Guardian 26,434 – Otterden

by

[If you’re attending York S&B please see comments 32&33] - here

I haven’t been particularly impressed by Otterden’s puzzles in the past, and I’m afraid this one has done nothing to change my opinion. To repeat what I said on a previous occasion, “there are some excessively obvious clues and some rather dodgy constructions”. Even the mini-theme based on 4 down doesn’t seem to add much, though I did like the clue itself.

 
 
 
 
 
 
Across
1. END USER Ensured distribution to ultimate recipient (3,4)
ENSURED*
5. TOE LOOP Jump on ice to enable first return to pool (3,4)
TO + E[nable] + POOL<
9. DRAIN Deplete noise, including raffia curtains (5)
R[affi]A (“curtains” meaning the outer letters) in DIN
10. BEPLASTER Daub number plates (not first three letters) to confuse followers (9)
Anagram of [num]BER PLATES
11. VILLAINIES Criminal acts at house in the middle of Trieste (10)
VILLA + IN + [tr]IES[te]
12. HOOD 4 down to get high-level protection for leader of the Greens (4)
Double definition – Robin Hood was the leader of those in Lincoln green
14. WATERCOURSE Channel divers swore a truce (11)
(SWORE A TRUCE)*
18. INTROVERTED Reserved opening avoided non-starter (11)
INTRO (opening) +[a]VERTED
21. COOK 4 down to get firm endorsement for a foreign secretary (4)
CO (company, firm) + OK (endorsement) – Robin Cook was Foreign Secretary 1997-2001
22. CHARGE CARD Plastic explosive applied to vehicle close to hand (6,4)
CHARGE (explosive) + CAR + [han]D
25. POINT DUTY Regulation involving use of arms to target revenue (5,4)
POINT (target) + DUTY (revenue)
26. LASSO Girl gets unrestricted job employed by ranchers (5)
LASS + [j]O[b]
27. EYESORE I looked at what is said to be an unattractive feature (7)
Homophone of “I saw”, though I find it hard to make “what is said” apply to “I looked at”
28. LAWYERS Long way off being seen in smaller sized briefs (7)
L + WAY* + part of smallER Sized? If that’s what’s intendd, I think it’s a bit vague
Down
1. ENDIVE Salad dressing envied (6)
ENVIED*
2. DOABLE Quite possible for party to fit (6)
DO + ABLE
3. SANDALWOOD Downloads a new source for perfumery (10)
(DOWNLOADS A)*
4. ROBIN Endless dressing-up is now sure to be on the cards again (5)
ROBIN[g] – reference to the robins seen on many Christmas cards
5. TOP SECRET Passes an hour in church over strictly confidential matter (3,6)
TOPS (passes, as in exceeeds) + reverse of TERCE (one of the liturgical hours)
6. EDAM Global production in the red — it’s simply made up (4)
MADE, up, and Edam cheese is a “global” shape and covered in red wax
7. OUTDOORS Open forbidden ways to get in (8)
You can’t go in through the OUT DOORS
8. PARODIED Took off trimmed international cricket match in the middle (8)
ODI (one-day international) in PARED (trimmed)
13. GOODFELLOW 4 down to get right bloke to provide an alternative for a Guardian setter (10)
GOOD FELLOW – Robin Goodfellow is another name for Puck, who is also a Guardian setter. As always, I think it’s a bit unreasomable to expect “ordinary” solvers to know this
15. TREE HOUSE Previous family residence used for play (4,5)
TREE (previous family) + HOUSE (residence), with “residence” doing double duty (with the exact same meaning) in the definition
16. MINCE PIE London Eye can be a Christmas treat (5,3)
Cockney rhyming slang for “eye”
17. AT NO TIME Never return to issue concerning former volunteers (2,2,4)
Reverse of EMIT (issue) ON (concerning) TA (Territorial Army, now renamed the Army Reserve)
19. HASSLE Harry has first signs of St Louis encephalitis (6)
HAS + S[t] L[ouis] + E[ncephalitis]
20. ADD-ONS A leading director puts on extras (3-3)
A D[irector] + DONS (puts on)
23. ROYAL Top family has many branches (5)
Rather obscurely, I think, a royal is “a stag with twelve or more points”, hence “many branches”
24. OTTO A small number in Italy use a footstool regularly (4)
Alternate letters of fOoTsToOl. The clue would work as well without “small”, which doesn’t seem to add much; is 8 a “small” number anyway?

52 comments on “Guardian 26,434 – Otterden”

  1. Very mixed feelings on this. It started as a Rufus and ended with not so much “aha” as “really!!” Fully agree with your opening comments Andrew and your niggles throughout. But I suppose it got the grey cells working, which is half the point these days! Thanks to both.

  2. 7 down reminded me of the TV show “It’s a square world” with Michael Bentine, which regularly featured “flea-circus animations”: small models that told a story in which things would happen with no visible reason. One was about a prison break and the dialogue went:
    “I don’t understand how he got away. All the entrances were well guarded.”
    “Perhaps he left by one of the exits?”

  4. I parsed 7 differently. It’s OUT (forbidden) + DOORS (ways to get in). Not that this makes the clue any better. Simple charades like this (and too many others in the puzzle) are so bland.

  5. 15d, while easy to get, is difficult to parse. Unless “Previous family residence” is a weird CD for the times people lived in trees. 🙂

  6. SV@5 -Previous family is found in a tree [family tree]; residence is “house”. A tree house is “used for play by children.

  7. Agree with foregoing comments. In 15d, I take ‘tree’ to be a family tree, as in genealogy, but clue doesn’t quite work.

  8. Thanks, Andrew. I agree it was an odd mix, with quite a lot of almost trivial clues and a few that were rather strange. I solved it without much difficulty but had to come here for some of the parsings. I thought 15d was OK, without anything doing double duty: TREE = ‘previous family’ + HOUSE = residence and TREE HOUSE = ‘used for play’.

  10. Thanks Otterden & Andrew.

    I started well but then slowed down. I didn’t much like 10 – ‘Daub number plates (not first three letters) to confuse followers.’ I suppose it is meant to read as not the first three letters in the phrase ‘number plates,’ but I took it to mean (pla)TES, which caused ‘endless’ frustration.

    ROBIN was quite good as the ‘up’ was nicely misleading. I think Andrew is right in that ‘residence’ has to do double-duty in 15 because ‘used for play’ is not the correct part of speech. [The ‘used for play’ in my garden……] I didn’t think of stag in ROYAL; I just assumed it was something to do with the extended family tree of the royals. As Andrew says, it is pretty obscure if it does relate to a stag.

  12. Absolute rubbish in my view. No care whatsoever is taken here. Agree thoroughly with the blogger! How can the same paper allow this alongside Picaroon or Imogen? It does not make any sense.

  13. Came here hoping that someone would have parsing to make me happier about 12ac, 6dn, 15dn and 23dn (didn’t think of the stag possibility — probably right but I don’t like it much) but no such luck. Oh well, better luck tomorrow.

  14. Found this probably the hardest Otterden yet, and not the most rewarding of struggles. Last in was POINT DUTY, mostly because it took far too long to see where the definition ended. Also spent far too long trying to make CHEQUE CARD work. Liked EDAM and PARODIED, though ODI would be a bit obscure to anyone who doesn’t follow cricket.

    NB This blog is not visible in the Guardian list – it is “filed under Uncategorised”

    Thanks to Andrew and Otterden.

  15. Only the LAWYER clue is a real dud, I reckon. Rather liked the whimsical HOOD and thought EDAM was top drawer – ‘global production’ indeed.

  16. Thanks to Andrew for the blog. You supplied the parsings I failed to spot.

    I was like Robi @4: started quickly then slowed down a lot.

    I was held up on 4d by thinking of ‘pack of cards’ and not considering the time of year! 🙁 I got there eventually.

  18. Andrew, were you in a hurry?

    5 no reversal indicator, yeah I know it’s obvious
    28 no * on WAY
    16 Cocknet

    I always think of Robin Goodfellow as a racing tipster 🙂

  19. Thanks Otterden and Andrew.

    Being unsophisticated, I enjoyed this and managed to do nearly all the parsing. I guessed MINCE PIE must be Cockney rhyming slang. Needed help with parsing TOP SECRET and the explanation for ROYAL.

  20. I have mixed feelings about this. I did enjoy it but I agree that some of the clueing is a bit off. I liked BEPLASTER,PARODIED and ROBIN. EDAM was LOI- too easy to see I suppose,and LAWYERS was awful.
    A mixed bag!

  21. Thanks Otterden and Andrew

    I didn’t enjoy it either. Some of the surfaces were nonsense – 9a and 8d for example – and others were dodgy, as previously stated (28a, 13d), and 24d works much better without the “a”.

    I did like 12a and 16d.

    [Returning to the bitterness = acidity question of a couple of days ago, I had the misfortune to be reminded of a crucial distinction in a pub yesterday. English bitter beer should have bitterness, but if it has acidity it has gone off! Fortunately the landlady readily replaced the offending pint.]

  22. Started off by noting the time as it looked to be a quick and easy solve but then came to a shuddering halt, had lunch, recently returned. NE was the principal problem, though I did like EDAM, out-Rufusing Rufus in the def part. Fair play to Otterden though, I spent too long trying to insert ES (the middle of ‘test’), when I’d already thought of PARODIED.

    Problems down the bottom of the crossword too. Had ROYAL as a possible answer ages ago but didn’t put it in as I thought it the weakest cd ever. If I had but known.

    LAWYERS should have been edited out.

  26. I do wish that some bloggers would remember that the Guardian crossword is attempted by solvers of all levels of ability. Hedgehoggy is extremely rude about the solver and highly unfair to me. He seems to believe that all the puzzles should be like those set by Imogen. I solved all but two of the answers to this puzzle and enjoyed it. I solved one in the last Imogen. Perhaps Hedgehoggy should buy another newspaper; if he buys one at all.

  27. I had 8d as DIVESTED – meaning took off, parsed as EST (trimmed international cricket match (test)) in the middle of DIVED (also took off). Wobbly, I know, but not within context of a rather wobbly puzzle.
    Thanks to Andrew

  28. Well said JohnM. One of the joys of the Grauniad is the range of difficulty, and like you, I nearly completed this one but barely started the Imogen.

    Many thanks to all the bloggers.

  29. JohnM and BillDo
    I think the complaint is more about the incompetence of some of the clueing, rather than its lack of difficulty.

  30. JohnM & BillDo

    I sympathise with you. I very rarely comment on the ‘absolute’ quality of a puzzle (though I will comment on my level of enjoyment), but may occasionally comment on a particular clue or two. I think that if this site was around when I started doing cryptics I would have been fatally deterred by comments which dismiss a whole puzzle out of hand.

    Having said that, I do think that Andrew nails it when he comments on the variability of Otterden’s clueing. To me inconsistency (and clunkiness of surfaces) do reduce my enjoyment of a puzzle.

    Having waffled for a while, I would encourage you to stick at it. I remember well how pleased I was when I first completed a puzzle, and the sense of triumph when I first finished an Araucaria.

    Crosswords should be fun, even when they are challenging. If you don’t lose sight of that I think you’ll be OK.

    Good luck!!!

  31. Could somebody have a go at explaining 28A again.

    I’ve got L = long and AWY = WAY*, but I can’t see where the rest comes from, other than the definition.

    Thanks

  33. Alistair @31
    I don’t think that 28a has been explained satisfactorily yet – I suspect that it will never be!

  34. Alistair @ 32, muffin @ 33

    I had 28 as AWY = WAY ‘off’, ‘seen’ in smalLER Sized,= smal L AWY ERS ized.

    I don’t think it works though, and don’t see any purpose being served by ‘long’.

  35. Simon@ 34
    I thought that L was for “long” – but where is the indication of a partial hidden elsewhere in the clue? I think that this was the worst of a dodgy bunch (apart from the two I liked – see above).

  36. muffin @ 35

    I think we’re in heated agreement 😉

    If the clue had been ‘Way off being seen in smaller sized briefs’ it would almost have worked as WAY* (off) hidden (seen) in smalLER Sized’, the rest being as I posted before. Like you, I don’t think this clue really works, and I think ‘Long’ is redundant. If long is part of the wordplay I don’t think it works, as to me a ‘hidden’ should be embedded within the two words, not between them.

    But I suspect we are nitpicking over a clue that doesn’t really deserve it! 🙂

  37. Well, what a load of mean minded comments. Top prize to angrycat @ 23.
    I actually. liked the Robin answers. They made me smile.

  39. Marrakchi @37, well said. We are expected to know all sorts of cricketers, chess players, footballers etc, but when it comes to Robin Goodfellow that is assumed to be beyond us.

  40. Marrakchi – I agree. As for Hedgehoggy @12, to say a puzzle you don’t like is “absolute rubbish” is, well, absolute rubbish.

  41. Excellent puzzle. Otterden seems really to be getting into his/her stride with this one. I found this the toughest of this setter’s offerings so far – also the most sophisticated and varied in its cluing. Some neat allusive stuff where I started out looking for a (letter-fiddling) wordplay.

    But I agree that in-talk such as 13d is best avoided – if only to encourage newcomers – plenty of other ways to clue it.

    Thanks to S&B.

  42. I think HOOD is a triple definition — Robin first and “leader of the Greens” third and in between “high-level protection” for something that covers your head. A bit sloppy since Robin is the leader in question.

  43. I quite liked it, though I would have liked more Robins. I liked 9a, 12a’s triple definition, 22a, 3d and 6d

    Regarding the many branches in 23d, I couldn’t see the wood for the trees, but “top family” made an obvious definition once the first and last letters were in.

    Though I loved “briefs” as a misleading definition, I was not really satisfied with the cluing for ERS in 28a. I believe a hidden answer clue should contain the entire solution, not just three left-over letters following a bit of abbreviation (maybe) and a three letter anagram.

  44. Can’t find L = long in Chambers or Collins, but I guess it must be the L. I get the way-off bit too, but, unless ERS is a ‘being’ as in entity I’m as stumped as anyone else for the rest of it! Mind you, there are quite a few I don’t fully understand here, so I’m probably out of Otterden’s depth.

  49. Thanks Otterden and Andrew

    Was a strange solving experience for me … I remember feeling irritated with some of the clues early on (as if they’d be compiled by a first timer) – like 10a and 11a.

    However, I found the cluster of ROBIN clues excellent. Have no grief with the local knowledge in 13a – assume that the vast majority of solvers are regular Guardian ones. Puck is a well known synonym for Robin Goodfellow. A google of Puck and Guardian setter would confirm the existence of him – no different to how I had to confirm the ‘Eleusinian mysteries’ and ‘Emanuel Lasker’ in the previous day’s puzzle.

    I couldn’t parse the ECRET part of 5d or any of 8d – although they make perfect sense now – so my problem not the setters.

    As for LAWYERS, I notice that there is a brand of boxer type underwear of that name. If it is common in Britain, then the clue goes from being a dud to one of esoteric brilliance – by using the parsing of Simon S@34 all held within the definition of ‘Long briefs’ ! :).

    This setter is a work in progress to me – some interesting clues mixed with clumsy ones at the moment.

  50. Uinteresting blog. I’m with those who like the variety in style and difficulty. I completed this, which made me feel better about the week, but failed to parse several, especially 28a

  51. Nice word, Cryptocyclist!
    Uinteresting ….
    Should we delete one letter, or add one?

    Crosswords are there to give pleasure to its solvers, for whatever reason.

    I can easily name three of those reasons:
    1 crosswords should be sound as clueing is concerned.
    2 the surfaces should make sense and perhaps make one smile
    3 a crossword should evoke a general feeling of “that was nice (enough)”
    The order here is not at random as it reflects my view on crosswords.
    But #1 doesn’t always overrule #2 and/or #3.

    Now, this crossword was far from perfect from a technical point of view (which Andrew made very clear) and to say (like Jolly Swagman) that this an excellent puzzle is not something I would have said.
    But there were nice touches too, there was the feeling that Otterden wanted to entertain us.
    It is clear that for a huge minority he succeeded.
    From that point of view I cannot really be dismissive, certainly not in the way hedgehoggy did. Calling this crossword “rubbish” does not serve any purpose, even if it’s something from the bottom of the heart.

    I appreciate the fact that many solvers found this a relief after struggling with Picaroon and even more Imogen.
    Most solutions were perfectly gettable, also perfectly parsible.
    It is, for example, crystal clear how the much discussed LAWYERS should be parsed.
    Whether it is an acceptable parsing or not, well, that is a completely different matter.

    The idea of “Long way off” is tempting but as Paul B says “L is not long” (it’s large). Otterden, however, is not the first to use it this way, therefore I can forgive him. The second part of the clue “being seen in smaller sized” for ERS is also not a mystery – but cryptically wrong, of course.

    Perhaps, that is Otterden’s ‘problem’.
    If you take in 10ac “number plates” as a whole (which is defendable), then I am fine with “not the first three letters” for removing NUM. The letters that follow (“followers”) should next be ‘confused’. Not unfair but far too wordy to really convince.

    I think, these two clues (out of almost 30) were the most controversial ones.

    The hedgehoggy-fan in me, however, had more things he didn’t really like:

    – “enable first” for E (5ac)
    – “return to pool” for LOOP – “to” is odd here (5ac)
    – the linkword “at” in 11ac, “in” would have been better
    – just adding “non-starter” in 18ac for removing the first letter – we all see what Otterden means but is it precise enough?
    – as Andrew said “what is said” as a homophone indicator (27ac)?
    Perhaps just about.
    – in 2d: “Quite possible for part to fit” while it should ideally be “Part to fit for quite possible” (which is nonsense, of course)
    – not sure about “can be” in 16d but, yes, it is a nice clue
    – “top family” for “royal”? Just about.
    – and as Andrew made clear, is 8 really a small number? (24d)

    But that was the hedgehoggy-fan in me.

    The not-so-hedgehoggy-fan in me has to admit that solving this crossword was still enjoyable (despite all this iffiness).
    And isn’t that the main thing for most of us?

    That said, I would like to add that, for me personally, this is ultimately not enough to qualify a crossword as “good”.
    No, this puzzle was not good. But rubbish?
    That sounds like it was a waste of time.
    I don’t think it wasn’t.

Comments are closed.