Financial Times 17,400 – Jumbo by Neo

15 comments on “Financial Times 17,400 – Jumbo by Neo”

1. Really enjoyed this bumper puzzle and thanks to Widdersbel on your entertaining blog.
   I couldn’t parse the ‘in’ part of AGAIN and failed on GARDEN SNAIL (was trying to make the wrong forest fit).
   My favourites were LAW OF THE JUNGLE and DECAPITATE and I agree that DOES was clever.

2. LIE-DETECTOR
   romance (verb)
   to tell stories that are not true, or to describe an event in a way that makes it sound better than it was (dictionary.cambridge.org)
   In the noun form, romance seems to be more ‘truthful’!!! 🙂

   AGAIN
   ‘That’s lit’ (slang, I think) is used to indicate that something is really cool (IN in that sense).

   Thanks, Neo and Widderbel!

3. Thanks Neo for a super Jumbo. I agree with Widdersbel’s assessment. I had many favourites including AEROSOL, JAILBAIT, OXALATE, TELLTALE, BATH, SAUDI ARABIAN (great surface), PROFLIGATE, ASSERTION, ASTI SPUMANTE, and DECAPITATE. I needed a word finder for EMPIRICISM and EYE-DETECTOR. I had a minor quibble with Jung being clued as a psychologist; he was a psychiatrist — no big deal in the lay world but it is in the psych world. Thanks Widdersbel for the blog.

4. Thanks Widdersbel for an entertaining blog

   I made steady progress and finished this in good time (for me), with all the clues parsed. I can only agree with verdict so far – this was thoroughly enjoyable – and I echo the favourites mentioned by Diane and Tony. As I read the blog, the clues again gave me real pleasure a second time.

   I learned JAILBAIT, and thanks to KVa “that’s lit”. I also think of Bugs Bunny when I hear FRICASSEE, while “RAD” for awesome reminds me of Austin Powers. And, I am not sure I understand how “took part” means SIDED. Could someone explain please?

   Thanks Neo for a great puzzle

5. Martyn,
   If you take someone’s part in an argument, it means the same as taking their side/supporting them.

6. This was a really excellent crossword, and a delight to solve. I parsed 20A (AGAIN) as Widdersbel. The online Collins Dictionary has this entry under “in”:
   20. British
   (of a fire) alight
   do you keep the fire in all night?

7. Rudolf – thanks for the citation, always useful to see these things out in the wild. I assumed it had to be something like that but surprisingly, the OED didn’t have anything relevant and I didn’t think to check Collins.

8. Extra-large Neo, most enjoyable.

   God knows how you compile one of these things, with sixty-odd clues. Must be quite a task. Wondering if the FT is planning to do these weekly, as does The Times, or for high days and holidays only. Gozo was in with one yesterday, Neo the previous two, so not sure. the more the merrier for me, as I love to sit down with the old coffee, toast and marmalade for a good old think of a weekend.

   By the way, I see both Chambers (under Jungian) and Collins call Jung a psychologist, so I think our compiler is on safe ground. Tony S may have a more detailed knowledge of the man.

   Thanks Widders for a lovely blog, great to read through the clues again with your guidance.

9. Lady gewgaw @8: Carl Jung was a psychiatrist and psychoanalyst. Psychiatrists and psychologists are both therapists but a psychiatrist is a medical doctor where a psychologist is not.

10. Thanks Widdersbel et al. Glad you liked this one. I’m not sure as to the ed’s long-term position on Jumbos, as we’ve not discussed it, but I’m always up for setting one. I’m pretty sure some of the other FT lads and lasses are up for it too, so here’s to a positively pachydermatous FT future!

    Per comments these are indeed a lot of work, with the main problem being duplication of indicators etc over a list of clues that’s usually at least twice as long as a standard daily. And the entries can be up to 23 letters long, which makes for some interesting clueing challenges!

    Anyway cheers. The Dam Busters is on, and the coffee pot full. See you soon.

11. Btw thanks Tony for the clarification. I went with Collins for that definition, but I’m sure you’re right, with your obvious depth of knowledge in the matter.

12. Thanks for the blog, this one was in the paper for some reason , the FT seems to be varying things a lot. Very consistent set of clues for such a large puzzle. DEER a very nice finish with “does” right at the end. By coincidence it was in the Guardian the same day.

    Tony is quite correct and also being very diplomatic. A psychiatrist has done many years of hard study , a medical degree first and then specialising involving many more exams. A psychologist is just a loose term , in fact in the UK anyone can call themselves a psychologist . The dictionaries really need to do better here.

13. Thanks Roz.

    Wiki calls Jung a ‘psychiatrist and psychoanalyst who founded analytical psychology’.

    I invite you to consider the plight of the generalist 😀

14. Awesome = RAD?? really?

15. I’m afraid so. In Chambers, meaning excellent. Hopefully it can mean awesome too.

    It’s also an acronym for reflex anal dilatation, which was considered of course.

Comments are closed.