February 26 2011
The Loroso Report - Usufruct to podium
The Loroso Conclusion is not a lost Ludlum title, but the week’s climax to a sustained forum in clue philosophy. The guru of honour is Dean Mayer, a regular setter in The Times, and clearly a regular sport for taking on this pro-bono role of judge for last week’s Clue Open. (Any gift suggestions welcome, and yes, he does have a copy of Puzzled, I understand.)
Anyhow, enough MC patter. Time for the end game, plus Loroso’s three laureates:
USUFRUCT: Turn, surf, cut, rip = product rights (Mr X)
Sometimes it’s staggering the extent to which enjoying or not enjoying a clue boils down to individual taste. Place this clue in a crossword and I’ve no doubt there would be lots of compliments for the quirky presentation an unexpected run of short introductory words; there might even be additional kudos granted by those familiar enough with the world of surfing to understand the references. But it didn’t really hit the mark for me, and I think in the end it was because the ‘product rights’ bit just didn’t seem to tie in with the rest – not convincingly enough anyway. If I can be persuaded to understand the references better I’m still not happy with ‘rip’ as the anagram indicator – it doesn’t really suggest the necessary jumbling of letters.
WELTANSCHAUUNG: Breaking gun laws, each nut displays inner beliefs (SK)
Well, this is just the sort of word your average solver would love to discover in a crossword. Not. Same applies to your average – no, even your most highly accomplished setter would just relish having to write a clue for. Strewth, as they say. Yet this clue demonstrates that a pretty awful set of letters can be turned into something solid, plausible and amusing. OK, the surface reading is faintly clunky, but it is still coherent and clearly points the solver towards an anagram; and that solver will be grateful for such overt signposting on the realisation that the answer is a tough, obscure word. In terms of ‘Wow!’ factor this can’t be a contender, but it is a fine demonstration of how a rotten word can be clearly, helpfully and accurately clued while retaining a good surface reading.
And now we come to the really tough part – selecting a top three. If the criterion was simply originality the task would be almost impossible because several clues take the unexpected into the realms of outlandish genius. I also have to bear in mind that, from the outset, this whole exercise is based on the sort of words you’re unlikely to see in the solution grids of the average daily crossword. To insist that, because of this, clues should be presented in as straightforward a way as possible is almost certainly going to remove a lot of the fun, so I’m going to take the unusual measure of imagining that each answer appears in a puzzle with all (or nearly all) of its letters cross-checked, so the clue-writer has been given the freedom to get a little bit down and dirty in the knowledge that the solver potentially has a huge amount of help available from other answers.
In third place: JEJUNE: In Paris I twice ran over a pedestrian (SK)
An outrageously cruel but funny image and clever use of French words throughout the wordplay. That tiny niggle over ‘ran’ instead of ‘run’ may have denied this clue second place, but it’s a cracker anyway.
In second place: SKIRL: Scream downhill on both hands! (SimonL)
The charade indicator ‘on’ won’t be on the approval list of all solvers; firstly that’s a 50/50 moot point anyway, and secondly the problem doesn’t exist at all if this is a down clue. A beautifully concise offering with a great surface reading.
In FIRST place: CONTUMELY: Barb: fashion nut in pretty outfit (Mauve)
Not a word is wasted in this fantastic clue. All of the wordplay gubbins sits perfectly and the definition is both appropriate and very, very crafty. Definitely a clue to be proud of.
Hear, hear, echoes DA, and not in any pseudo way. A splendid contest with three fitting winners. Congratulations to those compilers, and the biggest huzzah must be reserved for the arch-compiler Loroso, whose grace and guile have made us all a little wiser, and a lot more clued-up, in the diverse realm of Cryptopia.
Comments
Boniface — 26 February at 01:02AM
Great work Mauve, SimonL and SK. It's terrific to see that people like DA and Loroso are happy to give up their time to indulge us - I doubt I could have gotten any better entertainment this week.
dg — 26 February at 08:27AM
DA,
Perhaps you could judge one of Loroso's weekly clue-solving comps. It's been good to see how another expert looks at cluing. To help add another 'dimension' for us novice ... amateur ... setters it'd be good for this exercise be repeated some time with a third judge (i.e. not you or Loroso.) BTW thanks, Loroso. A labour of love is still a labour.
Sam — 26 February at 08:28AM
Congratulations Mauve, Simon L and SK – well done and well deserved! Also, many thanks to Anax for his detailed insights – as Boniface said it has been a very entertaining and engaging week! Great storm DA.
SK — 26 February at 08:30AM
I've been mucking around doing DA cryptics for a few years, along with the (very) occasional Times or other UK cryptic thrown in, without ever really having much knowledge or appreciation of different rules, protocols etc. I then stumbled across DA's blog about 6 months ago and have been having some fun with the storms. But this week's exercise is a bit like turning up for a tennis lesson and finding both Federer and Nadal there to provide the coaching. I think we have all felt privileged for the opportunity and appreciative of the time invested by the coaching staff. So thank you Anax for your insights, and thanks also to DA for the ongoing encouragement, constructive criticism, and general access to the way your brain works. This week's exercise has been great fun and a huge learning experience.
Congrats Mauve and Simon L. Mauve I reckon your barb is a true worthy winner. My other faves would have to be Sam's Bogart, X's Baldachin, and Bon's Oche.
Off to work on my extreme western grip...
Mauve — 26 February at 09:11AM
Congrats to SimonL and SK.
As I’ve said, SK’s jejune was my tip for winner - clever, with a beautifully effortless and intriguing surface meaning. And Simon’s is so tight and rhythmic.
Thanks DA, Bon, Sam, SK, but thanks especially to Loroso. I’m sure none of us expected (and all of us were gobsmacked by) the effort and detail he put in on our behalves, from pure generosity of duende. I already admired Loroso’s cleverness and discipline but did not expect such munificence.
And at the risk of being too sucky, his writing is so articulate, insightful, and concise, I’m saving the lot as a sort of Ten Commandments.
I’ve also discovered I’m still a conservative, dare I say anal, Ximenean at heart (probably from only doing Times cryptics all through the eighties) because although my 2 cents is worth 2 cents, I either agreed with, or learnt from, every detail in every review Loroso wrote. (Like everyone else, I wish I’d stuck with my instincts and submitted my first choices, which included my skirl and my duende rewrite.)
Overall it was like doing a 5-day course with lasting results that cost nothing. The person to thank of course is DA. Thanks mate for a brilliant idea, brilliantly realised. And I guess it’s no surprise that the king of the Libertarians is not going to podium in a Ximenean arena.
GymBunnies — 26 February at 09:41AM
Wow, what a week! Too bad we were out of action, but still amazing stuff to follow. Congrats and thanks everyone.
Boniface — 26 February at 10:13AM
Hey Mauve - podium as a verb - very Libertarian! ;)
Mauve — 26 February at 10:37AM
Lol. Ys. My mstk. DA's evl outfluence
DA — 26 February at 11:33AM
Thanks for the feedback - it's been a buzz to run Loroso's insights all week, a fitting finale to a great Storm.
Look forward to staging a similar event closer to this blog's birthday, with Storms and clue comps aplenty in the meantime.
Well podiumed, Mauve. And a huge thanks to Dean 'Loroso' Mayer for his eloquent largesse.
JPR — 26 February at 12:56PM
Still however puzzled by this aesthetic conflict over ximenean--araucarian; apart from noting that this corresponds to oxford vs cambridge (go those light blues!) i had always found Times style tended to the allusive and oblique rather than to a computational/analytic/scholastic style; (also the name Ximenes is in poor taste imho even after a few hundred years!)....
anyway, the winning jejeune is great. Thinking 'Skirl', as Sherlock Holmes said when Watson crashed into a tree on his first slalom run: "Watson, you ski but you do not observe"
JD — 26 February at 01:13PM
Well, to use 'reality tv speak', this has been a great journey we've all been on, and come out all the better. Once again, well deserved congratulations to the winners, and a huge thank you to our guest judge. 'Thank you' seems an inadequate word for the time and effort he bestowed on this task, and the insights he's given. I know I'm viewing today's DA in a different light!
On a personal note, I was delighted to get such a good wrap for my ampster clue, and not get pummelled for the others.
Thanks also to DA for orchestrating the whole affair.
Nib — 26 February at 01:55PM
Insightful analyses, I just hope to heck I never stumble across any like these in upcoming crosswords. :P
Anax — 26 February at 08:10PM
G'day everyone!
This has been a fascinating exercise and, for me, a great insight into (example of) how cryptic clues differ across the globe. The principles are largely the same but the application often very different. In fact the same can be said within the confines of the UK. Araucaria has been mentioned; many of his clues in The Guardian exploit wordplay trickery which simply wouldn't be accepted in other outlets - indeed not even from other Guardian setters - but that gives his puzzles a flavour you just won't find anywhere else. It takes some getting used to, but once you are used to it you find that solving his puzzles is often a unique experience.
Every UK setter has an individual style and, after a year or so of regular solving, you can identify a setter even if the puzzle doesn't carry a pseudonym.
That in itself is an interesting aspect of UK puzzles. The Guardian, Independent, FT and Telegraph Toughie series all use pseudonyms, so solvers come to know what to expect from individual setters; as a result, those setters have more licence to express their own styles.
The Times doesn't identify its setters. Neither does the normal (non-Toughie) Telegraph. Setters of these puzzles are obliged to write clues according to a house style, a set of fixed rules, so there is very little scope for experimentation and rule-bending. The Times is the more Ximenean of the two; the Telegraph can be, well, a little loose, but overall you'll find its rules are adhered to pretty well.
My own take on the clues which made up this Storm session is an individual one but, I hope, not far removed from how a typical UK solver would see and evaluate them. I'd be very surprised if others on this side of the globe didn't place Mauve's clue within the top three - probably agreeing it deserved its top place - and I reckon the 2nd and 3rd placed clues would do no worse than swap positions; but who's to know? Everyone has different notons about what floats their boat, be it smooth surface, conciseness, technical wizardry (one rather twisted solver I know once told me that the longer it took him to unravel a clue the more he enjoyed it. Sick puppy) so the results of this storm may be unpredictable if someone else was judging.
It has been terrific fun, and my sincere thanks to DA for giving me the opportunity to enjoy some long distance fun with words.
SK — 26 February at 08:33PM
Brilliant, Anax. You have blown us all away with your generosity, both in terms of time invested and the quality of your insights. Many thanks.
Mauve — 26 February at 09:02PM
"...but that gives his puzzles a flavour you just won't find anywhere else. It takes some getting used to, but once you are used to it you find that solving his puzzles is often a unique experience."
Sound familiar anyone?
I know someone else who that applies to!
Before I knew what a gentle soul he was, his rules-breaking puzzles used to make me angry, but now they're the only ones I look forward to - exactly the process Anax described.
JPR — 27 February at 04:47PM
Yes, lets not let in the cultural cringe, at his best (which is usually) DA is at least among the top 3 setters globally. but I thought there might have been a few lapses in yesterday's Age, altho this may just reveal my ignorance, eg 10 across 'attended' does what? [and 'density' isnt the same as 'mass', just like power and ohms are not the same...]; and IKEA is so much more than a furniture store [smiley face icon here]
Mr X — 27 February at 07:20PM
I'll add my thanks to Anax and hope that we continue to see him here in discussions to come. Great insights - it'll be interesting to see if some of us regulars modify our offerings in future challenges to take in the Anax perspective.
anax — 28 February at 08:50AM
Thank you Mr X for those very kind words - and I'll certainly try to make regular visits.
In the meantime (or 'during the meanwhilst' as those silly Python people once said) please do avail yourselves of a reasonably easy (I hope) thematic cryptic here: http://crossword.info/anaxcrosswords/Cryptic_Crossword_005
Love to y'all on God's own earth.
Stig Helson — 28 February at 10:45AM
JPR,
Out of a matter of interest, I'd like to know the criteria used in assessing that "at his best (which is usually) DA is at least among the top 3 setters globally." Number of publications, difficulty, blog comments...???
How many global setters have you solved on a regular basis? How many Australian setters have you solved on a regular basis? What makes a setter a top setter?
Do tell.
Stig
JPR — 28 February at 03:29PM
Hi Stig
My first response to your query/ies was 'ouch' (not sure if it went up) but my second is 'because I am omniscient', cheers JPR
Stig Helson — 28 February at 03:40PM
So no real basis then - I thought so.
Stig
JPR — 28 February at 05:26PM
no offence taken, we can't all be omniscient. Can we get back to discussing cryptic crosswords?
Stig Helson — 28 February at 05:47PM
JPR,
I thought my question about cryptic crosswords was straightforward. How did you assess the all the cryptic crossword setters in the world and come up with a top three? If you done a detailed assessment then share it, and I'll apologise, otherwise there's nothing that you could possibly get offended about.
Stig
Mauve — 28 February at 05:55PM
Have you had a tough day, Stig?
Stig Helson — 28 February at 06:12PM
No Mauve. Just like people to think before they write. If I said DA was the worst crossword writer in Australia, I'm sure contributors would want me to justify my assertion. Would an acceptable answer be "because he is"? I don't think so. I wouldn't make such an assertion without having some way of backing it up.
Stig
Mauve — 28 February at 07:38PM
Confucius say the cause of your anger is never the real cause of your anger
anax — 28 February at 07:54PM
I can understand some adverse reaction to any claim that an individual setter is 'the best' or 'among the top three', and I do hope you won't think bad things about me when I say those tags have been applied to me in the past - the point is, such claims can never be accurate.
A few days ago I mentioned the fact that solvers have individual preferences when it comes to clue types. A setter may be blessed with technical brilliance and produce puzzles whose clues combine slick surfaces and sly definitions, but there are plenty of solvers who just want in-your-face definitions and easily accessible wordplay; surface reading may matter not a jot to them. Many of Araucaria's clues come close to being nonsensical as 'stories' but he has a legion of fans who love his clues for what they are.
For a setter to be 'the best' he/she would have to be writing every clue in a way which appeals to absolutely everybody, and there's no such thing.
Put simply, the best setter in the world is the one you enjoy solving most; and every setter in the world is the best in the eyes of one body of solvers.
JPR — 28 February at 08:28PM
Hmm, I have to say that I disagree with both claims in the last sentence - cryptics are not ice-cream flavors.. but ok, balm gratefully received
DA — 28 February at 11:44PM
Thanks Anax (again) - one solver's Loroso is another's Bonxie. We all have our fiends of choice, and sometimes we vary our appetites, according to our moods. Far safer to say that Setter X is your kind of poison rather than commending the toxin to all comers...
(..as much as I appreciate your words, JPR, and your calling to account, Stig. Though a milligram less vitriol next time would be appreciated. Anax has sagely put the dispute to bed.)