| Comments on the competition |
|---|
| 1. |
|---|
| 46 is one of very few viable clues in this set and is by far the best, in my opinion. |
| 2. |
|---|
| A trickier challenge than it looked maybe to come up with something really good, but No5 did the trick for me. Five others in the chasing pack collected two points each. A number of clues could equally well have led to OMEN, something that the most careful clue-writer would probably have tried to avoid. |
| 3. |
|---|
| As usual hard to separate the good from the very good in PDs, so I have spread the marks wider than for normal clues. As it is I prefer PD clues in which the undevilled sense is quite different to devilled sense ie there is a pleasing and surprising change of scenario |
| 4. |
|---|
| Yes, 41 was indeed the worst clue. Well done! |
| 5. |
|---|
Given that the removal of a word from a passage and the closing of the gap results in the remaining passage still making sense, it follows that the original passage should also make sense otherwise there would be no point in its existence. On this basis I managed to eliminate 38 nonsensical passages from the 49 entries.
Of the reamaining 11, none scored 5 points, managing to fall down on some fault or another. Top in my list was 36 with 4 points where a higher mark would have been given if the remaining letters had contributed to the enhancement of the clue. Next was 38, marked down for a similar reason. The addition of the words "in Chambers" might have earned an extra point. |
| 6. |
|---|
| Good PD clues are rare, and so the usual weaknesses appeared. There seems little value in constructing a lengthy pair of sentences in which all words are modified if one or both fail to make sense or sound plausible. Abbreviations, unless entirely appropriate/natural, devalue a clue, and I discounted all entries built around OMEN O??? on the grounds of ambiguity and the fact that often the only significant conceptual difference was the presence of OMEN. One other thought, exemplified by 36 (for which I voted but didn't rate as highly as some others for this reason)- I felt it was devalued by the composer's insistence on setting the context with the first few words, when in fact it's apparent without them. |
| 7. |
|---|
| Lots to enjoy and it was good to see so many different ideas having struggled myself to find a workable one. The two outstanding clues for me were 5 and 46, both of which had me laughing out loud, but 5 gets top marks for the extra subtlety. Then 7 and 31, which hide the join well to provide a good penny-drop. Finally the two Carmens, 21 and 27, which I couldn't choose between. I also had 10, 14, 22, 35 and 45 as contenders, all very good, though the cows were a bit commonplace. A few clues, 2 and 8 in particular, overdid the devilry and lost the plot in the undevilled reading. None of the very short clues did much for me – they wouldn't take much solving for one thing. And I didn't particularly like the clues which just removed 'omen' from the undevilled version. |
| 8. |
|---|
It seems to me that many competitors do not understand the finer points of the PD clue – 1) It should make more sense in the undevilled version; 2) It should make *some* sense in the devilled version; 3) word splits should not come immediately before or the word's position either in the devilled or undevilled version.
Two clues which I gave 1 point to, but would have been my favourites if they did not fall down on point 3 were 27 and 42. Instead 36 was my number 1 choice. It very nicely deals with points 1 to 3, and also manages to incorporate some humour. The only others that stood out for me were 7, 22 and 24. I gave half a point to 4 which was great except for the rather unnatural surface reading of the undevilled version due to use of 'fluid'. I also gave a half a point to 5 and 31 since they are quite sound but also very obvious ideas (that I chose not to use for that very reason). |
| 9. |
|---|
| Some entrants seemed to enjoy rejigging lots of word spaces throughout the clues (such as 4, 47 and 49 among others) as a sort of game in itself, but this did nothing for me. I liked the ones where both the devilled and undevilled versions made some sort of sense (11, 45 etc.)! The smutty ones (such as 1 and 46 worked quite well. To the author of 22: I know how you feel, mate! I think the really short ones (such as 39) were maybe TOO "tough". Number 24 would have benefitted from losing the final "for". |
| 10. |
|---|
Apart from Azed's advice, I haven't seen much, so to some extent made decisions based on:
a) Both devilled (A) and undevilled (B) versions should make sense, more importantly B.
b) The split should occur inside a word in A and the two bits should become attached to MENO, which may (as in 10) or may not (as in most) itself be split.
c) There shouldn't be the same word before and after the split (as in 38).
d) A and B should not be too similar in meaning.
My marks:
1st= (3.5 points each) 22, 44; 3rd (2 points) 10; 4th= (1 point each) 5, 7, 16, 28, 45, 48 |
| 11. |
|---|
Satisfactory, let alone first-rate, PD clues are not at all easy to achieve, and I’m afraid that the entries for this competition demonstrate that. If the exercise is to have any point at all, it seems to me (though others will probably disagree) that there are certain criteria that it is essential to meet if a clue is to pass muster:
a. the undevilled version
i. must make good sense
(Out go Clues 2, 8, 17, 41, 49)
ii. must be in natural, unstilted, idiomatic English
(Out go Clues 14, 21, 24, 29, 33, 37. It’s a shame about 24, in which
it is not in fact the PD element itself that produces the stilted and unidiomatic
English; “freedom enough” / “free dough” was a good idea, but unfortunately
rather clumsily executed.)
iii. must be credible, ie, a sentence or form of words that one can readily imagine
reading or hearing spoken
(Out go Clues 4, 13, 27, 32, 35, 44, 47, 48)
b. there must be a marked contrast in meaning (the greater the better) between the undevilled and the devilled versions.
(Out go Clues 9, 12, 20, 23, 25, 31, 34, 38)
c. the devilled version must make at least a sort of sense, however zany, though it is OK for it to be slightly artificially expressed.
(Out go Clues 2, 6, 22, 28, 30, 37, 43, 46, 49)
Ideally, the omission of the clue word should alter a serious or humdrum pronouncement into something piquant or bizarre that raises a smile (and NOT the other way around). In my book, altering the punctuation is acceptable, but the very best clues will contrive to avoid it.
Of the remaining entries, Clues 3, 18, 39, 40, 45 are sound, but rather dull, and the devilled versions of 5, 7 and 19 seem to me to teeter on the edge of meaninglessness. In 26, the contrast, though there, is rather feeble, added to which the undevilled version is wrongly punctuated – it should, surely, read “It’s vital you get here immediately. Come now!”
Of the remaining six:
The undevilled version of 1 is rather strained and only just passes the test at a.iii. above, but the clue does offer the required contrast – 1.5 points
The undevilled version of 10 is one of the most credible, but “numerous works of sin” is a bit flat and doesn’t really gel with the preceding words – 1.5 points
42 is very neat, but I’m not convinced that extreme brevity is a virtue in a PD clue. – 2 points
The construction of the undevilled version of 11 is a shade unnatural (eg, the inclusion of “a” – and would one really express oneself thus?), but the execution of the PD element is masterly – 3 points
The undevilled version of 15 is pushing it slightly under a.iii. above, but the devilled version is suitably bizarre and the contrast the best of the lot – 3.5 points
36 has an entirely credible undevilled version, good contrast and first-rate execution of the PD element, but the devilled version lacks the bizarre qualities of 15 – 3.5 points |
| 12. |
|---|
Most entrants fell foul of the basic rule: the undevilled original must read naturally as if it were a plausible sentence in e.g. a newspaper. Voting was made easy by eliminations based on this premise.
As a corollary, an original version in one sentence is far preferable to one split into two or three (to make the devilled version work). |
