Listener 4333 - Discussion And Appreciation

[sunny-dave]

Listener No. 4333 - In the Event of Fire by Flying Tortoise

This thread is for the traditional 'elliptical' discussion, comments and thanks to the setter.

If you want to participate in a more direct conversation, a parallel thread has been started entitled "Listener 4333 - Hints and Help". There will be a link to this in the first reply on here.

[Cagey]

I just thought I would take a moment out of everyone's day to state how much I enjoyed the recent Sun's two speed crossword.

[Scorpius]

I'm not impressed by this puzzle at all. It comes close to what is referred to in this month's Magpie as a GWIT (Guess what I'm thinking). After solving an easy set of clues I was left floundering because of a less than helpful preamble. The process of solving clues revealed things that were intended to lead to the quote, but in the absence of supporting information (eg the originator of the quote hidden in the grid) they could suggest all sorts of themes.
Next we have "Guess what version of the quotation I want solvers to submit." If we rely on the current ODQ for the word order (as advised by the preamble) we should omit one word that is included (incorrectly) in many version of the quotation, but the relevant letters of that word are there in the grid - by design or by accident? I suppose symmetry provides the answer but, as others have said, it's a very unsatisfactory finale.

Finally we have a word in the solution grid that contradicts the first two words of the quotation. How could the editors have missed that?

[borealis]

Well done, sunny-dave! Good solution(s).

Which is more than I can say for this weeks, I’m afraid - I am largely in agreement with Scorpius, but having “got there”, as usual I’m too pleased with myself to worry about the first point.

With the second, no particular edition of the ODQ is specified; I would have said that any arrangement that fits would be accepted, since the “real words” constraint is not relevant. I claim right of precedence with a first edition copy, however!

On the third, I nearly changed my grid to obey the quotation, but instead have submitted an entry with the quotation mentally obeyed only, feeling that a more direct instruction was needed to make more changes.

[maurice]

Altogether a hopeless puzzle that no professional would be proud to call his own. I was thinking of opening a Monday Club here as I don't get the thing until much later then most (namely Monday midday), but after this experience I think I can afford to drop the bad habit of looking at The Listener completely.A waste of effort when the instructions are so unfairly formulated --- and probably by mistake as well. Maybe this was once a Great British Institution, but it has fast become ludicrous in the short time I've known it. So good luck to all who decide to persevere --- it's not even worth arguing about.

[maurice]

(for the pedants) For "then" please substitute "than".

[Cagey]

Well despite understanding the complaints here, I still enjoyed the clues and the solve and the pdm. If enough protest then I am sure all answers will be accepted. Find a quibble over final wording would be silly, given that to get to the quibble basically the whole puzzle is solved.

[AndrewG-S]

Maurice - I thnk in the last few weeks the Listener has had a bad run, but I don't think it is right to damn all the puzzles (and I guess all the setters) because of a couple of recent slips. Some of the puzzles are real masterpieces and I would recommend not judging on the basis of the last few weeks and in particular this week's puzzle which was something of an aberration. Perhaps dig out something like Sine Qua Non by Schadenfreude from the archives to restore your faith!

[maurice]

Thanks for the tip, Andrew, but I've stuck with quite a lot and am beginning to feel it's so often just not worth the candle. I accept that opinions may differ, however.

[jim360]

2015 has, perhaps, yet to really take off, but 2014 saw a fine collection of puzzles, for the most part. Hopefully this year will pick up soon.

[NickorWan]

Shackleton not Schadenfreude of course Andrew for Sine Qua Non. A master craftsman prepared to spend years on a puzzle. I had the pleasure of meeting him and was a bit star-struck. Let’s hope that we are due another soon. I certainly still enjoy solving The Listener and look forward to what might be.

[NickorWan]

Sorry, that was supposed to read that I look forward what might be in store each week.

[Ruthrobin]

Yes, I was going to say, Andrew-GS that it was Shackleton who compiled that wonderful puzzle. For me, equally magic was Kea's Admission - do try that, Maurice, if you didn't solve it at the time. Solving two like those makes it all worthwhile for me.

[upsetter]

It took an aeon for the penny to drop but once it had we felt that it was quite fair and sufficiently challenging.
Hello clouds, hello sky etc.

[AndrewG-S]

Sorry Shackleton and thank you all for correcting me!!

[tramart]

The simplest way would have been to give the number of letters in each word of the quotation, without reference to the ODQ at all, and simply to indicate that there were several versions. Okay, that would have slightly spoiled the need to understand the relevance of the sequence, but there would then be no need for several options to be accepted - if indeed that proves to be the case.

[UglyUncle]

Once again, a late start today. Grid filled with little difficulty, but no idea where to begin looking for the quotation. I'm looking here only to find out whether anyone else has cracked it - and, mirabile dictu, lots of you have - but I don't want to look elsewhere. If I'm beaten, I'm beaten.

Actually, that may well happen, at which point bang goes my long run of all-correct entries. It looks as if ambiguity (yet again) and wilful obscurity will be my downfall, which seems very unfair.

I do have just one yes/no question: given that there is apparently no need to solve the only impenetrable clue (21), should I bother with it? Or is the solution to that one clue going to lead to the PDM that none of the other 'treatments' has suggested?

Upsetter, do the final thing wot you sa hav any baring on the puzzle chiz chiz?

[maurice]

I don't think it's going too far at this point to tell you that you have to anagram 3 continuous straight lines in the grid in order to find the quotation that will explain why certain elements are missing in the solutions you've already entered. The problem at the end lies in knowing how to interpret the method indicated (but unclearly) in the pre-amble as to how
you should go about fitting that quotation into the grid --- and there we all have different solutions.
You're right, a very unfair puzzle --- but all the more reason imho why I should attempt to help you. I hope it works now!

[maurice]

P.S. I wouldn't bother particularly about 21: you can finish perfectly well without it.

[UglyUncle]

Maurice, many thanks - but in one of those 'How did I do that?' moments the PDM arrived, not from staring at the grid (no chance) or the 'synonyms' (hopeless, but I would say that, wouldn't I?) but from thinking hard about the title.

Although I usually agree with RR (aka fotherington-tomas?) that we should respect the time and effort committed by the setters, FT has strained my benevolence too far. And no-one else has said what a lamentable grid it is - within the initial thematic constraints it ought to have been possible to maintain a symmetrical layout.

I did retro-solve 21 after all else was done and I'd twigged that there was a completely redundant and possibly misleading short word in the clue.

[perseverer]

Ugly -can I call you that?- Not sure I understand the significance, but your mention of Fotherington-Tomas, via Google and Wiki, at least means I now know where hello clouds, hello sky came from.