Financial Times 17,971 by VELIA

24 comments on “Financial Times 17,971 by VELIA”

1. LOi 28a S + PLATTERS 😉

2. [13a typo TYPE]

3. A delightful puzzle, full of wit and ingenuity, so there were lots of smiles and ahas.

   I had a long list of ticks, which I’ve whittled down to 1ac AARDVARK (I always like ‘ground’ as an indicator), 5ac ASLEEP (for the groan as I entered it, as my last one in, having failed to find an anagram of SPREAD, despite having ?S?E?P!), 21ac VORTEX, 23ac ELTON JOHN, both for making me laugh, 2dn ROAD SENSE (lovely surface), 1/18 and 11/21 – both great anagrams and I must mention the run-ons in the grid, which I always admire – and 15dn, for the definition.

   Top accolade goes to 13ac SPARE TYRE, which will join an all-time favourite from Rufus (in 2008!) in my little book of classic clues: ‘Gluttons may have one; Alexander the Great didn’t. 5,4’.

   Huge thanks to Matilda for a brilliant start to a rainy day and to Teacow for the blog.

4. 26a In Latin IBID.(em) means “in the same place” – not quite the same as “the same” 🙁. Otherwise great fun! 🙂.

5. Velia was one of the first setters
   I remember solving but doesn’t seem to make many appearances at the FT. I liked this puzzle, however, particularly VILLA, PARTERRE, MALT VINEGAR and, like Eileen, ROAD SENSE and ELTON JOHN.
   Thanks to Velia and Teacow.

6. Oops! – I’ve just noticed my error @3. 🙁 My apologies to Velia, of course.

7. I also really enjoyed this and am with Eileen groaning when I finally worked out ASLEEP. I liked ELTON JOHN for the clue, among others.

   Thank you to Velia and Teacow

8. Thanks FrankieG@2 for pointing out the typo. I was a bit jaded this morning due to staying up to watch the Superb Owl last night! I’ll try to fix the crossword image later.

9. Teacow@8,😉 (<- click on this wink smiley.)

10. I remember the fact that Fish & Chip shops use a substitute for malt vinegar coming up on QI once.
    Marvellous puzzle. Like Eileen, I spent some time trying to get an anagram of ‘spread’ but eventually ‘parsed’ it (see what I did there 😉 ).
    I do like clues like the S + platters but not to everyone’s taste.

11. I had Sprays in 28a but I can see that is incorrect.

    Very enjoyable

12. 28ac: Chambers 2016 p 470 has “a driving shower” as a definition for drift as a noun. I think that is near enough to SPRAY. I had SPRAYS and am not going to regard that as a wrong answer. Thanks Velia for the rest of the puzzle and Teacow for the whole blog.

13. I lacked the necessary knowledge of UK to parse ROAD SENSE. Hadn’t heard of PARTERRE, but the wordplay was straightforward. And I too spent ages trying to think of an anagram of “spread” for 5a.

    A most enjoyable puzzle.

14. 22D: thought “Not allowed”, not “Sex Pistols”, was the def.

    I’m with FG @4 re ibid., and with PB @12 re drift.

    A nice puzzle nevertheless — thank you Velia and Teacow.

15. An excellent puzzle, from a setter that I do not know.
    A good mix of difficulty, and a range of devices.
    There are also some tricks that I haven’t seen before.

    Only one terribly minor quibble, 12(ac), RASTA: the surface might have been, “keeps/keeping the faith”.

    I admit, I had SPRAYS, for 28(ac), STRAYS; so, VELIA has defeated me.
    I will await the rematch. This was a very enjoyable challenge.

    Ta, Velia & Teacow

16. In my view, 28A is a dreadful clue. The essence of fair wordplay is that the words employed in it should clearly indicate what is required. To expect solvers to dissect “splatters” into S + PLATTERS and then substitute something meaning PLATTERS, leaving the S in place, without giving them any instructions at all is just arbitrary tricksy nonsense.

17. Thanks for the blog, very enjoyable overall, STRAYS my favourite.
    Not sure AUROA BOREALIS a rare sight , even in the UK they are getting common.
    TESLA more than a stretch for the definition , magnetic flux density does not mean attraction.
    The rest was excellent .

18. Further to the earlier comments on 28ac:

    When solving without looking at any dictionary, I thought this clue was a slightly feeble double definition, in that the two meanings were rather too close together for comfort. That view was based on the assumption that the intended answer was SPRAYS. Looking up the definitions for my earlier comment, I see that we can take them as noun and verb, and would like to strengthen my earlier statement and say that “a driving shower” matches spray¹ “a cloud of small flying drops” (Chambers p 1507) and the clue is therefore totally valid as a clue for SPRAYS. I can understand why people could also accept STRAYS as a valid answer, but I cannot see any reasonable basis for preferring STRAYS to SPRAYS given the clue and the checked letters.

    This brings me on to my more general point, which is why my objection to the “anything goes” school of clue writing is more than a matter of simple aesthetic preference. Extending the range of acceptable devices makes it more likely that a clue which has a single valid answer from a purist position may acquire other answers that can be considered valid under less precise rules. Here it is probably the other way round: the assumption must be that the clue was written under “libertarian” principles. Today’s example shows how setters who adopt those principles acquire an enhanced need to ensure that there is only one solution to the puzzle as a whole.

19. Thanks both – a top class entertainment.

    Minor point: a retailer KEEPS a TILL, so perhaps (if I may make so bold) not quite a double definition?

20. Pelham Barton @12, 18
    I would prefer to drive through ‘a cloud of small flying drops’ than a ‘driving shower’ – certainly the windscreen wipers wouldn’t have to work so hard!

21. Diane @20: Thank you for that. I take your point. On reflection, “matches” may be too much to claim. However, I would argue that each definition covers a range of (rain)drop sizes, and I can reasonably claim that they overlap, which is all I need given the question mark at the end of the clue.

22. Why is AZ map?

23. A to Z map books

24. Eileen@6, I suggest that Velia needs no apology for your use of her other name, but perhaps the FT does. 😉

Comments are closed.