General Discussion

by

 

This page is for the discussion of general crossword related matters and other topics of interest.

Comments posted before 16/11/2023 can be found here.

This post is now closed. New comments can be posted here.

 

 

134 comments on “General Discussion”

  1. Can anyone help explain an answer to me? This is from the most recent New Statesman:

    Head girl’s tailored tunic (3, 4)

    The crossers I have:

    G_M _L_P

    I feel the answer must be GYM SLIP. I just can’t make it from the wordplay so I’m wondering what’s going on. Is it perhaps a cryptic def or an &lit?

    Any enlightenment would be welcome!

  3. @Roz Ah that’s a very good suggestion! In the print version it’s definitely as I wrote it, but perhaps it’s a misprint. Thanks for the reply!

  4. Head girl for G? If so, are they using AI? I’ve seen that for G in the Evening Standard and it smacks of database-generated clueing.

  5. Can anyone explain

    Carriage spring one can envisage the sound of (3)

    I think the answer is cue, as in envisage the sound of i.e. actor’s cue but I can’t get the carriage spring part…

  6. Possibly AIR , carriage=bearing=air. A spring is a Scottish dance tune. I am not convinced.

    There are Q-springs for suspension and chambers gives Q=cue as the spelling of the letter.

  10. Is anyone else having trouble today with the Independent site? For me it keeps ducking out/crashing (but really just ducking out). To plagiarise Donovan: ‘First there is a crossword, then there is no crossword, then (after much poking and hooshing) there is’. (Repeat until thoroughly fed up).

    I’m inclined to put it down to my refusal to accept cookies from this direction. My defense is that I subscribed to the daily for as long as I could and owe them nought.

  11. @10

    I just tried it in my browser of choice (Vivaldi) and it didn’t work.

    I then tried in Firefox and it did work.

    I then tried deleting specific cookies (in Vivaldi) and it still didn’t work.

    Are you able to try a different browser?

  12. Has something happened today resulting in the disappearance of the “link”, bold”, “italic” etc buttons in threads?

  20. Here’s a thing. A recent contribution to the blog lamented the continuing absence of a certain daily contributor who shall remain essexboy. There are many reasons why a contributor may terminate involvement – is there any procedure for pursuing the reasons why? Since I first plucked up the courage to squeak here (after a healthy lurk) many contributors have come, gone, and come again in some cases. It would be nice to know that contributors hadn’t had their contributions curtailed by, well, you know what.

    I may be over-stretching things and feel free to delete@Admin if so.

  21. @20

    I don’t think it’s an unreasonable question.

    There are, of course, many possible reasons. The inevitability for all of us can’t be discounted*.

    There have been, during my time at the helm, some people using fake addresses and multiple aliases. In most cases I’ve asked them to desist and they have complied. In other cases, they just pack their bags and go.

    There was even one recently who was posting as two people, one male and one female determined to spark controversy by arguing against him/herself.

    *If I’m aware of their passing, I will, of course, post an announcement.

  22. essexboy’s disappearance coincided with the site being down for a week – and I wondered if he’d just got out of the habit of coming here when he couldn’t.

    (I do know that someone I used to solve the Guardian crossword with when I was a student died last month, but, to my knowledge, he wasn’t engaging here. I’m not even certain if he was still solving crosswords.)

  24. As part of my work, I’ve been examining the limits of AI and large language models like ChatGPT. So, I decided to feed it some simple and more complex cryptic crossword clues to test its reasoning ability.

    It’s very reassuring to know that, at the moment at least, ChatGPT 4 fails with the most rudimentary cryptic parsing. So far, it hasn’t been able to solve one clue. In fact, given both the clue and the answer it has failed on every occasion to identify the parsing. I’d be happy to share some links to conversations as an example if anyone is interested.

    With AI encroaching on so many things, it’s nice to know that one of my favourite pastimes is safe for now!

  27. Thanks Tim C@25, I hadn’t seen that article. I’ve just tried Google Gemini Advanced with the same clue and it failed equally miserably.

    PostMark@26 – Brilliant! It had gone into full Samuel Beckett mode yesterday.

  28. Alphalpha@20. There may be many reasons for someone dropping out, and I also hope that essexboy has only dropped out of this forum and not everything else. We had some memorable late night exchanges of opinion. I know they were memorable because he would occasionally quote my previous opinions back to me in order to demolish my more recently avowed arguments. 🙂

    I have reduced my frequency of commenting, partly because I often do not get around to either starting or finishing the crossword at the time of publication. And even when I do finish on the same day, the comments are often crowded with people who repeat what others have said, having obviously not read through the comments before posting. This can make for a tedious read through by the time I get around to it. (I mention this not because I think I might be missed, but as a more general observation that the “community” on this website is not always as “together” as is sometimes supposed.)

  29. Hello! Where can I find the Inquisitor crosswords? I’ve poked around 15² but don’t see which paper publishes it. Is it an online puzzle?

  31. Thanks, Admin @30 – I’ve found the i’s crossword puzzles page, and it allows me to see previous puzzles. But it doesn’t show if it’s an Inquisitor, or the number, or the setter! Maybe at the weekend all will be revealed. 🙂

  32. The inclusion of St Aldhelm as the solution to one of today’s clues prompted me to reflect on the recurrent complaints from some participants here about crosswords that require relatively obscure general knowledge.

    It is my impression that most of these complaints come from younger solvers, and where they concern minor 20th-century celebrities (Norman Wisdom, Omar Sharif, Ladybird Johnson are all recent examples) I have some sympathy. The fact that Sharif played top-class bridge is something the over-fifties might well recall but is hardly of historical significance.

    However, I think something more systemic may be at work, which is that young people no longer expect to have a head full of random facts that are of no immediate utility. I recently had a conversation with a new Cambridge graduate, a young woman of conspicuous intelligence, in which it quickly became clear that her general knowledge about politics and history would have been regarded as hilariously poor by most of my contemporaries when I was sixteen. And it was clear that she was entirely unembarrassed by her ignorance.

    I can think of a couple of reasons for this. The education system, in the UK at least, seems focussed on teaching what will satisfy the examiners to the exclusion of exploring the ways less travelled or immediately relevant. And the internet means that everyone now has an encyclopaedia in their pocket, so why bother remembering when everything can be looked up?

    But doing a cryptic crossword requires one to make previously unconsidered associations, and one can’t make associations between things that aren’t already lurking in one’s head. I suspect this is what makes cryptics less accessible to the young. There’s no point opening the Wikipedia app if one has no idea what to look up. And speaking purely personally, I think it’s a pity in life, as well as in crossword puzzles. Happening upon associations between unconnected, even apparently inimical, areas of activity has enriched my life and, I suspect, has driven surprising discoveries in science, as well as the arts. That will happen less and less If we only bother to learn things we know will be useful.

    That’s my ramble. It may be right, or it may just be definitive proof that I’m getting very old.

  33. Interesting thoughts, Charles. I’m sure there’s some truth in what you say but it’s not just young people – there’s also a reluctance among some more senior solvers to acknowledge developments in culture and language since they left school, simply because they are things they are not personally interested in.

    What’s more, they will often regard more recent cultural references as being somehow unworthy of inclusion in a crossword. Emo appearing as a solution in a recent puzzle had one commenter going so far as to say they despised the word, which seemed to me an excessively strong and irrational reaction.

    I’m no fan of emo music but my own comment was that it made a nice change from Gilbert & Sullivan. I’m happy that there’s room for both in crosswordland.

  34. My now mid-thirties daughter, as a teenager, was contemporaneous with emo “tribes”, so it’s not a particularly new phenomenon.

    Widdersbel, I’m not sure how old your Cambridge graduate was, but I suspect she went through before the current iteration of the English and Welsh education system (it’s different in Scotland and NI), was fully phased in in 2017. The current National Curriculum was rewritten under the oversight of Michael Gove during his period as Education Secretary to a narrow remit including a lot of rote learning, including abstruse grammatical terms applied as per Latin, dates of kings and queens rather than historical themes, nor is Religious Education included in the National Curriculum, although it should be taught. This itereation started being introduced in 2013, so anyone who is now 24 will have encountered it throughout their secondary education, but not before.

    The teaching of English has had much criticism from the proponents of English as stultifying and failing to build imaginative writing or a love of reading (Michael Rosen has lots on his blog). The curriculum also downgraded music and the arts – they count very low in the Progress 8 measure* and alongside vocational qualifications, so all that knowledge became useless to achieve qualifications. Together with school budget cuts and the impact of Covid19, most young people over the last decade have had less and less access to music, theatre and the arts generally.

    Progress 8 is a measure of progress across secondary schools, to measure both pupil and school progress, like the old SATs, which considers maths, English, science, various academic qualifications. There are slots for vocational qualifications, but only 2 or 3 – and if you’re weighing up Design and Technology subjects versus arts, schools have to balance their budgets and teaching capacity.

  35. Widdersbel@33: I absolutely agree with you about the snobbery displayed by some older puzzlers with regard to popular culture references, as if knowing about Maria Callas was somehow intrinsically superior to knowing the lead singer in Nightwish. No doubt that, too, deters youthful solvers.

  36. I’ve just mentioned this article asking whether crossword puzzles are good for the brain (from the Guardian, 26 January 2024) on today’s Guardian cryptic from Harpo, and said I would bring it here.

    There are various studies that suggest that crossword solving does stave off dementia by a few years. The article goes on to say:
    “One reason experts suspect that crosswords might help maintain brain function is that they require complex thinking.

    “When we do a crossword puzzle, it’s a test of memory, knowledge and verbal ability,” says Devanand.

    Beyond that, Pillai says, “there is a hypothesis that [doing crossword puzzles] improves working memory or one’s ability to keep multiple things in mind at the same time.” This improved memory reserve, the thinking goes, could compensate for some of the losses in cognitive function caused by the onset of dementia.”

    The other thing the article suggests is needed for good brain health is community.

  37. I think lack of knowledge of politics , history etc in students today is mainly because they do not read newspapers , listen to the radio or watch “normal” TV , especially news and current affairs. I get my own general knowledge from reading the Guardian/Observer every day , listening to radio 3/4, reading lots of novels, many non-English authors and never, ever using the internet.
    I did not know ALDHELM today, when I did the Across I put in ALDWAIM , it works and sounded right . When I put in my Downs I found it had an E . Helm took a while to get , had to ditch the w from with. I never complain about “obscure” answers if the wordplay is fair. If I do not know something it is time I learnt.

  38. I do (up to three) crosswords every day because they’ve been an important part of my whole adult life, starting at University. Hearing in later life that they were good for warding off dementia was a bit of good news but irrelevant, really, because I needed no encouragement.

    My husband and I used to solve the Guardian crossword each day in lunchtimes in our respective workplaces and compared notes in the evening. The Saturday prize was something to look forward to, because we could do it together. When he died, after a brief retirement, I was bereft – until, seven years later, after soldiering on on my own, I serendipitously discovered 15², which has been my lifeline ever since – which is why I’m totally with the last line of Shanne’s post (thank you, Shanne, for initiating this thread):
    ‘The other thing the article suggests is needed for good brain health is community’,
    which is why I’m so grateful for what we have here. Thank you all.

  39. It surprises me that so many comments on the 15sq blogs are about “GK”. It doesn’t add much to the discussion to say I haven’t heard of XYZ. I’m delighted to be led to something new (to me) by the cluing. I wasn’t brought up with the classics, music, literature, art and mythology, and have hardly watched much television, so am not very familiar with more modern popular culture either, or sports. The closest to the Guardian-style setters in Australia does use a lot of popular culture and sports references, and I don’t fit into that club either. However, I was given a solid grounding in language and research skills, for which I’m grateful. I remember primary school, in what we call here ”public” or state education, where we were taught grammar and some Latin and Greek roots, and were set exercises in “parsing”.

    As well as not reading newspapers, as Roz mentioned @37, these days many people don’t have books in the home, let alone 32 volumes of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, or the various dictionaries. Nor do they use them in schools much any more, with digital technology. At the same time, I find it surprising how many commenters ask questions about words or GK, the answers to which are (mostly) accessible in online sources. Perhaps it reflects a generation where you ask a question, either in person, or on social media, rather than looking it up yourself first (although I admit to the occasional sin of omission myself), and ”speed solving”, expecting to complete a puzzle in the dedicated 30 minute lunch break, for example, before moving on to the next one. My only disappointment with crosswords which rely heavily on GK unfamiliar to me, is if I want to sit out in the sun or am away from home, without a computer or other references, having taken several days of printed puzzles with me.

    When I first found the fascinating world of cryptic crosswords I was struck by the number of references to cricket, the Bible, opera, the military etc, and imagined men in their smoking jackets reminiscing, but I think the ”culture” of cryptics is slowly evolving. Setters do have a challenge with the changing demographics and experiences of solvers, but what we seem to have in common is a love for words, a delight in puzzles, and, I would say, a sense of humour (mostly).

    ( In my last year of employment I was required to undergo a cognitive test on which I performed well above average for all age groups, not just my own at 70. The psychologist and occupational physician both credited my hobby of cryptic crosswords for staving off dementia. They didn’t counsel me on what to do if I was in a position of not being able to feed my ”addiction”. 🙂 )

    Eileen, I see you’ve posted in the meantime, but in the remaining minute or so I can’t go back and acknowledge your contribution or check mine.

  40. Eileen @38, I totally agree with your comment about ”community” and your blogs always exemplify that. Thank you.

  41. paddymelon @39 – this is the downside of the Edit function that I was trying to explain a week or so ago: it’s frustrating to watch one’s comment being overtaken during the three minutes’ grace!

  42. Yes, Eileen @41, but it’s also an encouragement not to enter such long posts, as I did. Your needs are different though.

  43. GK is an important part of cryptic crosswords. If the reference is something I don’t know, I’ll have fun taking a punt on the solution. Whether I’m right or wrong, I’ll have learned something and be grateful to the setter for that.
    I think Charles above is probably right about Millennials and Generation Z being less inquisitive about facts for their own sake, but then again there’s another crossword forum where commenters in their seventies and eighties constantly moan about non-contemporary GK and are seemingly happy to display their ignorance and blame the setter. Not having heard of the film ‘Oh, Mr Porter!’ was a recent complaint. (Again, the objections were not from the forum’s recent school-leavers!)
    Current trends and neologisms should definitely be encouraged, but I don’t see why old literature and films and classical references should ever be retired.
    Re dementia, I’m not at all convinced that cryptic crosswords delay or prevent it, but they’re obviously good for the brain apart from that.

  44. Such a high-quality discussion going on here!
    I have no complaints at all with any setter, UK-based GK, references to events and people of 10000 BCE or things and people of 2024 CE. The only condition is that my outsourced memory should be connected to me. Learning something new daily from these setters, bloggers and commenters (& God’s E-avatar. Just saying. I am agnostic!).
    The younger people are different in many respects and it’s a joy to watch them do so many things differently than what we (the older ones) did/do. We learn a great deal from them.

    I have started doing one thing before posting anything long. Control X the whole draft, check if there is any post that might come after my typing started, add to the draft as needed and then Control V. Well. I forget this at times.

  45. Well, as long as I’m able to complete cryptics today as swiftly as I could yesterday (though I never rush my favourite solvers, irrespective of difficulty) I at least know that Alzheimer’s hasn’t got me yet! Unless, and until, that changes, I have no reason to give dementia a second thought!

    (I wonder what happened to hedgehoggy? We used to give him a hard time, deservedly as I recall?)

  46. The complaints about O and A levels being obsolete in the Harpo blog made me wonder how times may have changed in relation to GK. RE was the only O level I failed which is a source of amusement these days given the contents of my bookshelves. At A level one had to specialise in arts or sciences (maths, further maths and physics for me). One fellow pupil wanted to do maths, further maths and Latin but was denied. I mention this because everyone had to do a General Knowledge A level. There were no related classes and it relied on what you’d learned out of school, but at least it was a nod to hinting that there was more out there.
    I didn’t get a great mark (C or D from memory) but I’ve gained a lot of GK over the years from reading, viewing, listening and doing crosswords (more so now I’m retired). In Australia, the breadth of education at the A level equivalent seems wider. I wonder what the educational system at that level is like in the UK now.
    I think comments about modern technology above are pertinent. My offspring, now not so young, seem surprised at times at the GK I come out with, mainly when doing crosswords.
    I’m certainly happy for old or new GK that I don’t know being used in crosswords and welcome it so that I can learn something new. It’s so easy to check things on t’internet these days. Not like the 1980s in the UK when I spent a few work lunchtimes down the library trying to solve The Listener.

    KVa @44, I suspect that when you refresh the page, what you’ve typed in the box appears/remains on the refreshed page. You can safely check by using ctrl-C rather than ctrl-X

  47. Admitting publicly to not knowing a GK fact can be either humiliating (if it turns out to be something that any fule kno) or comforting, if you are in good and numerous company. I don’t find it annoying, though I think I would in crosswords like the Azed where it is accepted that many solutions will need a bit of research.

    MichaelR@43: I think some popular culture references do reach and pass their set-by date. Once upon a time actor=TREE was just as common in clues as singer=CHER or movie=ET are now, and for the same reason: they are a useful way to clue a common set of letters. But the reference is now long outdated. Classics are a different matter. It was interesting to see the reaction to THE ALCHEMIST being clued as a “book” recently: it’s the title of both a Ben Jonson play and a recent popular novel. I suspect that one of those references may date, but the other won’t.

  48. Tim C@46.
    Thanks for your response.
    I just checked. The typed message disappears when I refresh the page.
    Maybe it’s browser-dependent? I use Chrome.

  49. I’m pretty sure I’ve done it on Firefox, but maybe it was also a different forum KVa @48. Always safest to ctrll-C or ctrl-X first.

    gladys @47, how many people reading “any fule kno” will immediately think Nigel Molesworth, or Deep Purple?

  51. TimC@49: Molesworth in my case. Don’t know a Deep Purple reference. Alas, poor Molesworth will eventually pass his recognise-by date.

  53. Eileen @41: I think (not absolutely sure) that even with the new edit feature, your comment will appear as soon as you post it, ie it doesn’t remain in limbo for the three minutes. So it shouldn’t get overtaken by other comments. Perhaps kenmac could confirm?

  54. … I posted the above at 4:45, on my desktop computer, and it appeared straight away at that time, with the edit option ticking down. I also checked on my phone and it appeared simultaneously there, without the edit option showing.

  55. Lord Jim@53: That’s what I was told when I asked the question: your original comment appears as soon as you create it, and any changes appear as soon as you press Save. You do not have to wait three minutes before saving your changes.

  57. Gladys @51: those who do know Molesworth share a delight and a secret. I recently worked with someone who was aware of the book and we both found ourselves referring to a particularly sunny and effervescent colleague as Fotherington-Tomas, a reference nobody else understood. ‘Hello clouds. Hello sky’ …

  58. Follow-up, of sorts, on the New Yorker article I posted a couple of weeks ago, which mentioned Will Shortz of the New York Times. The Times has a news article about his health, which includes this interesting tidbit:
    Mr. Shortz went on to self-design a degree at Indiana University in enigmatology — the scientific study of puzzles as it is related to semiotics, culture and cognition.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/03/arts/will-shortz-stroke-nyt-puzzles.html
    I almost attended IU, but would have studied history.

  60. Martyn@59.
    I share your puzzlement especially as we can usually obtain full bio details easily. Seems to be a pretty universal custom. Is Martyn your real name?

  61. Pure tradition I think Martyn @59, starting with Torquemada (Edward Powys Mathers) in the 1920s, the pioneer of cryptic crosswords.

  62. Torquemada , Ximenes , Azed ( Deza ) all Spanish Inquisitors and only 3 setters for the same puzzle , nearly a 100 years . Afrit ( demon ) very early for the Listener.
    Names are fairly recent for the Guardian and still not used by some publications.
    I often fold my Guardian so I cannot see the name and try to guess who it is.
    I do not want to know any biographical details, the setter is my enemy , that is enough.

  63. Jolly Swagman @63 – really good to see your name again!

    I drop into this thread only sporadically and so it was fortuitous that I did so today, almost exactly twenty four hours after your post.
    Your citing of the poem immediately rang bells and it was a chastening experience to revisit my blog of twelve and a half years ago! https://www.fifteensquared.net/2011/09/24/guardian-prize-25430-araucaria/
    Thank you for the reminder.

    (For the record, it was over a year later that Araucaria shared the news of his cancer https://www.fifteensquared.net/2013/01/11/guardian-cryptic-n-25842-by-araucaria/ ) )

  65. Hello, fellow Cruciverbalists.
    I am new to the site, not new to crosswording… Though, I wish I’d stuck at it in my 20s, only really got going in my 30s, and really committed to it in my 40s… Feels like some wasted decades.
    I do the Independent and the Guardian cryptics daily, and I do ones from other papers out of compendium books.
    I’ve long set myself a challenge of doing a Times cryptic in under 30 minutes. Yesterday, I did what would have been the tie-breaker in the 1998 Times Crossword Championship in 34 minutes (puzzle 64 in Times Big Book of Cryptic Crosswords, volume 2). I was 2 clues off finishing in 30 minutes.
    So a near miss.

    Considered whether that was a time worth considering entering the Competition with, and was then humbled to see under 15 minutes is a good time.

    Then further humbled by almost blanking on the next puzzle, getting only 4 clues solved in about 20 minutes.

    All good fun.

  66. A question about the grammar of linkages from a solver perspective. When I learned to set, on an amateur site, it was drummed into me that, if I was going to use a link word, the correct grammar was ‘WP for definition’ or ‘definition from/of WP’. I do the three main GIF puzzles every day and I frequently encounter ‘WP from/of definition’ and ‘definition for WP’. In addition to linkers including ‘so’, ‘but’ and ‘on’. Is it the case that most solvers really aren’t that bothered by such things and that, so long as WP can be parsed and a definition can be spotted, what connects them does not matter? Genuinely curious – though not particularly keen on diverging from the rules/conventions in my own case.

  67. MrPostMark@67 interesting points , I had a look at the Azed while waiting for the rain to stop.
    You do not need to do it, it is just the blog from Sunday. Very few actual link words.
    1Ac, 21D FOR used “correctly” . 11Ac , 10D IN used just to link . 33AC,5D AND used neutrally . 9D MAKING used “correctly” .
    Personally I would prefer no link words at all but I do not “read” the clues.
    I suspect that most people are not bothered by them , used “correctly” or otherwise.
    [ I have friends on Stamp alert , they will even print it for me , so looking forward to the next one. ]

  69. PostMark @67: for what it’s worth this is what Brian Greer (Brendan) has to say in his book “How to do the Times Crossword” (of which he used to be editor):

    Commonly used joining words include “in”, “as”, “for”, “from”. Note that the first pair are bidirectional, by which I mean that the definition and the secondary indication that they link may come in either order. By contrast, “for” and “from” should only be used in one direction, thus:

    [Secondary indication] for [definition]
    [Definition] from [secondary indication]

    So that’s the Times position. I suppose it is more natural to say that you get the definition from the wordplay rather than vice versa. But couldn’t you argue that you could derive the wordplay from the definition? And that sometimes that is what we actually do in solving? At the end of the day I guess it comes down to what seems fair in a particular clue.

  70. PostMark @67, Don Manly in the Chambers Crossword Manual has this to say…
    “If you can spot linkwords in the middle of a clue, you can often work out more easily what is the definition and what is the subsidiary indication. The little word ‘in’ is often used as a link since it means ‘consisting of’ or ‘contained in’ so you may often find clues that are ‘S in D’ or ‘D in S”. ‘For’ is another linkword, so expect ‘S for D’ (though some do not like ‘D for S’). Sometimes you will find ‘S gives D’, ‘S produces D’ or ‘D from S’ and ‘D is shown by S’. The construction ‘D of S’ is generally acceptable but ‘S of D seems more dubious (expect to see it though).
    So he, for one, is not dogmatic (“some do not like”, “seems more dubious”).
    I have to say it’s not been something I would be dogmatic about, although I’ve been pulled up on it a few times I think on MyC. I like Lord Jim’s point that in solving we do use the direction ‘wordplay from definition’ at times.
    You could always write every clue as an &lit, then you won’t have to worry about it!!! 😉

  71. Thanks Roz, Lord Jim and Tim C for your comments. Tim – I don’t have the skills to produce a puzzle full of &lits! However, if you are interested in seeing such a thing, I would commend to you this episode of Cracking the Cryptic. I may have given away what is entailed – but it does become obvious pretty quickly. Two very interesting solves.

  72. Thanks PostMark @72, that’s impressive. My comment was tongue in cheek, hence the !!! 😉 but I should have guessed somebody must have done it.

  73. The first clue in today’s Picaroon in the Guardian is:

    Defensive work from a side playing China at first (8)

    Picaroon has done this in the orthodox way, but it seems to me that it would work equally well with “for” instead of “from”. That is, the answer gives you the component parts as well as the component parts giving you the answer.

    So like Tim C, personally I wouldn’t be dogmatic about this. It depends what seems to work on a clue by clue basis.

  74. Lord Jim @74, for me that Picaroon clue could mean the same thing with for instead of from only if you’re thinking of it as something similar to a mathematical statement – wordplay = definition being the same as definition = wordplay. It works on paper, but doesn’t allow for cryptic clues (especially of that type) being a game where the setter is trying to lead you to the definition specifically. That’s why I broadly agree with Brian Greer/Brendan that it should be wordplay for definition – the setter is using ‘for’ as a pointer.

  75. 67 to 75
    Thanks everyone for your great thoughts.
    Tim C@71
    Is this manual available online? How do I access it/buy it?

    PS: I treat each clue more like a mathematical equation and attempt to solve it.
    After I solve and parse it, I read the clue to enjoy the surface and look for
    additional layers.

  78. Twmbarlwm @75: a fair point, and you’ve got me wavering a bit. Maybe I would change my comment from “it would work equally well” to “it would work (though perhaps not quite so well)” 🙂

    KVa: I echo PostMark’s recommendation of the Chambers Crossword Manual – I’ve got both the first and fifth editions. If you’re going to get just one crossword guide, that would be it.

  79. KVa @76 I endorse PostMark and Lord Jim’s comments. It’s the sort of book that I wouldn’t think of buying as an ebook. I don’t think it’s available as one. Useful for solvers but especially useful for setters which is why I got a copy when I started setting.

  80. Thanks Lord Jim and Tim C!
    I will certainly buy a hardcover one even if a Kindle version is available (probably it isn’t there, as you said). My order on Amazon UK wasn’t going through for some reason (will try again) and it is not available in any online stores in India.

  81. KVa @81 Save your money – Ximenes terminology seems to have
    become accepted but not deservedly so – X and the Art was not the first nor
    the most authoritative book on cluemanship – one by Barnard (D St P and other stylings)
    came out a lot earlier and is packed with fine examples. His book (which I have) is
    much harder to get hold of. Barnard was the leading setter for the Telegraph, which rivalled The Guardian for readership.

    At the time taking the Telegraph defined one as a died-in-the-wool Tory but it was still possible for habitual Tory voters
    to read The Guardian and many did – if only for the crosswords.

    The Guardian (originally The Manchester Guardian) had the famous setters
    Araucaria and Bunthorne, both of whom were closer to Barnard than to Ximenes,

    Ximenes sought to differ by eschewing word-splitting even though most papers today
    (including The Guardian) allow it and X had used it himself (INCREASES = IN CREASES) although
    not very often. The TImes seems to follow X to this day, most of the other papers
    (including The Guardian) are closer to Barnard.

    It’s only in recent years that The Guardian has been seen as a left-wing newspaper.
    In the past it was more pluralistic, which distinguished it from more solidly establishment titles.
    Nowadays papers (in desperation as their readerships and advertising revenues fall)
    seem to have identified a political constituency which they hope will be loyal to them

    The Guardian has pretty much become a woke echo chamber – certainly not pluralistic, as
    it once was. Leading crossword setters seem to work across many papers despite their
    differing political allegiances – and (for now) get away with it. We are told that Michael Foot’s
    main read was The Telegraph – although that was when Bill Deedes was editor – apparently
    despite its being essentially the Tory Party at breakfast (the C of E was the Tory party at prayer)
    there was reputedly a clear distinction between news and opinion.

    The greatest setter of all time was indisputably Araucaria even
    though, aside from his setting, he was quite serious about his religious work
    and he had an amazing war record.

    Even Bunthorne said so: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS8z4V5ICnU
    Sadly (or maybe not so sadly – it seems to be a habit of the also rans) he never wrote
    about the theory of setting.

    He was renowned for his wit as well as his left-wing views.

    He is wrongly attributed with the tag “LIbertarian” whereas he rarely broke
    “the rules” – mainly when it was unavoidable in his determination to share a witticisn
    with the rest of us. It is inevitable in any artform that those who wish to be regarded as
    distinctive seek recognition through other means – theorising about the obvious being
    one of them – the better practitioners are known by their work alone.

    One of the most amazing things about this game is that the early practitioners did
    it all “by hand”(ie without the aid of software) – not only that but, due to the l
    imitations of printing technology) they often built their puzzles on pre-supplied
    grids (the gridfill being one of the most time-consuming jobs in the production
    of a puzzle – now more or less automated thanks to the latest software).

    They were a rare breed and we owe them a lot.

  82. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS8z4V5ICnU

    KVa @81 Save your money – Ximenes terminology seems to have
    become accepted but not deservedly so – X and the Art was not the first nor
    the most authoritative book on cluemanship – one by Barnard (D St P and other stylings)
    came out a lot earlier and is packed with fine examples. His book (which I have) is
    much harder to get hold of. Barnard was the leading setter for the Telegraph, which rivalled The Guardian for readership.

    At the time taking the Telegraph defined one as a died-in-the-wool Tory but it was still possible for habitual Tory voters
    to read The Guardian and many did – if only for the crosswords.

    The Guardian (originally The Manchester Guardian) had the famous setters
    Araucaria and Bunthorne, both of whom were closer to Barnard than to Ximenes,

    Ximenes sought to differ by eschewing word-splitting even though most papers today
    (including The Guardian) allow it and X had used it himself (INCREASES = IN CREASES) although
    not very often. The TImes seems to follow X to this day, most of the other papers
    (including The Guardian) are closer to Barnard.

    It’s only in recent years that The Guardian has been seen as a left-wing newspaper.
    In the past it was more pluralistic, which distinguished it from more solidly establishment titles.
    Nowadays papers (in desperation as their readerships and advertising revenues fall)
    seem to have identified a political constituency which they hope will be loyal to them

    The Guardian is certainly not pluralistic any more having a clearly defined angle on many things
    Leading crossword setters seem to work across many papers despite their
    differing political allegiances – and (for now) get away with it. We are told that Michael Foot’s
    main read was The Telegraph – although that was when Bill Deedes was editor – apparently
    despite its being essentially the Tory Party at breakfast (the C of E was the Tory party at prayer)
    there was reputedly a clear distinction between news and opinion.

    The greatest setter of all time was indisputably Araucaria even
    though, aside from his setting, he was quite serious about his religious work
    and he had an amazing war record.

    Even Bunthorne said so: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS8z4V5ICnU
    Sadly (or maybe not so sadly – it seems to be a habit of the also rans) he never wrote
    about the theory of setting.

    He was renowned for his wit as well as his left-wing views.

    He is wrongly attributed with the tag “LIbertarian” whereas he rarely broke
    “the rules” – mainly when it was unavoidable in his determination to share a witticisn
    with the rest of us. It is inevitable in any artform that those who wish to be regarded as
    distinctive seek recognition through other means – theorising about the obvious being
    one of them – the better practitioners are known by their work alone.

    One of the most amazing things about this game is that the early practitioners did
    it all “by hand”(ie without the aid of software) – not only that but, due to the l
    imitations of printing technology) they often built their puzzles on pre-supplied
    grids (the gridfill being one of the most time-consuming jobs in the production
    of a puzzle – now more or less automated thanks to the latest software).

    They were a rare breed and we owe them a lot.

  84. Do setters’ personalities change with their personas in different newspapers? I think Mudd is often easier than Paul, Serpent easier than either Basilisk or Jack and some believe Pangakupu harder than Phi (though he denied it). Picaroon doesn’t seem to vary much in difficulty, though he saves his (dreary for Roz) themes for the Guardian.

  85. Peter@84, I only do the Guardian and FT for obvious reasons. Mudd is the main example, for the FT very standard and fairly easy puzzles every time. Paul in the Guardian very variable, takes far more liberties and can be very tricky. I agree Jack/Basilisk very similar and very welcome in the Guardian . Same for Philistine/Goliath. Perhaps Pasquale generally a bit trickier than Bradman . Harpo/Monk not seen enough yet .
    IO seems to be once a month in the FT , similar to Enigmatist who seems to have stopped in the Guardian, a shame as the last really hard setter.
    Themes become dreary with repitition , tools hidden in answers , how mant times ?

  86. [The numbering on here has gone a bit awry. It seems to be because there was a comment from Jolly Swagman @63 (acknowledged by Eileen @ what is now 63) and that has been removed. I don’t know why? But it means that a lot of the subsequent references to comment numbers are now incorrect.]

  87. Roz et al, do you ever do puzzles in the Telegraph? They’re not free, but there are occasionally very cheap offers for subscribing to the Puzzles section only.
    Anyway, Enigmatist sets the Telegraph Toughie as Elgar every other Friday, always a superb challenge. Picaroon sets a fortnightly Toughie as Robyn, as well as regular back-page puzzles anonymously, and Paul/Mudd sets the Sunday cryptic and some Toughies as Dada.
    (They all set for The Times too.)

  89. ^^ Jolly Swagman, hear! hear!
    As far as I can see, there are only two available copies of the Guardian’s collection of Bunthorne crosswords left online. Very entertaining and challenging puzzles, not dissimilar to Araucaria’s in some respects, but definitely sui generis, as they say in Manchester.
    Bunthorne/Bob Smithies used to work alongside the likes of Tony Wilson on Granada Reports, of course. An amusing short piece by another presenter colleague here, mainly about Tony Wilson, but which features Bob S. https://heswall.nub.news/news/local-news/a-lasting-memory-of-anthony-h-wilson-145760

  90. I see the Guardian puzzles app will close on 30 April. I assume this will mean that personal history will be lost and the only way to access the full range of Guardian puzzles in future will be through a newspaper subscription. This will be very disappointing to many.

    From what I understand they are offering app users 3 months free access to the newspaper sub once the app closes but after that it will cost £10 per month. The puzzles app used to cost about £30 per year. I wonder if free Guardian ‘online’ puzzles will also be discontinued at some point.

  91. KVa @83: glad to hear it. I hope you’re not put off by the comment from Jolly Swagman, who has very strongly held anti-Ximenean views which he used to express a few years ago in pretty blunt terms. (If you want a flavour see comment 29 on Paul 27,055.)

    Jolly Swagman @81 and 82: as usual I think you’re being very unfair to Don Manley. I’m far from being a hard-line Ximenean, but I think DM’s book is an excellent guide to the main principles of cryptic crosswords. He makes it quite clear that while he’s a follower of Ximenes, there are setters who are not. In his selection of crosswords he includes puzzles by Araucaria – a great Alphabetical Jigsaw in the first edition, and one from the Church Times in the fifth edition which he describes as “magnificent”.

    It’s true that he concentrates on the Torquemada / Afrit / Ximenes line of setters rather than the Guardian, but the latter is not his particular interest. If anyone wants to read about the history of Guardian setters, try Sandy Balfour’s “A Clue to Our Lives”.

    D St P Barnard’s “Anatomy of the Crossword”, which you’re so keen on, is of some historical interest, and has some interesting passages, but would really be of hardly any use to solvers today, largely because of the extraordinary terminology that he adopted, which unsurprisingly didn’t catch on at all. Try this: “Primitive Definition (or Cryptic Definition for that matter) thus enjoys five forms: Synonymic, Antonymic, Paraphrastic, Generic, and Exemplary” (page 51). It culminates in the final chapter with the amazing “Allusive Dilemmatic Amphibological Concomitant Parabole”!

  92. I cut my solving and setting teeth on Alec Robins’s and Don Manley’s books, and I’m much more comfortable with Ximenean principles, but I do admire the erudite individualism of Bunthorne and Araucaria in their puzzles. I hadn’t realised Swagman was that vehement about Don Manley’s tenets. The first time I’ve seen his excellent book criticized, in fact.

  94. Lord Jim@91
    My order was placed after reading Jolly’s comment (no offence meant to Jolly).
    It will take another 3 weeks to reach me but what’s the hurry?

  95. Can someone tell me how to get access to the inquisitor crossword? The independent has an offer on subscription at the moment so I thought I’d subscribe to get a look at the crossword. But I can’t find it. The website and app both acknowledge that I am a subscriber.

  96. Brian @95 : The Inquisitor is published in the paper edition of the i Newspaper each Saturday, and has been since The Independent went digital only, a few years back. There is not an electronic version of Inquisitor* (which is why it migrated from the Independent a number of years ago) so it may not appear on the app. I subscribe and read on my laptop, where I see an image of each page of the i – and the electronic versions of many puzzles other than Inquisitor are available. I am in process of resubscribing at present and I will probably end up telephoning and renewing by credit card at just under £60/year.

    * There are some grids (hexagonal cells or strange shapes) which don’t fit well in electronic versions; and sometimes we have been asked to mutilate the final grid before submission in the days when you could send in a completed grid for a chance to win a prize.

  98. Ok. Guardian Cryptic 1st April.

    5a – Comes into home with heartless, reclusive people (8)

    How do you read this clue? Currently gibberish to me.

    (As well as the whole NE corner to be honest. AND 5d. There are no words in the clue)

  99. Steffen@98
    I guess you are asking for some hints.
    And I assume you don’t know the solution yet.
    You can think of a word for reclusive people. Heartless: You know what to do. Home: You have seen
    what to replace it with. ‘Comes into’: This is the def, but the word may not click straight away. The
    wordplay should help you get there.

    5D is better ignored for now. Not to discourage you. It’s a bit tricky.

  100. Steffen try a few Downs first in that corner .
    6D Tailor ( make an anagram of ) Swift ,led by prince . In crosswords often prince=HAL , definition at the end.
    7D Tory = definition . Blair finally = ? is = IS greeting = ?? just 2 letters .
    8D Trends = def ….new=N boring means N is inside scene fixed with edit so anagram sceneedit with N inside.

  102. G 29334
    From my comment@58

    I have been describing such clues in three different ways:
    1. &lit (where the complete clue is the def and also every word of the clue is utilised in (required for) the wordplay.
    Just as you have explained. I am a little finicky about & lit and so are many bloggers and commenters.
    2. CAD: Clue-as-def only to say that the entire clue works as the def but it’s not an &lit (there are words in the clue not utilised in the wordplay). This part of my understanding seems flawed. I intend to mention ‘CAD, but not & lit’ henceforth instead of just mentioning ‘CAD’. 🙂
    3. Extended Def: My view as mentioned @53 (And ‘Extended Def’ when the clue reads like a description associated
    with the solution rather than defining the solution).
    I am somewhat averse to using the description ‘semi &lit’ as of date.
    —————————————————————————————————————————–
    Adding today (April 3):
    Sometimes ‘&littish’ is used instead of ‘semi &lit’ (I don’t find these expressions cool. Call me whimsical).
    Borrowing from ‘attempted yorker’ in cricket, we may even call it ‘attempted &lit’ but that will not be acceptable, I am sure.
    Some bloggers mean &lit when they say CAD. I am sure that is authentic. Otherwise, they wouldn’t be using it.

    Any thoughts to bring clarity to the matter are welcome. Of course, as a rule, clarity is achieved only by adding to the confusion temporarily. 🙂

  103. Hi Kva. I fear your query of today might be prompted by exchanges on yesterday’s Indy. I know I was responsible for using ‘&littish’ in connection with LOURDES and you are correct in observing it was an extended def – as per your initial comment. ‘…pilgrims here’ is not part of the WP but a def so it cannot be an &lit. And a clue either is or is not an &lit so ‘&littish’ is not really a valid term. INDONESIAN and AT SEA, I believe, had a stronger case for qualifying as &lits. I am rarely 100% confident in claiming &lit. It’s rather the Holy Grail of setting and solvers are quick to dispute/disprove the claim if they can see a flaw.

  104. Postmark@103
    I am not capable of setting a single clue or writing a fourth of a blog for a Quiptic.
    You and many other experts here have enlightened me a lot and continue to do so.
    Therefore, my intention is certainly not to prove anyone wrong.

    I want to understand the classification properly. &lit seems quite clear. The other
    expressions are used in varying contexts by experts. I thought I should seek some
    clarity on this matter from you all.

    PS: INDONESIAN and AT SEA both were simply brilliant (&littish with the limit tending to 100%).

  105. I can’t stand the term &lit – it’s unhelpful jargon. It’s useful for the likes of Azed as shorthand notation to save space when explaining clues in the Azed slip, but the slip is aimed at an audience of advanced solvers who can be assumed to be familiar with the jargon.

    I don’t see much use for essentially meaningless terms like semi-&lit or &littish either.

    I feel fifteensquared bloggers should strive to write in plain English as far as possible. Being concise is good but not when it’s at the expense of clarity.

    Other opinions are available. 🙂

  106. Widdersbel: I agree that “&lit” is not very helpful if you haven’t come across it before. Even Ximenes, who invented the term , said: “… it calls for a good deal of explanation, since the name I have given it for the sake of brevity is not self-explanatory and has from time to time caused misunderstanding among my solver-competitors”. (Why didn’t he come up with a better name then?!)

    But as the point of the blogs on this site is to explain how clues work, it is useful to have some sort of shorthand way of referring to clues of this type. It was precisely because of the obscurity of “&lit” that Pierre came up with CAD or “clue as definition”. NB a CAD is not meant to be a different sort of clue from an &lit (or semi &lit) – it’s an alternative terminology.

    On the plus side, “clue as definition” is fairly easily understandable. But one possible drawback is that it doesn’t distinguish between an &lit (where the entire clue is both the definition and the wordplay) and a semi &lit (where the entire clue can still be seen as the definition, but contains additional word(s) – a sort of mini-definition – as well as the wordplay). CAD covers both of these.

    And KVa @102, I’m not keen on “attempted &lit”! I don’t think a semi &lit should be seen as a failed &lit – it’s a valid clue-type in its own right. Some of my all-time favourite clues have been of this sort, such as the lovely “Song composed to win lady’s heart (8)” for SERENADE (Qaos, Guardian 27,949).

  107. Lord Jim – Yes, the purpose of the site is to explain how clues work. That’s exactly why jargon is best avoided – it is distracting and obfuscatory. If you look at today’s Goliath, for example, there are several clues with constructions that are not easily explained by simply sticking a label on them. And even an experienced blogger like Quirister had trouble categorising 22a in today’s Eccles.

  108. Wouldn’t CAD/clue as definition also describe cryptic definitions as well?

    ‘&lit’ is a funny term, but it’s just as valid as its suggested alternatives, and surely easy enough to understand when it’s explained to a novice as short for ‘and literally so’. The term makes no difference to any difficulty in precisely categorizing a clue, and I can recall finding the term intriguing when I was a complete novice, not offputting at all.

    By the way, if I need to explain an &lit to a learner, I always choose the Azed competition clue for TOERAG from Robert Teuton (now one of the Sunday Times Mephisto setters) here: http://www.andlit.org.uk/azed/slip.php?comp_no=2556 😀
    [Note the website’s name!]

  109. Message to self:
    S. As expected the entropy is increasing! 😊

    Lord Jim@106
    Attempted &lit was my attempted joke! Sorry. 😄

  110. I don’t mind “&lit” – if that kind of construction must be defined and named, &lit is as good as any. But I agree with widdersbel@107: the object of the exercise is to explain how the clue works, and as long as that is done, precise hair-splitting classification is of secondary importance.

  111. precise hair-splitting classification
    Almost anything about solving a crossword puzzle could be termed as hair-splitting.
    No problems if someone sees the classification as not useful.

    However, if a blogger classifies a clue as CAD or semi &lit or something else, it should mean the same to all. Currently, one classification carries different senses across blogs. CAD is &lit to some but not to some others. Semi &lit is in muddy waters. If no classification is mentioned but clues are just explained, then also no probs.

  112. Is semi &lit in Muddy Waters? –

    I woke up this mornin’, crossword puzzle on my mind
    Yes I woke up this mornin’, crossword puzzle on my mind,
    You know the hardest bit
    Was that semi &lit,
    Setter treat me so unkind…

  113. Michael R – love that clue for TOERAG! 🙂

    KVa – One of the strengths of fifteensquared is the different styles and approaches of different bloggers. I don’t think enforced consistency would be a good thing. As long as bloggers explain what they mean by the terms they use, lack of consensus shouldn’t be a problem.

    Lord Jim – lol!

  115. The Guardian today has a new “Quick Cryptic Crossword” set by Carpathian , only small 11X11 and a helpful description of the tricks used. I suspect it is much easier than the Quiptic which I never see because it is online only. I think it would be useful for newer solvers to give them a good idea of all the basics.

  116. I came here to flag the Quick Cryptic in today’s Guardian – it is available electronically on the paper app. It’s got lots of hints and suggestions on how to solve (and took me about a third of the time of a usual Quiptic.)

    [I am entirely unsurprised by the Rob Teuton clue, linked above, from the uni crosswords he set back in the day. I had wondered what had happened to him.]

  117. I thought the Quick Cryptic was very precisely clued and a good innovation for new solvers.

    I also note that the Quiptic is moving to Sundays.

  118. I think it is a really good idea and in the right place. I know lots pf people who just do the Quick Crossword, it is just underneath, they may see it and have a go and become interested. The Guardian could advertise the Quiptic in the same place , tell people when and where to find it.

  119. Independent puzzles – help!

    I’ve just noticed that I can’t access any Indy crossword more than two days old. The website simply greys out all the puzzles prior to then with the caption “no score for older puzzles”.

    Is this a change in the Indy site? I don’t recall this happening before.

    Of course I can always find the solutions to those puzzles on this site but that’s not what I’m after. Sometimes someone refers me to an older puzzle I might want to solve – but I can’t access it.

    Any workarounds, please?!

  120. Laccaria @119 I can’t access the Indy crossword back more than 30 days, using this link, and further back into March I get the message older puzzles don’t score points.

  122. Shanne @121, thanks for the tip regarding the BBC programme tonight. I note it features, amongst others, Alan Connor (Everyman and Guardian editor) and Victoria Godfrey (Vigo/Carpathian).

  123. Shanne@120 – sorry my mistake, it’s 1 month not 3 days (I clicked on the wrong arrow!).

    But I didn’t know about the 1-month closure rule before now – which means you can’t access any puzzle more than a month old. I may ask Mike Hutchinson about this when I next hear from him (I’ve a puzzle in the queue with him).

    Another question of a more general nature: who owns the copyright of puzzles submitted and published in one of the dailies? Anyone know?

  124. Laccaria, the setter owns the copyright. If you submit a puzzle for publication it’s good practice to include copyright information, your name and year, in the file.

  126. Widdersbel@125 (and Jay@124) thanks for the info.

    According to the policy document clause C.2. (my bold),
    “The Company has the worldwide, perpetual and irrevocable right to publish, perform and adapt the Material in all present and future media and formats (including print and digital) and across all devices (including desktop, mobile and tablet). This right is exclusive for one year from the date of delivery of your Material and non-exclusive thereafter. This right is sub-licensable and the Company may provide your Material to third parties for publication on their platforms.”

    If I understand this correctly, it means that the Indy retains exclusive rights for one year but after then I’m free to publish the crossword wherever I like – e.g. on mycrossword.co.uk . Now that I realise that Indy puzzles go offline after a month, I might consider doing that. But I’ll check with Mike first.

  127. I know and understand the prohibition on here in commenting on current prize puzzles before the closing date but I don’t think this question will breach that.
    Has anyone tried to submit the current month’s Genius and failed like me? I’ve tried 2 different browsers (Firefox and Chrome).
    On the Genius page you get “Deadline for entries is 23:59 BST on Saturday 4 May.” followed by “The deadline for entering this month’s competition has now passed.” followed by “Click here to register.” with a link. (I’m already logged in) but if I log in again and navigate to the same page I get the same behaviour.
    If you click on the Genius button you get the information for 250 that “Deadline for entries is 23:59 GMT on 6 April” (NOT 4 May). That entry is dated 1 Apr 2024. Is Picaron having another laugh or is the Grauniad screwed again?

  128. Laccaria @26. You will no doubt be aware that most Indy crosswords are recycled in the i after a gap of about four years (without further payment being made to setters).

  129. On a lark, we’ve decided to do the old Guardian Genius puzzles on their website, starting with #1. It’s a bit tricky because there are no special instructions! We managed the first 8 but had to skip #9 as there were letter counts but no clues! (It wasn’t an April first puzzle – I checked.)
    The tenth is stumping us. Several passes yield nothing, even with fresh heads.

    Does anyone know where I might find more information? There are online archives that charge a fee, but not all of the puzzles are included. Is there a blog where someone discusses these old puzzles? Or, maybe some of you have also done these puzzles recently and could give us a hint?

  130. Kristi, you are not the first to attempt this. There have been discussions before. I would suggest popping into the discussion here

    …the last Genius we attempted to solve without the preamble, No. 13, which we did, but never quite managed to discover the underlying cypher or code. I even went to the Guardian editor in the hope that there might be a dusty archive box lurking somewhere in the basement of Guardian HQ, but alas, no. It’s an interesting venture though… good luck!

  131. [I should add that I am Jono, not Jay, in that forum link in the previous response, just to avoid any confusion]

  133. Rudolf@128: no I didn’t know that, thanks for the update. As far as I can gather, the Indy’s parent company (Independent Digital News and Media Limited) retains publication rights for submitted material in perpetuo – but that doesn’t mean the rights remain exclusive after the first year.

  134. FrankieG, commenting on today’s Guardian Cryptic, is sure that, though two clues for ARAL SEA use the same wordplay, “there is no suggestion of plagiarism”. I am sure he is right, but has the issue of plagiarism ever come up with crosswords?

Comments are closed.