| Comments on the competition |
|---|
| 1. |
|---|
| Generally people seemed to struggle with FIRST AID, but I thought clue 30 was outstanding: terse, witty and with a clear definition (unlike many). I would have scored clue 12 highly but can't convince myself that 'eluded' works as anagrind. |
| 2. |
|---|
| A great turnout of 58 clues, and many of fair quality, but no outstanding winners. 'If Tardis' was a good anagram idea, and 14 made the best clue out of it. I liked 9, 50 and 58 for misleading definitions and 47 for a concise & lit., but my overall favourite by a narrow margin was 1 for its simple and economical surface. As usual, a few quibbles with some otherwise good clues: in 12 I can't see in what sense 'eluded' works as an anagram indicator; 15's 'Ernest a kissin' = staid' is a novel variation on the indirect anagram, but still indirect; 36 attempts a 'reverse cryptic' & lit., but I wouldn't accept 'First Aid = A'; and 'doubling C = F' in 55 is a step too far for the solver – and it certainly isn't true in hexadecimal. |
| 3. |
|---|
| I have discounted clues that simply substitute "help" or something similar for "aid", or use "Dr." in place of "doctor". Some questionable anagram indicators, e.g. 12 and 15, and some false &lit claims, e.g. 8, where the definition is just "immediate benefit" and not the whole clue. 34 verges on brilliance, although in the UK it's usually a literary "draft" but a medicinal "draught". However Chambers supports draft = draught "in various senses; occasional and US". I don't think many solvers would recognise the biblical allusion in 44 or the reference to Jeremy Paxman in 54. ("I find the Scottish national poet little more than a king of sentimental doggerel".) 58 combines originality and soundness and to my mind it's the best clue, just beating 47's neat &lit. |
| 4. |
|---|
| Disguising the definition wasn't easy this time around, was it? |
| 5. |
|---|
| Some good ideas, but many spoilt by cumbersome reading and clumsy wordplay. I judged 1 the best, and it differed from 33 by not using an unnecessary word (required). The remaining points were spread rather thinly, because there were lots of clues using the same idea, if not the same words, as each other. |
| 6. |
|---|
| This challenge offered plenty of promising material for anagrams. Tardis was “a nice find” (to use Azed’s expression from the last slip) to combine with definitions involving the Doctor, but, although it produced several perfectly acceptable clues, none seems to me to exploit the idea with much élan. The best of them is perhaps 27 – 0.5 point – which had a more imaginative definition than the rest. Of the three composite anagrams, 41 seems to me to rule itself out on several grounds: using a dash to indicate “minus” in this way (though ingenious) is, surely, a bridge too far; even if one winks at two anagram indicators (see John’s blog on a recent Azed on Fifteen Squared), “with” seems to have no role in the wordplay; and, most seriously, the surface makes virtually no sense and is far from being an &lit (how can major replacement surgery be said to “suit” a fracture with first aid?) 53 is much more accomplished – although I personally much dislike the illogical “shred of decency” = D device, it is too widely accepted for it to be reasonable to penalize it – but the clue is unfortunately seriously flawed by the lack of an a.i. in either half, a lack that could so easily have been supplied. 16 – 2 points – is very neat, though slightly spoiled by the fact that it is the friend rather than I who would be in need of first aid. 47 – 3 points – is an admirably succinct and accomplished & lit. The three most original and imaginative clues are, in my view, 48, 54 and 58. The first sentence of 48 – 3 points – reads slightly awkwardly as a question; a full stop or a colon would have been better. The second sentence of 54 (a first-rate idea) – 2 points – falls rather awkwardly between the stools of the two meanings: “reduced” isn’t quite the right word in either context (“diminished” would have been slightly better, at least for the Paxo reference) and “an introductory treatment” doesn’t very happily describe “first aid”. 58 – 3 points – is entirely sound, if one accepts “subsidiary indication IN definition” (as most seem to do), and very neatly done, if a shade less exciting than the other two. Fractionally ahead of the pack of other sound and acceptable clues – 0.5 point each – are, in my view, 5, 33 and 56. |
| 7. |
|---|
| I enjoyed this list. There were a variety of treatments of what was admittedly a very friendly challenge, including what seemed to be every conceivable anagram or partial anagram. Regrettably a number of these were unsound in that the indicator used the wrong part of speech in the cryptic reading. The other main weakness lay in some of the definitions, which indicated only general medical attention or immediate response to some crisis without covering both points. |
| 8. |
|---|
A good bunch this month, I suppose because 'first aid' lends itself both to devious wordplay and to cunning definitions.
(3 points) 48 (quite outstanding, if you can accept the anagram indicator, which I can; one hopes Derek won't take it too seriously)
2nd (2 points) 58 (very neat, not 100% happy with the definition, but it does make for an excellent surface)
3rd= (1 point each) 6, 10, 24, 27, 33, 34, 37, 45, 47, 54, all of which are very pleasing. |
