Inquisitor 1672: Shattered by Chalicea

40 comments on “Inquisitor 1672: Shattered by Chalicea”

1. The grid fill for me was pretty straightforward, but the highlighting took an absolute age as nothing leapt out and I had to resort to random Google searches of words in the grid, which I did sporadically over several days. Perhaps I just wasn’t observant enough, but would have appreciated a hint as to what we were looking for, perhaps using another device.

2. All thanks to Chalicea and HG. There were some neat clues and little smiles en route, but as noted it wasn’t terribly difficult to fill the grid — after which I stared at it blankly for a long time! The general location was strongly cued by KITSAP, PUGET SOUND and TACOMA (all remembered from my one visit to Washington State) and I eventually guessed that because it could be removed leaving all real words, TUBBY was the vanisher. My Google was WASHINGTON STATE TUBBY, which got me there. I’d never heard of Galloping Gertie but liked the Schadenfreude-like effect of its being spelt out in full, though in the “aftermath” position.

3. I had to change my tune somewhat while I was drafting this note ready to post. The only pointer to the theme, ‘aftermath’, simply wasn’t enough, and I was going to say something like ‘nice crossword – shame about the theme’. I had found TUBBY, seeing that it could disappear without doing any harm, but nothing whatever to go with it.

   For no reason at all GAL LOPING GER seemed to stand out in the grid and I vaguely remembered ‘Galloping Gertie’, albeit having no idea what it was. Thanks to Wikipedia (which comes to my aid from time to time), I read the whole story.

   I enjoyed solving the clues. I got temporarily stuck in the top left, but it yielded eventually.  I also liked the symmetrical placement of all the thematic items.

   Thanks to Chalicea and HolyGhost.

4. Perhaps my favourite Inquisitor so far.  Clues not too hard and theme cleverly deployed; I’d been told to look for a significant anniversary and found it without too much trouble.  Thought the splitting of GALLOPING GERTIE was very clever.

   I had 1ac and 5dn wrong (KARENIA/KYRENIA and AVA respectively), so I wouldn’t have won a prize, but it felt good none the less.

   My solution here

    

5. Thoroughly enjoyed this. I had 1D wrong (KATSUP was the only word I could find, but the clue couldn’t be forced to fit!) and googled Tacoma Puget and found the video of the bridge, which I remember seeing while I was at school. It was a pretty spectacular event. Wikipedia gave me the rest. I had never heard of Kitsap, Galloping Gertie or Tubby, but they made an excellent ending to a relatively easy grid fill.

   Lovely puzzle Chalicea, as always. Thanks to HG for the blog.

6. I meant to say (@3) that the thematic items were placed not just symmetrically but in a highly appropriate way, as HG and others have remarked.

   Guy (@4): you make a good point in your solution about PLONG not having that meaning (‘reckless gamble’) in Spenser’s time.  “Stink about lake poet’s dive” would have avoided that pitfall, with the bonus (possibly) that you can read ‘dive’ in more than one way.

7. JonS sums up this puzzle for me. A ludicrously quick gridfill followed by zero hints to the theme. Others may enjoy randomly scouring Google for possible thematic links but not this solver. Sorry, not for me at all.

8. Alan B (@6): Thanks.  Maybe a slightly pedantic point but I’m a bit of a stickler for accuracy in definitions, for reasons I’ve given elsewhere.  The other one I wasn’t quite sure about was ALEGGE = “allay” = “make light” (not “make light of”), but some of the crossword guides say that “of” can be a link word between definition and wordplay (though I don’t like it).

9. I’m a rookie by most peoples standards here, especially Bingy’s

   So I filled the grid which as mentioned was not difficult and waited fo the blog for which thanks,

   But i do remember the name of the dog that stole the FA cup!

10. @Cop – now that would be a theme!

11. Copmus @9: didn’t Pickles find  the FA Cup, not steal it?!

12. And I know the first dog into space.

    Some have more patience / tenacity than others; I decided from the title’s puzzle that the answers would be anagrams, and soon quit. I now see I ought to have noticed Puget + Sound, and maybe developed from there. My solving was hindered by entering ‘sap’ for 35d, which seemed the obvious answer to me. Wonder if misdirection intentional?

    Really elegant design here; thanks to both setter and blogger.

13. One solver’s ‘not too hard’ is another’s ‘ludicrously quick grid fill’, and I’m firmly in the latter camp. Although this puzzle contained lots of thematic material, there wasn’t much of a challenge for me. I am pleased that other solvers had a totally different experience and I wish it had been the same for me.

14. We were late starting this, but it was possibly our quickest ever Inquisitor solve. We’d never heard of KITSAP, but googling it made clear its connection to other answers whose significance we hadn’t previously recognised: PUGET, SOUND, and TACOMA.  Film of the bridge collapse is an apparently essential part of an engineering course, so that brought back memories. We didn’t know the story of poor TUBBY, but found it from Wikipedia, and then recognised the other thematic answers.

    Good fun, thanks Chalicea, and thanks too to HG for blogging.

15. Caran @13: ‘not too hard’ and ‘ludicrously quick grid fill’ could simply be two solvers’ ways of expressing the same opinion (the former being less pejorative) rather that two different opinions of the puzzle.

    bridgesong @11: Pickles found World Cup (Jules Rimet Trophy) not the FA Cup – and there has been a crossword with that as its theme.

16. HG, yes, I agree  with your remarks.  I was trying to be reasonably tactful, in that ‘not too hard’ seemed exceedingly generous  to me!

17. Caran @16: The words “not too hard” were mine (@4), and I meant exactly what I said.  It wasn’t a “ludicrously quick gridfill” for me – it was just about right.  This is only my 11th or 12th Inquisitor, and I’ve found some previous ones extremely tough going.  I didn’t even attempt the last one, and I’m struggling with the current one.

    Please don’t assume that everyone else here is of the same standard as you.  I think it’s good that there are reasonably accessible puzzles like this one.  How else are beginners going to get a foothold?

18. Thanks, Guy Barry. I am, of course, perfectly happy that you found the puzzle ‘not too hard’. I was struck by the juxtaposition of your comment and the ‘ludicrously quick gridfill’  one and the latter certainly resonated with me. As I said earlier, I am pleased that other solvers enjoyed this puzzle. I certainly don’t assume that everyone else here is of the same standard as me –  I’m pretty average when it comes to crossword-solving, and I enjoy seeing the cleverer solvers’ remarks on  puzzles that have been beyond my capabilities. Yes, it’s good that there are reasonably accessible puzzles like this one and great that these are appreciated.  It would also be good if solvers who found a puzzle a little disappointing felt they could say so.

19. @GuyBarry

    I think you are missing the point. My beef is not with the gridfill being easy per se. More, the contrast between the gridfill (let’s say ‘unusually easy compared with most weeks’) contrasted with the complete absence of any pointers towards the theme – unless you happen to have the knowledge of the place names stored in a readily accessible part of your brain – almost inevitably results in spending ages Googling words in the grid that may or may not be thematic. For me at least, the puzzle was thus very imbalanced.  Any puzzle which requires me to spend at least double the time after I have filled the grid using Google to complete an unsignposted endgame is not one for me.

20. @Bingybing: Sorry that you spent so long on it.   Maybe there should have been some indication that the puzzle related to a significant anniversary.

    The very fact that the gridfill was relatively simple suggested to me that some sort of lateral thinking would be required for the theme.  I didn’t have to google any words in the grid.  I looked up events of 7 November in previous years ending with “0” and found the Tacoma Narrows Bridge collapse fairly quickly.  I already had TACOMA in the grid and the rest followed from checking Wikipedia.  (It even helped me with KITSAP.)

     

21. The “not too hard/ludicrously easy” debate leads me to wonder whether it would be possible to give a “difficulty rating” when publishing the puzzles?  I realise that it wouldn’t be completely straightforward, because sometimes the gridfill is easy and the endgame difficult, and sometimes the other way round, and often a little relevant knowledge is a big help.  But there is often a consensus about the difficulty level, so it might be possible.  In principle, something like that might be a warning some weeks to a novice solver that they will face a struggle if they make a start, and other weeks might alert the expert solver in advance that they may come away feeling unsatisfied.

22. David O.

    This is exactly what “The Magpie” does. Its puzzles are ranked from A – not much harder than the daily Times to E – The expert  editors struggled. It is very useful, though of course there is sometimes slight disagreement.

23. I believe that the Inquisitor puzzles are ranked, to ensure an average difficulty over the month, though that rating is not published with the puzzle. Or did I imagine that? Personally I’m happy to take my chances week by week, as I do with a daily cryptic. Such things are often subjective, of course.

24. It often happens that when we have plenty of spare time on a Saturday the IQ is over and done with quite quickly and then when we need to get on with things we have a real stinker to solve. This one was in the former camp but no complaints as we do appreciate the range of difficulty.

    Having been in Puget Sound last Autumn the two words leapt out as did TACOMA which is where the airport is situated. The rest we had to google. The fact that the thematic entries were symmetrical helped too.

    Thanks to Chalicea and HolyGhost.

     

25. I really enjoyed this. It was straightforward but the clues were elegant. And the theme emerged organically (despite its less than organic nature)…reminding me of childhood visits to my grandparents in Scunthorpe and Hull and watching the UK’s version of Galloping Gertie thrust across the muddy Humber.

26. Enjoyed this and learned something too, as I so often do from similar puzzles.

27. I had the same solving experience as most others here. Quick grid fill, long grid stare. The collapse of the bridge is one of the many gaps in my general knowledge, so I got nowhere until I realised that TUBBY was the most likely candidate for removal due to it leaving real words behind. I then spent ages trying to get something from Tubby the Tuba until a lucky combination of search words turned up the theme.

    I’d normally grumble about the imbalance but the implementation of the theme was so elegant that I didn’t mind too much, and in any case there was a far worse imbalance of this sort in a recent Listener puzzle (if you’ve done it, you’ll know which one I mean).

28. Interesting debate.

    I really wouldn’t want the editor to indicate of the level of difficulty, though. Not knowing is part of the mystery. It’s not as if you don’t find out soon enough.

29. @28: “It’s not as if you don’t find out soon enough.”

    I never touched these things for years until lockdown, when I suddenly found myself with extra time on my hands.  The first one I attempted was back in May, which I found remarkably straightforward.  Enthused by my success, I plunged into the next one and almost had a nervous breakdown trying to solve it.  It was several months before I dared attempt another one.

    I really think there ought to be some sort of warning to novice solvers.  Some of these puzzles are not for the faint-hearted.

30. Thanks to those who have commented and especially, of course, to Holy Ghost. What can I say to Bingybing with his ‘ludicrously quick gridfill’ (which I do find crassly pejorative)? – I blog weekly and would never use such belittling language) – then what to me is his astonishingly gross ignorance of the theme. I set crosswords expecting solvers to have basic knowledge of significant events in history and culture and that includes major events in engineering. If he is so limited, he could easily have used Wikipedia instead of resorting to self-indulgent abuse. I was really happy that some knew of that spectacular film and that the crossword brought back memories.

31. @30: “I set crosswords expecting solvers to have basic knowledge of significant events in history and culture and that includes major events in engineering.”

    What arrogance.

    I solve crosswords expecting the setter to know that a form of a word not used since the 16th century can’t possibly have a definition that didn’t appear until the 19th century (and appears to be the wrong part of speech).

    The snobbery involved in these puzzles is one thing that puts me right off them.

32. Guy @31
    Addressing solely your point about the word PLONG (16th century), I would just say that it was your own findings on the history of PLONG and PLUNGE, as documented in the OED, that showed up the deficiency in Chambers, which is the primary reference here for setters and solvers. We must be forgiven for using that reference to set and solve what appears for all the world to be a valid clue. With the knowledge gained, that particular way of clueing PLONG would not, I suggest, be valid in future.

33. Your point is well made, Alan. Like most of us I have an area of specialist knowledge, and more than once I’ve been asked by an editor to modify the definition in a clue to make it more compliant with what Chambers says, despite my knowing that what I started with is technically correct. No doubt experts in other areas take a similar view of errors that I’ve unwittingly committed by adherence to Chambers. I think we simply have to allow some flexibility in these matters.

34. Guy Barry, @31. If you don’t like the puzzles stop doing them rather than slagging off our well loved and admired setters with “pejorative language”. I hope not to see such comments from you again.

35. Ifor @33. As an editor of another ilk, may I suggest that maybe it’s the editors who also need to be more flexible? If what you know is more correct, then in my line I would prefer to use what is more correct. Since I started doing these I’ve been occasionally annoyed by their reliance on a single reference that I don’t own — and not a particularly good reference from what I can discern in that it includes so many dated and occasionally incorrect references — but then I just shrug and say that’s the chosen catalog and maybe anarchy would result without it. But think of all the more comments on this site! As with people whose work I edit, I would encourage your push-back as part of a healthy give-and-take.

36. Ub – I should perhaps have added to “I’ve been asked…” the caveat that the outcome is sometimes that the original is left unchanged. Editors that I set for (and I’ve no doubt you’re the same) are above all accessible to reasoned argument, and I yield to no-one in my admiration for the work they do, often unseen. We must all remember that they approve what’s published but don’t have the luxury of being able to respond to comment, whether positive or negative.

37. I think it is really important to have a point of reference and stick by it. We come across a lot unfamiliar words, which makes the puzzles tough enough, but they would be even tougher if we couldn’t rely on the reference.

38. Yes, John Nick. I totally agree with you and the value of it is that we share with solvers the knowledge that everything in our grid will be confirmed in Chambers (whether we like the word and validate it or not). Actually, when attempting to fit a lot of thematic material into a grid, it can be very useful to ask Crossword Compiler to complete a grid with Chambers words and some will almost certainly be obscure or Spenserian or Scottish, say. I always try to clue those in a transparent way to be fair to solvers. I have far more of an issue with the ODQ which mis-spells Georgia O’Keeffe’s name (and I set an entire crossword based on the error as I hadn’t the wit to check in Wiki) and also, in the film lines, the first name of Admiral Yamamoto (of Tora Tora Tora fame). That has recently ruined a grid for me.

39. “I totally agree with you and the value of it is that we share with solvers the knowledge that everything in our grid will be confirmed in Chambers”

    Then why do you point-blank refuse to acknowledge that Chambers is the source?  I hate Chambers, I think it’s the most unreliable dictionary on the market.  Other publications admit that they use the dictionary.  The “i” doesn’t, yet expects all its solvers to use it.  Print it in the bloody paper, please.  Then I’ll know to avoid it in future.

    CIRRATE does not mean “cloudy”.  STUPRATE does not mean “ravage”.  VUM does not mean “to swear in Kansas”.  And PLONG does not mean “poet’s reckless gamble”.  If anyone at the “i” even spent a moment checking what the words actually meant, they wouldn’t publish this rubbish.

40. Guy Barry @39

    Apart from the fact that your assertions regarding definitions are wrong, according to both Chambers (which you seem to detest) and Collins, the tone of your comment is aggressive and not in keeping with the ethos of this site.

    This is not the first time that a comment of yours has caused me to wonder about your intention, so you are now under moderation (something that I very rarely invoke).

Comments are closed.