| Comments on the competition |
|---|
| 1. |
|---|
As a comparative newcomer to this competition, I do not feel qualified to denounce any entries, although I can say that I liked some more than others!
In view of the fact that we were given the task of providing a clue to any firework, I have discounted those whose definitions are, in my opinion, at odds with this requirement. Neither sausage 29, 36, nor rose/window 4, 34, are fireworks! Obviously sausage = banger = firework, and similarly rose window = Catherine wheel = firework, but it does not follow from these examples that sausage and rose window are fireworks. In my opinion, the same applies to an old crock 1.
I do not understand why 2 submitted two definitions. I found it difficult to produce just one.
Substituting OUR BILL for DAMAGE 14 is, in my opinion, pushing it!
I am not familiar with the lyric in 15. Sorry.
22 seems to suggest that bonfire = firework. That's news to me!
Perhaps the explanation for 26 is incomplete. anag NEWYORKFAIR = ANY FIREWORK, so the compiler has taken the instructions literally!
33's explanation baffled me until I realised that Kurt should read Kirk (Douglas).
I do not recall seeing R (from the 3 Rs)used before 38. As the other two are W and A, I am not sure this is valid. I wonder if anyone else has thoughts on this.
I think the explanation in 42 should have been edited; as it stands, it is incompatible with the clue.
I awarded points as follows:
13 5. 46 4. 433. 25 2. 17 1. |
| 2. |
|---|
| When I entered the competition I had to decide which firework would make the most interesting clue, and then how to clue it and in particular how to define it. I enjoyed seeing how other competitors addressed these choices. In the end I decided the strongest clue would be one that defined the solution as a firework, and preferably a specific firework, rather than one of its alternative meanings ('banger','rocket', etc), but which avoided 'firework(s)' or anything too obvious as the definition. This was also the basis on which I judged the clues, and several otherwise OK ones (19,23,29,30,34,37,45) missed out on points for that reason. Happily there were enough clues that met my criteria, of which 8 was the outstanding example – good anagram indicator, excellent misleading definition, and coherent surface – and got top marks. I also liked 42 for tackling 'jumping jack' successfully and 43 for its topical-ish and misleading reference to the occasion. 35 got points on the strength of the definition (I guess it was the Tate Britain saloon), as did 7. And 11, 13 and 18 also worked well. 16 would have been a contender but for the spelling error ('firey' isn't in Chambers anyway and doesn't get past my spellchecker). 31 was nicely worded, but chose precisely the wrong firework for the definition 'don't pick it up'. |
| 3. |
|---|
| I couldn't consider any entries that chose to use a main definition that was not a firework – this seemed to me to be outside the brief for this comp even if the answer could also be defined as a firework. Wordplay using 'M' as 5 November particularly appealed eg 13 & 25. Though not quite in the points for me I did enjoy the joke in 26! |
| 4. |
|---|
| Quite a good mix, maybe because people had freer rein than usual. I liked 5th November for M in 25 & 13. I must specifically salute 31 for managing to incorporate Gary Sprake in true context (having frequented the terraces for years watching him punch / throw / backflick through his own legs / explore every possible chance to dunk the ball into his own net). Those were the days! |
| 5. |
|---|
Clues 13 (5 points) and 36 (4 points), both excellent clues, are the outstanding ones for me in this competition. They bear the hallmarks of the work of R.H. and T.M. It will be interesting to see if my crystal ball is working.
The other clues I liked were 25(3 points), 11 (2 points) and 34
(1 point).
When I saw the announcement of this competition, I thought that the wide scope offered would produce an excellent competition which would be hard to judge. I was disappointed. Many competitors seemed unable to rise to the challenge. |
| 6. |
|---|
I feared that this slightly unusual challenge might present problems of interpretation for the judges, and so it proved for me. One contestant 26 even chose to clue the phrase ANY FIREWORK itself; I think that the words “of your choice” that followed the phrase on the site clearly show that this was not what was intended. Three competitors (5, 28, 40) clued types of firework that may well exist, if only as proprietary names, but which are surely much too esoteric to be fair as answers to crossword clues; I discounted these. A significant minority (2, 4, 29, 30, 34, 36, 37, 44 and, arguably, 20) clued words (such as BANGER, CATHERINE WHEEL and (SKY)ROCKET) which are indeed common types of firework, but, within the clue, defined meanings of those words that had nothing to do with fireworks. It is arguable whether or not clues taking this approach met the intended criteria for the competition. I decided in the end that they didn’t and discounted them too, even though some of them were in themselves quite good clues. (Other judges will no doubt have reached a different conclusion.) Even then, however, there remained at least a dozen clues worthy of consideration for points
4 points: 13, a cleverly appropriate anagram and neat semi-&lit
3 points: 10 a well crafted &lit
2 points: 16 pleasingly crafted and well-disguised hidden (even if “fiery” is misspelt!)
1.5 points each:
17 A similar approach to 13’s, but a less natural surface (”Girandole’s alternative”). (Golden Rain appears in Chambers Crossword Lists, though not in Chambers itself. I accepted it on that ground and on the rather arbitrary one that I had heard of it.)
27 this clever (if unclaimed!) &lit is slightly spoiled by the wordplay’s requiring “One’s”, where the definition really demands “One may be”.
1 point each:
8 a good misleading definition, but the rather unnatural “wherein” required for the anagram slightly spoils the surface
23 very neat, but a light firework is a slightly artificial phrase
43 an original (if slightly anachronistic) definition and neat matching anagram, but the surface as a whole reads slightly oddly.
Prox. ac. 11, 18, 19, 25, 38, 39. |
