CCCWC January competition voters’ comments
Clue no. 21: Evade duty at work – term for employee not going in?
Back to competitor’s clues | All the comments | Other competitions
A clue to DUVET DAY.
6 comments refer to this clue (from 5 competitors, 0 others)
Move your mouse pointer over any bold clue number to see the clue.
Here is the text
| Comments on the competition |
|---|
| 1. |
| Some distinct classes of clues here: * Ones using 'Dave duty' that automatically get booted out for the usage of arbitrary name. * Ones using evade duty and some way to eliminate 'e', that claim to be &-lits. Quite a few are not, with implausible surfaces carrying appendages that cannot form part of the definition. * Ones using 'down', which except for 3, fall short, as duvet=down is not just correct. * Some other boring ones which carry imperfect wordplay. 13 was the only funny clue here. 33 got to be lauded for the clever use of overlord. I would plump for one of 3, 6, 13 or 21 to go all the way… |
| 2. |
| The definition was the trickiest part of this challenge and thus the trickiest to judge. This is a relatively recent coinage, and the dictionary authorities seem not to be in full agreement as to what precisely it means. There is unanimity that a duvet day is one agreed with the employer, and the majority states (a) that its purpose is to alleviate (genuine) stress and (b) that it is typically granted at short notice. Only Chambers (11th edition), in one of its whimsical definitions, suggests that the reason given by the employee is necessarily specious and that the employer knows this, but turns a blind eye. The OED, surely the ultimate authority on English usage, defines duvet day as “a paid day’s leave from work, granted at short notice for rest or recovery from stress, etc”. Nevertheless, a definition that picks up the full flavour of the Chambers definition must presumably be allowable, simply because Chambers, even in a minority, is our standard bible. On the other hand, a definition (eg, 1, 15, 30) along the lines simply of time-off is probably insufficient. It is clear too that a duvet day is (a) a noun and [b] an occasion and not the excuse given for taking it or even the act involved in taking it – which rules out, eg, 8, 9, 11, 14, 16, 19, 29, 31, 32, regardless of other considerations. More problematic is a definition (eg, 4, 5, 21, 28) that implies either that the reason given is not genuine or that the reason is the alleviation of stress, but does not state or imply that the employer’s agreement has been obtained. I decided to give the benefit of the doubt to these, if only because to exclude them would leave hardly any otherwise sound clues eligible for points. 4, however, was ruled out for me by the inadequacy of “Abandoning” as an a.i.; similarly, the definition in 41 is unexceptionable, but the a.i. is, unfortunately, fatally flawed by the little word “to”. 5 points: 6 This ticks all the boxes with respect to the (Chambers) definition. Some purists might object that a composite anagram should have an a.i. in only one half, but that seems unreasonable to me when the “redundancy” contributes to so neat a surface. 3 points each: 21 skillful wordplay, and the definition neatly side-steps the traps identified above 28 a refreshingly different approach, deftly done 2 points: 36 This cleverly achieves the element of employer’s permission, but sails perilously close to defining duvet day as an act rather than an occasion, though I think that the use of “This” just avoids the charge. 0.5 point each: 3, 17, 39 These deserve some recognition for their brevity, combined with the play on the word “down”. 24 This has the merit of neatly incorporating the idea of employer’s permission, but the use of the arbitrary “Dave” simply for the sake of the anagram is a weakness (in my own clue too!). |