Australian Crosswords

The concept of “double duty” is an easy one to understand: part or parts of a cryptic clue have more than one role, that is, to be truely technically correct the double duty element(s) would have to be repeated for the clue to be sound. Obviously, that’s not possible in most cases as the clue wouldn’t make any sense, so double duty is employed. The solver must consider one part of the clue as overlapping with another part. For instance,
Strikingly unconventional at four (3-3)
must be read as [Strikingly {unconventional] at four}, so the overlapping {unconventional] performs double duty, one as a (necessary) part of the definition and the other as an anagram indicator (anagram of AT FOUR = FAR-OUT).
It wouldn’t surprise you to find out that I don’t like this. The reason is simple: a clue that employs double duty is incomplete despite the necessary components being available if the clue is read/considered in a special way. Add some kind of indicator to instruct the solver, and I’d be happy. In my mind the use of double duty is lazy setting.
Here’s another one:
Roll at base of picnic basket (5)
Here the setter uses “(at) base of” to position and to extract a letter. It’s also an across clue which adds more confusion as “base” can be “bottom” but not “end”. It doesn’t strictly conform to the overlapping style of “normal” double duty clues, and in fact it doesn’t seem right no matter how you think of it yet the answer, “C + REEL”, is clearly the right one.
Some would argue that double duty is alright if used in an easy clue. Remembering that double duty means there is missing information, would it follow that an anagram clue without an appropriate anagram indicator is acceptable as long as it’s obviously an anagram? Not on my watch!
Double duty may also be employed in a semi-&lit clue where the wordplay stands alone but requires something extra in order to convey a proper definition. For example: Brit vicar’s clues excited them? (15).
In this case the entire wordplay may be considered as doing double duty but doesn’t quite provide a definition so “them” must be added. In some cases, the separate definition part may be seen as enough and the wordplay as just adding some clarification.

Over the years I’ve written just about every kind of crossword you can imagine, from the 3-minute, heavily-interlocked quick to the Y2K monster history puzzle that contained at least one clue for each year of the preceding century. Every puzzle type is different in content, style and audience, and a setter must take this into account when putting them together. Content is fairly straightforward, as is style, but catering for a potentially wide audience will always leave a setter with unresolvable issues. No two solvers are alike in solving ability and everyone’s vocab is different. A solver brings to the solving table a lifetime of word experience, some of which may be in a specific field related to study or work, and this will to some extent colour their view and interpretation of clues. For example, recently a solver commented on the equation of Average = Mean in an Australian newspaper crossword, stating that they are two very different terms. Of course, they are right, if you look at them from purely a mathematical or statistical perspective. However, as there is no context given in most clues, all aspects are permissible and a general term is certainly not incorrect. This often won’t stop the avid long-time scientist or biologist from voicing their displeasure, certain that their interpretation of a particular clue is the only one that should be considered. For people who have thought of a word one way their whole life, it’s hard to think of it any other way. Remember, there are countless words that start with a narrow meaning and spread their wings over time, many taking on informal or colloquial aspects. All this is good for the cryptic setter who must exploit these to bring variety to their work.