| Such a clue-friendly word (thanks Robert), this was really hard to judge. Lots of perfectly good clues, so I had to look for that little extra something that made a clue stand out. 31 is an excellent topical reference and a shade better than 16. 40 is the cleverest of the & lits., perfectly worded, as is 43, just pipping 47. The chess idea is well handled in 41, and the picture conjured by 19 is very plausible. Sadly that left no room for 2 and 21's original ideas or 51's neat combination of 'apartment' and 'smoke'. In a more average competition they'd all have been contenders. |
There was much repetition of wordplay (apt in cure, curate+p; teacup+r; p,u and t in care, etc). I'm afraid I didn't find any of the large number of "apt in cure" clues appealing, though I enjoyed examples of all the others. Is it fair to downgrade anagram clues for lack of originality simply because many competitors think of the same anagram?
I found the concise clues the most satisfying ones this month. For longer clues, I aim to look for wit, ingenuity or topicality to justify the extra length; there were indeed topical clues relating, for example, to the Chilean miners, but I'm afraid I found the wording of those a bit clumsy. It's hard to combine the necessary precision in clue-writing with an interesting reference to a topical event.
The clue I enjoyed most was 30, with its nice allusion and precise wording; 4 points to that, with 3 points for 49, 2 points for 18 and 54, and 1 point each for 4, 21, 35, 53. |
This competition was notable for the extraordinary variety of single-word definitions offered for “capture”. Quite a few of these struck me as definitely inadequate: eg, picture, detention, control, vacuum, even (apparently) escape. Words like hook, land, beach and trap signify specific ways of capturing something, but, at least without a “for instance” or equivalent, are, it seems to me, inaccurate as synonyms for capture. Which is a particular shame in the cases of 29, 30 – a lovely allusion to the Mad Hatter’s tea-party – and 31, all otherwise very good clues. Similarly, something appropriated is not necessarily, or even typically, captured, spoiling 59, an otherwise good clue. I was surprised to find that Chambers gives “arrest” as one of the definitions of capture and find it hard to credit that “arrest” in the sense of “apprehend or take into custody by legal authority” is what is meant. Only in a minority of very specific circumstances would it be at all natural to talk about the police capturing a suspected criminal. However, in view of the Chambers entry, it seemed a bit unfair not to give cop, collar, bust, nick and pinch (and indeed the &lit at 40) the benefit of the doubt . 8 and 32 were examples of invalid indicators of first letters: “starts treading” surely cannot indicate the first letter of “treading” – which requires something like “start of treading” or “how treading starts” – while “Premier’s” cannot conceivably mean “premiers of”.
5 points:
12 – delightfully succinct, with an excellent and (quite fairly) misleading surface.
2 points each:
18 – a neat clue
40 – a question-mark would have improved it
1 point each:
21 – a slightly improbable surface
41 – though the “in”, where “of” is really required, is a shade clumsy
49 – straightforward and rather easy to solve, but a pleasing image
55 – a nice anagram and surface, but, even with a question-mark, the definition is pushing it a bit.
0.5 point each:
10 – a question-mark to indicate that smoking is only one means of curing would have been an improvement
15 – surface spoiled by extreme improbability of a rook’s taking a queen in the opening of a chess game
39 – wrongful is on the borderline as an a.i.
48 – quite a nice surface, but “restore” for “cure” is a shade iffy |
