Think I’ll stick to the regular Guardian cryptic, thanks.
Thank you Tony @112, I have found buttons for these above number 2 and number 3.
widdersbel@113 for more of a challenge try the Azed every Sunday in the Observer, most puzzles are “Plain” which means all clues are normal. The clues can be a bit fearsome until you get used to them.
I used to attempt Azed back in the days when I bought the Observer regularly. These days I use the Guardian puzzles app which unfortunately doesn’t carry it. But they do provide a print version on the website, so maybe I’ll give it a go. I’m not buying the paper just for the crossword though.
I can only use pen and paper but I think most people do it online in some way.
Another pen and paper solver here. Doodling flowers and faces alongside the grid sometimes helps when I’m stuck. (And I’d rather throw a newspaper across the room than a laptop.)
Twmbarlwm @117. I’d rather throw a newspaper across the room than a laptop. As regards the long term consequences, no doubt. But the initial impact, if any, is far less satisfying!
…and thanks for introducing me to the hitherto unknown hill from which you have borrowed your name. Hope you haven’t taken your laptop up there…
Sheffield Hatter, no! I have enough trouble getting the wi-fi to work indoors never mind up a hill.
As modest as it is, Twmbarlwm is believed by some to be the inspiration for Arthur Machen’s ‘The Hill of Dreams’.
Just in case anybody is wondering about this, today’s Guardian crossword (Sat, 28/08) is a Bank Holiday special and is under the Cryptic header, not the usual Prize header.
sheffield hatter @118
Having thrown a laptop, I can assure you that the satisfaction lasts only as long as its flight
When shall this Game of Throwin’s come to an end? 🙂
Twmbarlwm @ 117:
I asked my grandson to lend me a newspaper.
“Don’t be so old fashioned”, he said. “Everyone uses computers these days – here, borrow my laptop.”
Honestly, that fly never knew what hit it…
Gladys, I thought my laptop joke was ace but yours is Acer.
James @122 & Gladys @124. I hope this will be the start of a newspaper vs laptop thread. It’s been very stimulating so far!
Is there going to be a blog Guardian cryptic. I have now completed it after puzzling what “bottom right-hand square” meant in a circular puzzle. I finally worked out that it meant the top (!) of the right hand column. Needed to look up a couple of the answers but not to do with the theme and have puzzled out an explanation for all but one of the answers. It would have been nice to see how that clue worked.
Peter @127, I guess the blog will probably be next Saturday as it’s a ‘Prize’ puzzle. Even with competition prizes suspended solvers are allowed extra time as usual – especially for jumbo holiday specials.
I haven’t started it yet, but a Maskarade is always worth savouring.
Twmbarlwn @128 There may be some confusion with it being a Prize given my comment @121 (unless they’ve moved it since then). Nevertheless, the blog will surely not appear until Saturday.
I’ve had to resort to pen and paper for the bank holiday special, since there’s no interactive version available. Makes a nice change, to be honest.
PeterC @127 – I was wondering about that “bottom right square” thing since the way I interpreted it ended up with impossible answers in the three-letter slots round the edge… I did wonder if it meant the four parts were not in order, but maybe I should hold off trying to fill in the theme until I’ve managed to fit some solutions into the grid, which is still foxing me…
Pleased with myself for sussing the theme quite early though, except that it’s a theme I have very limited knowledge of, so have had to resort to Wikipedia for assistance.
Widdersbel it is in order but starts in a different place, the instructions not quite right, I did a trial run just on paper first and glad I did – the 3 letter slots are key.
Yes, I just tried it with PeterC’s suggested starting place and it works perfectly…
Hmmmmm!
Luckily, there is another way into the grid… but I’ll say no more, no spoilers.
@widdersbel. Unlike you I am very keen on the theme. I got all14 related clues on my own without needing to look up a theme-related source. Those who are merely quite interested in it might have found at least three of the answers rather obscure., whilst I went hunting for the relevant clues as I went through the candidates for the related answers. The alphabetical order of the clues is particularly helpful for that purpose. As you will now be aware, there were only just over as many again possibilities once I sussed out what the theme was. Assuming that no ordinal numbers were used, of course.
Yes, the alphabetical ordering is very helpful. And the wordplay for all of them is very fair. (And I did actually get a few of them without assistance, to give myself some credit!)
But anyway, let’s save further discussion of this one for Saturday when the blog is published…
Just a thought. By the time the blogs on Everyman and the Guardian’s Saturday puzzle appear, six (seven counting Quiptic) puzzles have intervened, and I find I have sometimes only a very vague recollection of the solving experience and how the grid worked. Would it be possible for the bloggers in these instances to paste in the completed grids (as some bloggers do anyway with weekday puzzles), to save having to burrow into the G’s crossword pages to recover them? I would be interested if any other contributors would find this helpful.
Spooner’s catflap, I find it more convenient to have the (part-) solved puzzle in a separate browser tab anyway, so, once it’s solved (or not, as the case may be), I leave it open in my browser until I’ve seen the blogpost. It’s a lot easier to flick between comments and a different tab to see what someone is talking about when they write “10 across was brilliant/terrible” than it is to scroll up searching for the relevant part of the blog then searching for your pace in the comments again afterwards.
Tony C – I do exactly the same (or, if I’m on my phone, have the grid open in the Guardian Puzzles app and toggle between that and 15^2 in Safari).
I’ve been dabbling. It’s something I do mostly for my own amusement, but I also find that looking at clues from the other side of the fence, as it were, is a good way to hone my solving skills. I rarely get as far as finishing a whole puzzle, but here’s one that’s ready(ish) to be unleashed into the wild:
https://we.tl/t-2kQA4vuGQq (file is a simple pdf to print and scribble on – no interactive version available, sorry; download at your own risk)
I can promise:
– no 19th-century naval terminology
– no 21st-century neologisms
– no “double duty”, Miltonian or otherwise
– no indirect anagrams
Beyond that, it’s pot luck. Enjoy. Or don’t. Bouquets and brickbats equally welcome. Don’t pull your punches.
widdersbel well done for making the effort. If I can get someone to print this for me I will definitely have a go when I have the time.
widdersbel @39
Have you had a look at the website set up especially for this sort of thing, MyCrossword?
That’s great, TC, thanks so much for the tip! I did a bit of cursory Googling for such a site but failed to find that one. Looks perfect.
widdersbel , I managed to get someone to print your puzzle, had a quick go in the sunshine now , very impressive. Not checked anything in Chambers. I always tick clues that i like and circle any I think are dodgy , so here goes.
Ticks – AC 1 14 18 25 26 D 3 13 19
Circle – AC 5 12 27 D 5 16 20 23
Only my views and not looked up a few queries, I can give you more detail but do not want to give answers away.
Thanks, Roz. I can probably guess at the reasoning – a couple you’ve mentioned are ones I would have circled myself…
Some are easy to repair, I will say a bit without giving anything away, but you should understand.
5AC change internationally to something more specific, remove measures , definition a bit techy for me but I trust you are right.
12AC works okay but I do not know the word you have used for the definition ?? assume you are right.
27AC biggest mess of all really but great idea with the Jack , needs work , too many letter s .
5D almost V good “say” not quite the right word.
16D may be okay not checked what you used for “symptoms ” plural may be okay, rest is fine.
20D neat idea, replace gang’s
23D easily fixed , do not think “mean” and “soul” are quite what you want.
Ah! I was happy with 5d but see I’ve made a schoolboy error… agree that 5a, 12a, 27a are all a bit problematic. 16d you might be right about the plural, I’ll check. Thanks for taking the time to comment, very helpful. Now I need to work out how to get this one up on mycrossword… (my grid isn’t in the default options) In the meantime, I’ve set up an account there and will put up some more of my efforts there in due course. If anyone is interested.
It’s a great site – thanks again Tony C for the pointer.
I thought 5A and 23D are OK as they are, but that’s probably just 17D, I missed the howler in 5D, you’ve brought shame on your profession there Widdersbel! I did mean to flag the more usual plural usage in 16D, but missed it. 27A I applaud the attempt but agree it just doesn’t work as is.
Overall very good crossword I’d say.
widdersbel@146
I spent some time earlier in the year building an import option for MyCrossword. If you navigate to the create crossword page there should be a “go to import” button in the top-right corner. That will allow you to bring in XML files from Crossword Compiler or PUZ files from other applications such as CrossFire – hope that helps.
Thanks, Raider. I didn’t know about CrossFire, I’ll have to download it – used to use CC on Windows years ago, but I’m Mac-only these days (I’ve been making grids manually in Indesign). Well done on the site, by the way, it’s great.
Also thanks for the comments, Blah!
widersbel@149
Should you with to go back to CC, I use it with Parallels on a Mac, works perfectly
Thanks for the tip, Jay, but I’m not sure I can justify the expense of Parallels and a Windows licence just to use CC!
Monday’s Guardian thread is starting (yet again) to become a little contentious. I will not name names or point the finger, as many of us (myself included) are or have been guilty of being dismissive about the offerings.
Many years ago I was introduced to this site and the Guardian cryptic by a friend. (For reference it was when Eileen was a poster, before she started blogging.) I had previously done a few cryptics with my father who was a life long Telegraph and occasional Times solver. 15 squared was a relevation! Like minded intelligent contributors with something worthwhile to say! I lurked for a while and posted a few times. Eventually the Monday diatribes against (in those days usually a Rufus) drove me from solving altogether. I returned to solving 2 – 3 months ago in an attempt to stave off some worrying memory lapses and returned to 15 squared. A few weeks ago I started attempting Azed, with limited but increasing success, and the Azed bloggers and posters have been nothing but helpful and encouraging. I’m sure that some may have laughed at some of my mistakes and mis-parsings but they certainly haven’t made me feel unwelcome or question my ability.
Finally to my point (and a request). We all love cryptics and solving (why else are we here?) so why are we (as a gestalt) risking driving people away from something we enjoy? It is of course perfectly acceptable to query clues and parsings and have an opinion, and it would be a boring world indeed if we all had the same opinion and experience every day, but maybe we could all try to be more encouraging and recognise that one day we may find it easy , but the next are stumped by something that others (who were stumped yesterday) find simple.
I shall try to live up to this in the future and would hope that more of us would do likewise as i believe many contributors already do.
Well said, Blah @152 – thank you for that.
(I’m intrigued by the comment at the beginning of your second paragraph: it must indeed be many years ago!)
Thank you Eileen.
It was certainly more years than I care to remember but was over a decade ago, late noughties would be my best guess 2008 most probably, this being a case in point of the memory lapses. I do remember you from then as well as several other bloggers and I believe a few posters names ring a bell too.
Hi again Blah
I know I first commented in the spring of 2008 and started blogging in September of that year http://www.fifteensquared.net/2008/09/24/guardian-24502orlando/ but can’t think what memorable comment I may have made between those dates!
PS: how old-fashioned that blog looks! This, of course, was in the days when we didn’t supply answers to all the clues, in deference to the Guardian’s premium line, nor did we supply the clues. Initially, I was one of those who couldn’t see the point of doing so, because I thought that everyone would, of course, have their copy in front of them. It’ s quite irritating now, though, when looking up the archive!
Indeed the mind boggles at what you may have posted to be so memorable 😉 . But seriously I used to usually have an excellent memory for the oddest
items, and I suspect that your common sense approach to whatever was under discussion that day just chimed with me.
Blah and Eileen. My first post a mere 18 months ago was also a reaction to people saying a puzzle that I was proud to solve was too easy. I was grateful for Eileen’s immediate words of encouragement.
Very interesting to have Eileen’s early history with the blog recounted. I couldn’t help noticing, in the context of Blah’s essay @152, this part of Eileen’s first preamble:
“straightforward and fair without being too easy to be interesting”
(Stir, stir).
Hi TC, haven’t heard from you in a while, it was perhaps a bit long-winded I’ll admit, but I needed to get it off my chest.
As for stir, stir you just couldn’t resist eh?
Sorry PeterT I should have acknowledged your post too. I always enjoy your contributions. I’m sorry the subject was relevant but glad that you posted.
Blah, I suppose the clue is in the name 🙂
It’s only a week since I last posted (@41) and that was to be helpful, not just to tease …
Blah @152 – I was prompted by your post to look back through the archives to see when I first posted here. I couldn’t put a precise date on it but have found comments by me from the first half of 2008 – albeit using a different pseudonym then.
Interestingly, I found a blog of a Monday Rufus where the blogger (no names, no pack drill) complained about always having an easy one on a Monday, to which I responded that some of us particularly looked forward to those ones… I’m a much more accomplished solver these days but I still prefer a gentler ride first thing on a Monday morning.
Commenting on the same blog, Paul B also made the excellent point that puzzles should not be judged by how easy they are but by how well written the clues are.
Thanks Widdersbel, I think PaulB makes a very valid point. As Eileen regularly reminds us, it doesn’t have to be difficult to be enjoyable.
It may well be interesting to see what today brings. I won’t say any more than that as the blog is not up yet.
Has anyone else been having trouble printing out the Guardian crosswords recently? I always managed to increase the size so as to fill the page. It seems impossible to do that now? Have they changed the way the puzzles are formatted? I’ve removed all the unwanted ‘blocks’ but there is still something stopping the bottom quarter(ish) of the page printing.
I don’t think there’s a problem with the settings on my computer as I can print other stuff without any problem.
Printing the PDF version is one solution but it is rather small.
Anna, yes I’ve also struggled at times though I use the app for the daily puzzles. But with the last Maskarade puzzle for example, I downloaded the pdf and then copied the grid image and the clues into a Word document and reformatted into a decent size for printing and it worked rather well
Jay@166
Thanks for reply. I shall try that method next time.
Anna
Jay@166
I tried to do that with these weeks Saturday puzzle. But I can’t manage to copy the grid image from the PDF file into the Word doc. How do you do that?
Anna
Anna@168, I simply open the pdf and take a screen shot* (separately of the grid and the clues) then paste the images into Word which you can then size to you liking. I hope this works for you.
*Shift-Command-4 on a Mac allows you to drag the cursor over the part of the screen you wish to capture. Not sure about pc it might be the snipping tool but it’s been a while since I used a pc.
I doubt this is helpful but on my iPad there is an icon (like a square with an uparrow) that, when tapped, allows me to copy a pdf to various locations (such as iBooks), where I can then solve with my ipencil. Is there something similar that helps you get around any printing problems?
Jay @169
Thanks again, Jay.
Anna
Hovis @170
I can’t see anything like the square with an uparrow.
Perhaps I should have said that I am looking at these PDF files on Adobe Reader. I think you get different tools if you have Microsoft Edge.
And it’s a desktop computer with a giant screen because my eyesight is less good than it used to be 🙂
I would really like to find out (and undo) whatever it is The Guardian have done to block the bottom part of the page from printing.
As the blog for last Saturday’s Guardian hasn’t appeared, am I allowed to ask about a clue here? Or would that be breaking the rules?
Ask away Anna , I will try and answer , kept my paper copy . surely nobody can complain.
OK, thanks Roz.
What’s your parsing for 18ac, which I assume to be STATIONS?
I assume that 16ac PLACE is remember as in ‘I can’t quite place him, but …..’
Those were my only minor queries. I felt that the puzzle was fairly easy for a Saturday.
18ac is stations , to set is to station and office=station in Chambers but was new to me in this usage.
Yes 16ac I agree in the remember sense although usually it is not remember, also catch=hear plaice.
Most Saturday puzzles seem to be easier these days.
Office = station. Yep. But I can’t say I’ve heard of station as a verb.
Did you have any luck with any of those Finnish works I recommended?
Cricket I believe , they set the field or station the fielders in the correct position.
Our daughters have your list thank you, Christmas day I always get books.
No blog at all it seems today, it shows how much we take it for granted normally.
Roz/Anna – I agree about ‘to station’ = ‘to position’ = ‘to set’. It often comes up in sports writing, not just cricket, eg this from the Graun:
The Costa Rican’s lofted corner exposed Arsenal’s own problems with marking, and Berbatov, stationed right in the middle of goal, only needed to take a gentle amble back to find the space to glance past Vito Mannone.
I would guess that the usage comes from the military originally. “My father was stationed in Germany after the war”, in the sense that he was put in a particular place to perform a particular duty.
Yep. The meaning ‘to be stationed somewhere in the military’ did in fact occur to me just after I had replied to Roz.
I also thought military in the sense of troops being stationed at certain points in the trenches before an expected attack.
I think SET must have the highest number of entries in Chambers.
For all those struggling with size on the pdfs, I just print at 120% scale (for the Guardian Saturday prize anyhow) and it fills the page perfectly.
Just in case anybody is wondering about the FT crossword yesterday (Oct 2), it originally had the wrong grid (now corrected) but still has 8d (linked with 10a) labelled as 10d. Maybe this will also get corrected? The original grid had the wrong lengths for 9a, 10a, 26a & 27a, though the clues had the correct enumerations.
JemmaQ@183
Do you download the PDF file first? Have you got it in Adobe or Edge?
My problem is that I always used to print the puzzle at about 120% but that was the ordinary print version, not the PDF version.
Eileen. Apologies this is not crossword related, but its the only way I could find to get hold of you Eileen. My name is Siobhan and i’m Geoff Moss’ (aka Gaufrid) daughter. Would you please contact me at:-
siobhanjnj(at)gmail(dot)com.
Thank you
Siobhan
Thanks, muffin – I’ve been out but have seen the message.
Anna and Muffin,
May I suggest that if you’re sharing an email address on a public forum that you use the format that Siobahn@186 uses. It’s still obvious to a human reading it what the correct address is but replacing the ‘@’ and any ‘.’s with (at) and (dot) will stop most spam bots harvesting the address to sell to spammers.
I can’t help with Farsi or Egyptian I’m afraid Anna, but I hope you feel happier tomorrow.
Thanks for your comment, Blah.
Anna and muffin
Gaufrid is not able to post comments at the moment, so I’m sticking my neck out to speak for him. I know that he has, in the past, at the request of commenters who have found that they have a common interest, communicated their email addresses to each other, with their permission. It is strictly against Site policy to publish commenters’ email addresses and I was disturbed to find my own address posted here last night.
May I suggest that, if anyone wishes to exchange personal messages with another commenter, they address a request to admin@fifteensquared.net. Many thanks.
Blah is quite right, and I understand Eileen’s concern at seeing her email address published here. I know from bitter experience that an email address published en clair on a website soon becomes a spam magnet. It’s nice that people want to get in touch but I hope Admin will remove or disguise those addresses as soon as possible.
My apologies that I seem to be the link to emails being exposed. Thank you so much to those that helped me get a message to Eileen. I’m not a member of this site, but my Dad , Gaufrid, even told me how to put my email address down on this site to protect myself. He also said it’s stated on the website how to protect yourself! It’s not rocket science, so protect yourself and your fifteensquared colleagues! #pleaselookoutforeachother x
Admin Note: recent comments containing personal email addresses have been deleted.
Many apologies. I should have twigged why Siobhan’s original post had what didn’t look like an Email address. I would have Emailed her directly if I had realised.
Anna@[deleted]
The language spoken in Egypt is a dialect of Arabic. I learned to speak the Cairene version fairly fluently while living there for a few years in the late seventies (but I’m pretty rusty now). I would rather not exchange email addresses at the moment, but perhaps there is something relatively simple I can help you with if it’s not too off-topic for this page and you are not still sore with me for suggesting you might like to have direct contact with Roz that time?
Is there any reason that the Saturday puzzles are not covered on the day like any other weekday? It has not been a prize puzzle for some time now. You don’t have to visit the site if you want to retain old habits. Or do bloggers want the weekend off too!
Hi Monkeypuzzler @195
See Gaufrid’s response re Prize puzzles at comment 6 on Site feedback.
Sorry – I should have said ‘Site Feedback’.
So sorry again – I wasn’t being pedantic about the capital: I got it into my head that I’d written ‘Site Policy the first time!
Oh just admit you’re a pedant Eileen, you’ll be in good company with the rest of us 😉
Blah – I thought everyone here knew that I was a pedant!
Thanks for the steer, Eileen. Not sure I see the logic for delaying the solutions/discussion. Of course if they ever become prize crosswords again, then it has to be delayed until the closing date.
Absolutely nothing wrong with being a pedant, by the way. Been one all my life. Oh, it hasn’t ended yet, so not all. Oh, and I don’t think I was actually a pedant at birth, so it must have developed at some point. But it clearly did, as you can tell!
FAO Bodycheetah (some others might be vaguely amused, I hope) I’ve produced the odd clue for you (mainly ‘cos you ask for them!) over the last couple of years but this one popped into my head walking the dog yesterday, inspired by Formula 1:
Hill in Liege cows Button (4, 9, 4)
PostMark @202 I was going to ask if you’d been sitting on that one for a while, but I see that it popped into your head just yesterday. Very good.
Penfold @203: 😀 I was pathetically pleased with myself when research delivered that the Belgian GP is, indeed, held somewhere near Liege.
Nice to se you here. Is it me or have you frequented this site less frequently of late? Not sure I’ve seen MaidenBartok that much either. The pun ratio has certainly changed somewhat. Ho hum. Probably for the best.
PostMark @204 Yes, I’ve given myself (and everyone else) a break. I changed the daily routine to walking the dog first thing, rather than doing the crossie and I just got out of the habit of commenting.
Penfold @205: don’t be away too long. Your contributions were/are enjoyed by many of us and you are a master of one particular form of wit in particular. ‘Fraid my dogs are well used to coming second fiddle to my morning cuppa and the Guardian crossword in bed!
Penfold@205 Yes it would be great to read your witty comments again.
Postmark @202 I’m clueless about that one. I abandoned F1 when Nigel Mansell won Sports Personality of the Year. The fix was in
bodycheetah @208: if I suggest it’s HMHB influenced? F1 is just the surface.
PM, I have no idea about your clue I’m afraid, but I have one for you after today’s Knut in the Indy.
I, wrinkly bore, verry verry drunk! (6,6)
Blah @210: very nice: I always thought Boris Johnson’s diction reminded me of someone…
Roz, have just read your comment on Pan’s 18 Oct offering and wanted to let you know that I laughed out loud. Cheers
“Copper isolated by swell (3,3)” is a clue by Gordius I’ve just found in an old Guardian crossword book: a rare instance of the definition sitting in the middle of the clue rather than the usual beginning or end. I can imagine some angry posts if it appeared today.
APP @213: I imagine some posters would be apoplectic… Doubt I’d have got it without your steer.
APP and PostMark: I’m not apoplectic, or even angry, but I’m afraid that clue doesn’t seem to me to work. In the answer, “copper” is by “swell” – “isolated” isn’t.
As discussed recently (Guardian 28,566, me @51 and Alphalpha @58), the fact that the definition normally comes at the start or end of a clue is not an arbitrary rule or convention, it’s just a consequence of the way cryptic clues naturally work.
Anyone care to give the answer to this clue thought perhaps not to work anyway? Why don’t people give answers when discussing how clues work?
Tony: it was to try to avoid complaints that people hadn’t been given the opportunity to solve it for themselves if they wanted to. But I suppose they’ve had the chance by now, so…
The answer (I assume!) is CUT OFF, with “isolated” as the definition, “copper” being CU, and “swell” and TOFF both being slang for a grand or important person.
Lord Jim @215:
If you rely on ‘how clues work naturally’, then presumably in principle you don’t object to a clue that puts the definition in the middle in a natural way.
So, a natural structure would normally be ‘take these wordplay elements and do what I tell you to make this definition’ or, ‘the answer you’re looking for is made from these wordplay elements’.
But if you have ‘Given this wordplay element, the answer you’re looking for is found by doing this to it’ you have a natural structure in which the definition is in the middle.
Isn’t that what this clue does, albeit in shorthand? Cu gives isolated when put by toff > Cu is isolated by toff > Copper isolated by swell all seem natural steps. I think if it was a commoner structure it would seem straightforward.
I think it’s wrong to pretend that convention does not play a part, though. What about clues in which there is no link (i.e. linking words, such as gives, for, from etc.) between wordplay and definition? Some setters eschew such links entirely. In those clues you just have two discrete sections, with the cryptic grammar in the wordplay section operating independently from the grammar of the clue as a whole. Is there any way to explain that except as a formal convention?
Thanks, Lord Jim@217. I quite appreciate your reasons for not letting the cat out of the bag straight away.
I think the way James@218 has analysed this clue is correct. I thought the same before reading his comment. As you may well be aware, there is a type of anagram clue, more popular in the ‘hard’, unblocked puzzles, which goes: “X [+] this (or this [+] X) is an anagram of Y”, where Y contains all the letters in the answer plus those in X. Such clues have a similar flavour to the Gordius, especially in the “X + this” form. I think perhaps Pasquale sets this type of clue in the Guardian Cryptic sometimes?
Interesting point James makes, too, about clues which have no link word(s) between definition and wordplay
James @218 and Tony @219: thanks for your interesting comments.
I did of course say that the definition normally comes at the start or end of a clue. There are different ways that you can get it in the middle. One is the double wordplay clue which takes the form: (wordplay) + (definition) + (alternative wordplay). Personally I’m not usually keen on these as they just seem like overkill.
Much more interesting is the type you describe James, ie X becomes Y (definition) if you do Z to it. These can be quite difficult to pull off, and I still don’t think the Gordius clue quite manages it despite your eloquent persuasion. If it had been, say, “Copper becomes isolated by swell”, yes, maybe. (I was ok with the Brummie clue in the puzzle I mentioned @215: “Bachelors hurt inside (4)” for ACHE – not exactly the same perhaps but similar.)
Tony: yes I know the sort of anagram clue you mean, which does indeed have the same sort of slightly “backwards” feel to it.
LJ, Tony, James,
A question. Is Gordius’ clue for cut off Ximenean or not? I genuinely can’t decide. There is (as far as I know) no rule about where the definition appears just convention. The wordplay leads to def or def derives from wordplay formats probably lend themselves to cleaner surfaces but that’s irrelevant to the ‘rules’.
Blah – what’s the solution to “I, wrinkly bore, verry verry drunk! (6,6)” ? I can’t crack it.
Blah, I can’t help with the X word, as I haven’t read anything he wrote. Tony has, I think. The only sensible guide as far as I am concerned is whether the instructions in the clue are in good English.
The structure of this particular clue is common in written and spoken English. For example, ‘eggs delicious on toast’, ‘Charles unhappy with Di’ etc. In each case, the result of combining the first and last elements is the middle element. Eggs when put on toast are delicious, Charles when with Di is unhappy. If we are presented a clue that says ‘eggs on toast delicious’, with delicious being the definition and the wordplay being a charade of eggs and toast we are quite happy. ‘Eggs delicious on toast’ is identical in everything except for word order. If it were permitted to have the definition in the middle of the clue, we could have no objection to the latter if we were happy with the former. So it looks to me like the only reason for not being happy with it is that definitions are not permitted to be in the middle of the clue. And that is an arbitrary convention.
I’m not against it as a convention. Clues can be quite hard enough as it is. If placement of the definition was at large, I think setters would have to be more precise with the structure of their clues, making it clear what is being pointed to. Many setters don’t care about the direction of linking words, for example, using ‘for’ both ways (definition for wordplay, and wordplay for definition). Uncertain placement would magnify that problem.
Drofle@222
The answer is Rowley Birkin.
I should apologise really as it’s an unfair clue. PM and I had swapped comments on Knut’s Paul Whitehouse’s Fast Show theme about this character’s catchphrase being an excellent anagrind.
James@223,
Thanks for that its clarified my own thoughts and I tend to agree with you, although I had no issue with cut off. I am shamelessly pro-libertarian to the point of welcoming lift and separate style misdirection and even accepting of a limited form of indirect anagram (as previously discussed here)
James @223, there is no rule that the definition has to be at one end or the other; it just happens that that is the natural way to write clues. When teaching someone how to solve cryptics, it’s a good idea to tell them: “The definition is usually at the beginning or the end”, but that’s a statement of fact, not of a rule.
In fact, I haven’t read Ximenes on the Art of the Crossword (have you seen how much a second hand copy costs?), but I have read stuff by arch-Ximenean Don “the Don” Manley (Pasquale, etc.), including Chambers’ Crossword Manual, not to mention a number of comments from him as Lizard on other people’s entries for the fortnightly Guardian cluing comp.
The best way to find out what is (or should be) considered fair by the disciples of Ximenes is to consult The Azed Slip Archive where you will find the results of the cluing competition run originally by Ximenes and continued to this day by Azed.
Alternatively, you may like to heed the “top tip” given to John Halpern (Paul) by his friend and mentor, John Graham (Araucaria): “Never, ever read Ximenes on the Art of the Crossword by D.S. Macnutt!”.
Blah@225, when you use the phrase “lift and separate”, you are almost certainly not using it in the sense intended by Mark Goodliffe (aka Magoo) when he coined the term. See here. However, like all words which are used wrongly, the phrase has in fact come, by repeated (mis)use, to signify what you are (probably) referring to: where you have to break a word into two (or more) separate words, possibly even across the definition/wordplay boundary. It’s enough to make you want to literally gouge your own eyes out the way that happens, isn’t it? (See what I did there?)
Goodliffean lift-and-separates are quite acceptable to Ximeneans, the other type are anathaema — witness the occasional irascible comments emanating from Lizard on the Guardian when someone uses the device.
Tony @226, I think you must be mistaken if you think (?) that James is suggesting there’s such a rule: appropriately enough, his “So it looks to me like the only reason for not being happy with it is that definitions are not permitted to be in the middle of the clue” is an example of the sort of disguised conditional construction he admires in the Gordius clue which sparked all this.
Lizard irascible? Merely sniffy I’d say.
Gobbo, widening the window on what James said:
“If it were permitted to have the definition in the middle of the clue, we could have no objection to the latter if we were happy with the former. So it looks to me like the only reason for not being happy with it is that definitions are not permitted to be in the middle of the clue. And that is an arbitrary convention.”
The opening words are a counterfactual conditional, so I think there are good grounds for what I understood his belief to be, even though I found it surprising. Of course, he can tell me himself if I’ve misunderstood. It may be that his editor adheres to this “arbitrary convention” and so he is bound by it.
Of course Lizard’s mood when he makes his remarks is purely a matter of conjecture. I wrote as I found. Can’t guarantee I was right and I don’t care enough to search for supporting evidence. The point is that whatever his mood when he makes his remarks they are usually based on his reading of Ximenes and Azed, so one can pick up ideas of what constitutes ‘Ximenean’ cluing. Now I think about it, my first gleanings on the subject came from reading Alberich’s thoughts.
As Lord Jim has said frequently , the main reason the definition is at the start or the end is simply because most clues will only work in this fashion. There is only one rule – the setter sets and we try to solve – if we do not like clues we can grumble.
For a clue to work properly , the definition and any wordplay have to give the same answer , that is it.
I remember the Gordius clue on the day and it simply does not work. ISOLATE = CUT OFF , fine.
CU and TOFF only give CUT OFF if they are adjacent , this clue has CU ( ) TOFF so does not work.
One reader’s parsing (@218: cu gives isolated when put by toff) is pretty close to another’s quibble (@230: cu and toff only give cut off if they are adjacent). That’s just great.
Tony @229 I’ve no doubt that the Gordius clue would be ruled out, but I expect one could be contrived that would be allowed. It would have to be more obvious what was going on.
Roz @230, outside of the context of a clue, if you have A B by C then it can be either A or B that is by C. ‘Man cooking by fire’ can be a man by the fire getting too hot, or a man using the fire to cook. If you say ‘in a clue, by can only link two words that are adjacent’, you are imposing a limitation (aka rule, convention, practice, guidance) that does not exist in normal language. You say there are no such rules for clues, yet rely on one to say the clue doesn’t work.
Gobbo, yes, facepalm.
Me@227
Literally
Tony, if I mean something literally, I now say ‘literally literally’. I can’t say it’s been very successful as a joke thus far, but I intend to persevere.
James, I promise to laugh when you say it ….
Tony@227, thanks for the response, you are correct I was referring to what Sil calls Philistinean nonsense. I wasn’t aware of Magoo’s earlier use. I was very glad to see the later SNL link, as your use of literally, literally caused my teeth to clench.
The reason I mentioned the so-called lift and separate was that I had been reading Alberich’s thoughts and further thoughts on Ximenean clueing, and also his thoughts on link words, in which he deplores the old chestnut ‘indeed’ cluing DE()ED.
Examples he (Alberich) gives in the above only included ‘def from wordplay’ and ‘wordplay gives def’, which was what prompted my question re cut off.
Roz@230, thank you, I think that’s the clearest answer I have received to my question. GIven your predilection for Azed style cluing, I am concluding that the clue for cut off is not Ximenean. Which if I’m reading correctly is confirmed by James@232.
James@234, I literally applauded your perseverance!
Thanks all for a fascinating diversion from the ennui of real life!
sheffield hatter
I accepted what I took to be your challenge to provide clues in which “see” referred to a diocese other than Ely @66 in yesterday’s comments and posted a couple@100. Probably too late for you hence this.
Crazy about crew member? We’ll see. (4,3,5)
See without whiff of American night time visitor (7)
Blah@236,
There’s more to (what Sil calls} “Philistinean nonsense” than word-splitting: there is also what I like to call ‘the Philistine* device‘.
Of course older readers will know exactly where Magoo … ahem! … ‘lifted’ the now ubiquitous-in-cluology phrase from.
*’Philistine’ is already an adjective, so I don’t go for “Philistinean”.
Hi Pino @ 237 – as I’ve just commented on yesterday’s Vulcan thread, I still haven’t solved your clue. I’ll sleep on it – again!
Blah @236 – thanks for flagging up Alberich’s thoughts on link words, both interesting and useful – I found the piece on his website, for anyone else who may be interested.
Thanks also Tony C – I didn’t need help remembering where the phrase came from (I was a boy of impressionable age when those ads first came out!), but I am grateful to be enlightened as to its ‘correct’ usage in crosswordland.
Pino @237. Thanks for taking up the challenge! I got (4,3,5) yesterday but like Eileen I’m struggling with the second one (but will probably kick myself when you reveal the solution).
I only threw Evry out there (@66 in Monday’s Vulcan) because it could form a word that would fit yesterday’s crossers; most people have never heard of the place. As I pointed out, it would make for a fiendish clue. (But the cathedral is amazing.)
I think the point about ‘see’ or ‘cathedral’ for ELY is a) that everyone knows it, even if, like muffin, they object to the device, and b) (ok, two points) ELY is a group of letters that often forms part of words in English, such as surely or lonely, or ‘See round short diagram with no lumpiness’ (6). Once you get into using either of them as a definition or synonym, you can leave your audience far behind, especially in the absence of crossers.
I’ve figured out Pino@237’s second clue. An obscure one I never knew of before, but the ‘American night time visitor’ was enough to get me there. Cheers Pino
…my mistake ‘American’ applies to the spelling of ‘whiff’ I think. Am I correct?
Jay@243 I believe you are, yes!
Pino@237, very good indeed. The second one is a bit of a stinker to work out if you’ll forgive the pun. I needed a hint from EB and had to resort to Wikipedia to confirm it.
Excellent! – Pino @237. (I’ve commented on my Vulcan thread.)
Pino @237 – like others, I got the first one readily enough but the second has had me scratching my head… until now, when I’ve just had a clunking great PDM. Very good!
Of course we have had an example of a different See in a fairly recent crossword. I would be more precise but I wouldn’t want to be a spoiler.
Me@237
I think it’s time to supply the answers and parsing, though several have solved them and been generous in their comments. Thank you.
First is BATH AND WELLS – BATS (crazy) about HAND (crew member) WELL, skipping a couple of bits of punctuation as is generally accepted.
Second is SANDMAN – SODOR AND MAN (a diocese or see) without ODOR ( American spelling of odour). According to Wiki a sandman is a legendary figure who would throw sand in children’s eyes at bedtime to bring them sleep and dreams. Can’t see it working myself.
I remembered the word from an ancient pop song:
Mr Sandman bring me a dream
Make her complexion like peaches and cream
Give her two lips like roses in clover
Then tell me that my lonely nights are over.
– Amazing what can be dredged up from the slurry of ones memory.
Pino @248: nice that you mention Sodor and Man. There is, of course, no Sodor (it is a corruption of ancient Norse reference to the Southern Isles (Hebrides etc – of which Man would be the most Southerly)). Which is why Reverend Awdry chose to place Thomas the Tank Engine there. Close enough to Britain for everything to ring true but no pesky British Rail reality to get in the way of the stories.
PM@249
Yes. I was curious enough to Google Sodor and Man and found that Sodor probably ceased to exist in 1266 when Norway ceased to have sovereignty. I mentioned this on the Vulcan thread.
Thank you Pino, I particularly liked the fact you used American in your clue to indicate ODOR, Azed always does this when using an American spelling, many setter do not.
MrPostMark @ 249, the Isle of Man itself used to have a lot of interesting little railway systems , probably not these days, no doubt this also influenced Sodor and its location.
Pino@237&248, thanks. I got the first, the see in question having been brought to my attention recently by the reminder of a 12-letter hidden clue mentioned by James on a comment to the blog for Paul’s recent Prize with the 12-letter reverse hidden.
In the second, it wasn’t the Sandman that defeated me, but Sodor and Man — not on my mental map. Another song featuring the Sandman is Metallica’s Enter Sandman covered beautifully in bluegrass style by Iron Horse here:
https://youtu.be/3c7bISLhVl8
Comment 105 on the Brendan blog.
Discuss. If interested!
Taffy: post 105 on Thursday’s Brendan was from (I think) a new poster – I don’t recognise Moloch as a name I’ve seen on here before. This is the quote:
Ben Franklin also gave us “Those who would give up essential liberty for a little temporary safety deserve neither”. Something for all of you in Medico-Police States to think about.
I think the poster expects us to equate “Medico-Police State” and “give up essential liberty” with requirements to work from home, wear a mask on public transport and in shops, avoid unnecessary journeys and have a vaccination in order to slow or prevent the spread of a disease that has killed many people in the UK and elsewhere.
Do you want to discuss this on here, Taffy?
I concur with your conclusion sh@254. Thought it an unusual stance for a Guardian puzzle solver.
I’d rather not wander down that rabbit hole, just found it rather jarring.
Glad we’re on the same page, Taffy. 🙂
Interesting choice of pseudonym. Moloch was a Canaanite god to whom child sacrifices were made. The name is used figuratively to describe “any cause to which dreadful sacrifice is made or destruction due” (Chambers definition).
Anyway, yes, probably best leave that discussion for other forums.