Listener No 4372: Seldom Seen By Piccadilly

[AHearer]

Anything I say will set off yet another argument about easy and hard Listeners, so I'll leave it at thanking Piccadilly for a brief spell of entertainment.

[Scorpius]

Well said, RuthRobin. The tone of some of theses comments is just plain nasty. If the people making those comments are so bored wouldn't they be better off doing something other than posting their snide comments here? As a setter I don't mind criticism, and as a solver I do sometimes make critical comments, but I do take exception to sneering. We had a similar input last week with a number of condescending and negative comments on a very fine puzzle.
The puzzle is based on a nice idea that has featured only once before in my memory. Not all the thematic clues are easy, and I'm still pondering the wordplay to one of the the other clues, so it's a perfectly good puzzle at the easy end of the spectrum, even if it doesn't appeal to all.

One clue surprised me. I don't think I've ever seen a clue like 23d in the Listener except where there's a preamble alert. It seems to break the Listener's own rules.

[olichant]

I absolutely echo RR and Scorpius (though, Scorpius, I admit I don't see the problem with that down clue - and now am feeling paranoid!)

Happy weekend to everyone, from a rather glum Paris.

[s_pugh]

Totally agree with RR, Scorpius and others of a similar persuasion. Yes there were some easy clues, BUT the construction was neat and with a twist in the tail.

Thanks Piccadilly, I enjoyed it and feel some of the posters here are being a tad unkind and unappreciative.

[u10]

I have followed Piccadilly's puzzles for many years now and he is one of a select group of setters who has produced both number and letter puzzles. All of his crosswords have been consistently fair and straightforward and this includes the ones appearing in the EV series. If you ever get the chance, try some of his early Listener numericals - brilliant! Shame we can't now get a number puzzle from him next week!

[EV_Solver]

I'm with RuthRobin here. There is a place for nicely constructed simpler Listeners such as this. I'd greatly prefer one of these to a poorly-constructed ambiguous Listener of which there have been a few recently. I'm of the opinion that it's harder to set a fun simple puzzle than a good medium-difficulty puzzle.

Piccadilly won't see any of the snide comments, fortunately, as I believe he is not connected to the internet, and so sets his puzzles by hand - drawing grids out with ruler and pen, getting a fill by literally writing in words until he finds a grid where they will all fit, and typing up his clues on an old-fashioned typewriter.

When you look at some of his puzzles and how elegantly set they are, given these constraints, I doubt that many of the new breed of setters could do better. It's a lot harder to set a puzzle as Piccadilly does, than it is to type a few thematic words into a stock grid in Crossword Compiler or Sympathy, click onto 'Fill', and then see the software fill the grid automatically.

So give Piccadilly a break. I thought this was a nice example of a simpler puzzle, a good one for new solvers to have a go at (the Listener needs new solvers, or in a few years time due to death and other attrition, the entry numbers will collapse to zero), with clear, concise clues. I wouldn't want one this simple every week, but I'd like one every now and then. Nice puzzle.

[Cruncher]

Good to see the British attitude to crosswords is no different to their attitude to the weather - always something to grumble about. Too hard, too easy, too quick, too laborious.
I thought this was ok and well put together but my grumble is about the thematic answers. On one hand you can complete the puzzle without solving all the thematic clues. On the other hand if you do want to solve all the thematic clues at best you can only deduce one letter of the answer (as opposed to the grid entry) from crosschecking. A tad unfair

[towsertaylor]

I've only had one Listener published but it means I can write as a 'setter' - fine puzzle from Piccadilly, good construction and clever theme. Finished fairly quickly but we don't all have the time for a week's worth of headscratching (or do we?)

[EAChaplin]

I want to thank u10 for those interesting nuggets of information about Piccadilly. I have just completed one of his numericals in the Book of Listener Crosswords and like u10 have enjoyed many of his puzzles in the past.
I shall make a point of including a few complimentary remarks with my entry now that I am aware Piccadilly doesn't have internet access.

[icynorth]

I can't add a lot, really. Some nice clues, but never difficult. Thanks Piccadilly!

[emcee]

I enjoyed this, and agree that those who don't find the extra letters haven't solved the puzzle.

Can I recommend a book from 1993, "The First Book of The Independent Magazine Crosswords". It has puzzles by the old favourites Mass, Phi, Quixote, Lucifer and Apex. And a couple of puzzles by Piccadilly too!

I found the Indy Mag crossword of old a nice, gentle start into the thematic crossword world and there were some great puzzles set. This week's Listener puzzle reminded me of those puzzles.

[UglyUncle]

I was rather shocked when I began reading the comments, so thanks to RR for summing up my own feelings, after which it was good to see others agreeing.

The complainers seem often to react with hostility if the clues are seen as being 'too easy', which appears then to deprive them of the willingness to say, 'Actually I wonder how long it must have taken Piccadilly to identify a usable set of thematic answers, capable of being replaced by words of the same length while also fitting together in a symmetrical grid'. It's not a task that can be mechanised.

Upsetter, the third sentence of the preamble looks unambiguous to me, but you might be in trouble if you were filling the grid as you went along. The quibble that no-one else has raised is that the final seven letters of the first sentence are redundant.

[Cruncher]

Good point UglyUncle. In fact the entire first sentence is completely wrong

[aldanna]

I am fully in agreement with RR's comments in general but have to agree with UglyUncle about the end of the first sentence (as well as about the complexities of compiling this puzzle). I had not raised this here but I had earlier expressed slight dissatisfaction about it to Himself.

[UglyUncle]

I've just noticed my mistake. Despite not being tired and emotional last night, I managed somehow to type 'seven letters' when I meant (of course) 'seven words'.

[upsetter]

UU can see no ambiguity and we've got the word.
We have even had a billet-doux from RR, but still don't see why the word leads to the final entry that she (and by inference you) have effected.

[AndrewG-S]

Upsetter, I am intrigued by what you think the ambiguity is if you have the word - maybe you can drop me an explanation on [email protected] as perhaps I am missing something.

[Zabadak]

My working out of the additional letters word certainly gives an unambiguous instruction that can/must be applied to the whole grid, all the entries. There are no other arrangements possible. If you don't got it, you ain't solved the puzzle. Hows that for unambiguity?

[IainGrace]

To fill the time, this week's Inquisitor is amusing and entertaining.

[IainGrace]

Not wishing to be disparaging and not sure what the Listener standard is (very subjective) but, if solving the puzzle in its entirety in just over half an hour is any sort of standard, then this was not a good Listener. As noted, the Indy this week is entertaining and multi-layered, and emcee may wish to note a continuing debate there as to whether it is becoming much tougher. In our experience over the last few months there is little to choose between the Listener and the Inquisitor most weeks.

[EAChaplin]

It would take me more than half an hour to fill the two grids being careful not to make errors:-)