Music: Finzi – A Severn Rhapsody, Introit, Nocture, Prelude, Three Soliloquies, Romance, The Fall of the Leaf, Boult/LSO
Across | |
---|---|
1 | SHORTFALL, SHORT + FALL, more or less, not very Ximenean. |
6 | RECAP, RE + CAP. |
9 | OPEN OUT, OPEN + OUT, where ‘old hat’ = ‘passé’ = ‘out’. |
10 | BROWNIE, BR(OWN)IE. A brownie would not be called a cake in the US. |
11 | TRIAL, double definition, and a very feeble one. |
12 | FRUITCAKE, anagram of FREAK I CUT. |
13 | TIE UP, TIE + UP. |
14 | AGINCOURT, AGIN COURT. |
17 | TEST PILOT, a not-so-cryptic definition. |
18 | ADDER, [l]ADDER. |
19 | ASCERTAIN, AS + CERTAIN. |
22 | AORTA, hidden in [chin]A OR TA[iwan]. |
24 | REAL ALE, anagram of ALL ARE + E[nglish]. |
25 | IMAGINE, I(MAGI)N E[ast]. |
26 | MUSTY, UM backwards + STY. |
27 | THE SCREAM, T[itian] + HE’S + CREAM. The world’s most-stolen painting. |
Down | |
1 | STOAT, S[mall] + TO A T. I nearly put ‘snail’ but thought better of it. |
2 | ONE LINERS, ONE(LINER)S. |
3 | TOODLE PIP, Spoonerism of POODLE TIP. The literal is cleverly hidden in ‘take care’, so this was the only one that really gave any trouble. |
4 | ACT OF PARLIAMENT, anagram of AFTER A COMPLAINT. I did not use the cryptic in either of the two long answers down the middle. |
5 | LABOUR INTENSIVE, LABOUR (the party) + INTENSIVE. |
6 | ROOST, R + O,O + S[cheld]T. |
7 | CINNA, sounds like SINNER if you speak a non-rhotic dialect of English. |
8 | PRESENTER, PRESENT + E.R., as in a TV host. |
13 | TETRAGRAM, MARGAR(T)ET upside down, just banged in from the literal here. |
15 | CHARABANC, CHAR + A BAN + C[aught], cryptic not needed by me. |
16 | UNDERMINE, anagram of MEN RUINED – yep, I never saw the cryptic as I solved. |
20 | CLASS, C + LASS. |
21 | READY, READ + [waverl]Y. |
23 | A-TEAM, A(TEA)M. |
Similar experience to our blogger: initial panic at the economy of the clues followed by swift relief.
Edited at 2014-03-03 01:51 am (UTC)
One may well say “take care” on parting with someone but I have doubts that saying “toodle-pip” instead expresses the same sentiment.
If I remember correctly the difference between cakes and what in the UK we call biscuits is that cakes go hard as they go stale whereas biscuits go soft. This led to a ruling about the status of Jaffa cakes and whether or not they are liable to Value Added Tax. The decision was they are indeed cakes and are therefore exempt.
I’m still struggling to understand how “take care” translates as “goodbye”. I see it as an additional nicety (as in “goodbye, take care”) not as a standalone substitute. Just as one might say “goodnight, sleep well”, but “sleep well” alone does not mean “good night”.
So there are no true synonyms: they are all just things that people say to one another when parting and there’s no point trying to draw fine distinctions between them. In this context “take care” seems fine to me: I’ve certainly heard people use it as a direct substitution for “goodbye”.
Edited at 2014-03-03 07:42 pm (UTC)
Nice to see you’re on the Finzi again, vinyl (I noticed before I read the stern note from teacher!) and better yet on the banks of the Severn.
And, thanks for the Finzi reminder.
Edited at 2014-03-03 03:57 am (UTC)
“The man has” would probably work too: “He’s [got] a big hat on today”.
And a BTW to Vinyl: you have this blogged with the wrong clue number. Should be 27.
Edited at 2014-03-03 05:29 am (UTC)
Nice gentle start to the week – if it takes me a mere 24 minutes, then there’s going to be an awful lot of super-fast times.
Nice anagram at 4d.
Here’s a handy tip for inexperienced solvers: it can really help if you read the clue. I wasted a couple of minutes trying to think of the name of a famous statue for 4dn.
Note to self: listen to some Finzi.
Edited at 2014-03-03 08:00 am (UTC)
Now look, I know about jelly/jello and all that kind of confusion, but just what would you call a brownie in Manhattan assuming it wasn’t “brownie”?
Edited at 2014-03-03 10:06 am (UTC)
In the US, cookies can be either hard or soft, the distinguishing features being that they are sweet and eaten with one’s fingers. Cake is also sweet, implies a loose crumb, usually a larger size, and requires a fork. (As an aside, cake isn’t a pudding, because pudding implies gooey). Biscuits are a particular kind of slightly informal breakfast or dinner roll, usually slightly savoury, and with a crumb similar to a scone – except for old Southern beaten biscuits, which are pretty much like hard tack. K,NY and other Americans: did I miss anything important?
Now you know why I can’t wait to get back to civilised London next week.
Edited at 2014-03-03 12:11 pm (UTC)
For the record she also made a Victoria sponge and set fire to an oven glove.
Quite what any of that has to do with the puzzle I have no idea, but I just thought I’d mention it.
Edited at 2014-03-03 12:55 pm (UTC)
(And, it can taste pretty good).
Just a note: see what happens when we all finish the puzzle in record time and have a little time on our hands? Diversion into all manner of discussion.
I do like these dog days where there’s nothing much to do except chew over cookies and biscuits.
Edited at 2014-03-03 04:06 pm (UTC)
Thanks all for entertaining enlightenment!
Good luck with getting your daughter interested, Derek. I have tried several times, unsuccessfully, with my sons. I have fond memories of sitting with my dear old Dad working on it together…
I understand that this is the first crossword under the new editorial regime (happy to be corrected). I appreciate that it is a Monday but I hope that this puzzle is not indicative of the future.
Edited at 2014-03-03 08:38 am (UTC)
TOODLE-PIP is very old fashioned upper class slang for “see you” and I guess the phrase “take care” is currently in fashion.
I parsed 23D as ATE + AM (had a meal + in the morning)
Re: K from NY’s timing system, I’ve given up for years now, but I used to be an enthusiastic smoker in my youth, especially when the crossword was a treat saved for the pub. Pretty sure I thought I was Sherlock Holmes, and always enjoyed a good, tough, three-snout puzzle.
But, ’twas not to be. Did not know Tetragram, and (unforgivably having strutted and fretted my hour upon the stage in a ramshackle performance of Julius Caesar many years ago) forgot Cinna and did not pick it up from the homophone or the three checkers in place! Feel a complete Charlie, of the type who might say “Toodle Pip”…
Edited at 2014-03-03 12:13 pm (UTC)
Like vinyl1 at first glance I was concerned at seeing the many short clues but when the two long answers went straight in I thought it might be a quick one.
Didn’t know CINNA but was easy from definition. Thought that the reversal of Margaret for TETRAGRAM was neat. Otherwise not much worthy of comment.
I was slowed (if that’s applicable here) by 9 where I didn’t see where the hat came into things and 17, where I failed to spot the enumeration and was also looking for a word such as accused or defendant.
I agree that the upside-down Margaret was neat.
My memory conspired against me. I was convinced Cinna was a poet and not a conspirator in the Bard’s ‘Julius Caesar’. But all’s well that ends well. Managed a sub 30 minute solve which, for me, is a rarity.
Enigma
Welcome to this site! I think the answer is practice! I know that I’m getting quicker all the time, but am still overjoyed when I can finish it ‘without aids’, whatever time it takes!
Janie’s right in that practice is probably the most important factor and I’ll come back to that in a sec.
I’d also add:
The right sort or warped brain
A recent study concluded that you need “fluid intelligence” to be good at cryptics – the ability to manipulate stuff in your head in a certain way. Some very bright and knowledgable folk may struggle because they possess the “wrong sort” of intelligence. If you can solve these puzzles at all then you’re off to a reasonable start.
General Knowledge
You don’t need to be Fred Housego but a decent armoury of trivia helps. Whilst one of the great things about cryptics is that there’s generally another way to solve a clue if you don’t know the word, if you can spot the answer without having to piece together the wordplay that will improve speed. Just take last week: where many of us had to take an educated guess at the composer Finzi, others knew him so were able to solve that particular clue more quickly. Bone up on composers, plants, ducks, ports, poets, scientists(!) and Scottish towns…
Wavelength
Speed on any given puzzle can depend on getting onto the setter’s wavelength, which is sometimes just down to luck. For instance, “bar” in the wordplay could lead to a number of things, like pole, counter, ban, pub or be an exclusion indicator. If your first thought is the “right” one then you’re tuned in.
Technique
Some very able solvers choose not to go for speed, preferring to savour the challenge and pausing to parse each clue fully. For the “speed merchants”, however, short-cuts are the norm: read the next clue while filling in the previous, go with gut instinct and don’t bother to parse, don’t cross off clues you’ve solved, start with short or multi-word answers, look for anagrams to get started, start with a clue that will give you the first letters of several others…
Practice
Only with practice can you learn the little tricks that are vital to a fast solve. You’ll then be able to:
– spot the definition;
– quickly identify what clue type you’re dealing with;
– solve anagrams without writing a jumble of the letters
– recognise conventions – anagram indicators, reversal and inclusion indicators, single-letter abbreviations, alternate letter and deletion indicators etc;
– ignore the surface reading and just see a clue as a coded instruction;
– unstick yourself when you’re stuck – is it a pangram? could that U be preceeded by a Q? What if the definition isn’t what I think it is?
– generally spot what’s going on very quickly.
I’m sure there are other factors as well. If you want to improve your speed it’s prboably worth investing in a “how to” book.
Sorry for waffling.
Welcome! I too am pretty new here (I’d been tracking the comments for a few weeks – and rapidly improving my game as a result – before finally popping my head up above the parapet about a month ago).
Fully endorse the other comments from Janie, z8b8d8k, and penfold. Until recently, a calendar was more useful than a clock in monitoring my completion times (if, indeed, I ever completed).
Started tackling the Times last September, after a couple of years of doing my apprenticeship on an easier cryptic – viz. Sydney Morning Herald – where I slowly picked up most of the basic cryptic conventions. Initially, I could only do about a quarter of each puzzle: more frustrating was that when I checked the solution next day, in many instances I still could not work out how it was derived – which is where this site is utterly invaluable!
After a couple of months I started getting close to completing the odd one, then one red letter day in November I actually finished one! (OK, it took pretty much a whole weekend, but hey…)
Since then, been improving further and now complete say 75%, with some around the two hour mark – a rate of progress over 6 months that shows the importance of practice and the benefit of the insights you will pick up here.
Doubt I’ll ever become (and frankly don’t aspire to be) a speed merchant, but thoroughly enjoy the challenge and the satisfaction of visible improvement. Good luck!
@penfold_61: Not waffle at all. Thank you for taking the time to provide such insight.
@mohn2: Is there any particular book recognised as the bible?
I believe the Tim Moorey is still the go-to book. Personally, I learnt by just hacking away at it, which is probably not the most efficient way to learn but might be the most fun — you get more of those Hallelujah moments when the light finally dawns on a cluing device.
After that you need plenty of practice (to get those 10,000 hours in as soon as possible :-). And even if you become a competitive solver and complete the crossword without having completely understood all the clues, it’s always worth going back over them afterwards to make sure you’ve understood them all. This blog wasn’t around when I first attempted the Times crossword, but I wish it had been.
As for books, I suggest Tim Moorey’s How to Master the Times Crossword; or you might like to try Alan Connors’s amusing Two Girls, One on Each Knee. Or, if you’re prepared to stump up a little more money for a used copy of a book now sadly out of print, I’d recommend Alec Robins’s Crosswords in the Teach Yourself series (Watermill Books currently have a copy on sale – via either Amazon or AbeBooks – at £19.72), though I suppose it’s possible that it may seem a bit dated nowadays.
My times are still slow, because my brain isn’t quite built that way. I could solve this one so fast only because I have seen all these baby clues many times before. On the harder puzzles, I typically take 2 to 3 times as long as our ordinary speedy solvers.
Tony is right, if you start solving as a child or teenager, you will be much better. A kid’s mind is more flexible, and can get used to thinking in this peculiar way.
Indeed.
I’m still trying to comprehend the fact that 11 minutes can be regarded as slow. 😀
Ah well, practice makes perfect. At least I’ve found somewhere I can come to understand the wordplay I can’t get for myself.
Today’s award for Most Interesting Injury goes to a middle-aged cyclist who attacked a kerb stone with his head. That, in itself, is not particularly interesting or original. However, when he regained consciousness, he was hyperosmic, meaning that his sense of smell was hugely increased. Oliver Sacks reported something similar in a patient (can’t remember the cause). My man was completely overwhelmed by smells that I could barely detect. We (and then the neurology mob) tested him on a few things out of curiosity, and it was extraordinary – he could tell which of four different people had briefly handled an envelope, for instance.
Sadly for him, a hospital ward is not the best place to suddenly develop olfactory hyperacusis. However, his episode only lasted a couple of hours. Makes you wonder, though, what our brains are doing with all that olfactory information the rest of the time.
I really wish this man’s condition had lasted a little longer, to allow a more detailed assessment. We did consider whacking him on the head again, but the neuro guys wouldn’t have it.
Re. thud_n_blunder’s unfortunate patient, the thought occurred to me that olfactory super acuity would be a real problem for those with flatulent dogs (inter alia).
However, I still managed to screw things up by rashly bunging in AURAL at 11ac (an over-elaborated attempt at using “hearing” both as definition and for ‘sounds like’ “oral” (= “test”)). I then had a brainstorm at 1dn, thinking of S = “small” and the old chestnut TO A T = “exactly”, but failing to put the two together and wasting ages trying to think of a 5-letter animal beginning in S and ending in A. It was only when I got to the next old chestnut at 2dn (which really had to be ONE-LINERS) that I realised that AURAL was wrong. Eventually I got going, but struggled to a disappointing 6:09.
I think I must be missing something obvious at 9ac, as I don’t really understand OPEN OUT = “unpack”.
Edited at 2014-03-04 07:45 am (UTC)