Australian Crosswords

It’s pretty clear that, in general, solvers don’t own, or don’t have access to comprehensive dictionaries. How do I know? There are many queries about definitions and components of clues that would be answered with just one simple look-up. As a solver, you can’t be expected to know everything about a word and I can’t be expected to write crosswords using the lowest common denominator of word knowledge of my solvers.
Having said that, I have to aim for a place that both of us can exist, and to that end I have rules regarding what words and meanings I use, the references they must be in and whether I have a working knowledge of a word/term. When in doubt, a simple clue can come to the rescue.
All this is under threat, though, as the electronic dictionaries I have that run locally on my PC, are no longer being produced. They have been replaced by online versions that are a poor substitute, with slow response time, zero integration with crossword software and limited search options. Such online software needs a working internet and insists on a logon process that automatically logs you off after a short period of inactivity. In the case of Oxford, you can buy a personal annual subscription that gives you access to 100s of publications, but there’s no provision for a smaller fee for just a couple of titles. The system is heavily geared towards institutions like universities and schools, but does allow people to access publications through libraries, if your local library has signed up. Yearly fees for each publisher tend to be more than buying hard or soft copies of dictionaries, making the online environment very much unsatisfactory for crossword setters. With very few crosswords to produce, I won’t be using online versions anytime soon, relying heavily on my ageing PC-based electronic dictionaries. While dictionaries don’t change that much, they do change, so there’s a real possiblity that over time I’ll get left behind. I guess I’ll deal with that if and when it occurs.

The Stickler

A little while back I invited all to accomplish something I wasn’t able to do at the time to my satisfaction – write an &lit clue. I’d done the first bit: worked out the base components and suggested a possible construction, but the final touches were needed (if possible) to create an acceptable &lit. The situation that I presented to you comes up relatively regularly during the course of setting crpytic clues, that is, components and construction options suggest that the right combination could lead to the holy grail of setting, a clue that is totally definition and at the same time, totally wordplay.
The tricky bit is getting it perfectly right. Some setters are happy with close enough, but it doesn’t take much for it to fall apart for me. If I can’t make it all work, I’ll move on, or use the bits I have and add a definition. Let’s recap: Our answer is SIEGE MENTALITY, and my suggested construction was: (MEN) inside an anagram of GET IT EASILY. In this case, the key word is (believe it or not) “it”, a word that can point the whole clue to a single concept. There was one attempt in particular, possibly spurred on by the self-confessed wimp, Greg, that I’d like to break down and assess. There are two essential elements that must be exactly right for the clue to work: the containment indicator, putting (MEN) inside, and the anagram indicator. The first one is easier, but still must convey the right “sense” otherwise the wordplay won’t offer enough to make the definition acceptable. The second is the anagram indicator, which for me, makes or breaks the clue, as again it has to convey the right “sense” AND be recognisable as a suitable anagram indicator. This last part is where I stumbled, not being able to find one word/term that I was happy does both jobs.

Here’s Steve’s clue:

People in the grip of it get easily alarmed (5,9)

Here the containment part “in the grip of” paints the perfect picture (better than the one I used in the final clue), a totally suitable term the describe a condition that’s mental. The anagram indicator, “alarmed”, while conveying the right sense in terms of the definition, is on the border as a proper anagram indicator IMO. It’s very close, and I have no doubt many solvers wouldn’t question it.  Arthur questioned the whole thing as a viable definition of SIEGE MENTALITY, but I think it’s OK, not super-specific, but still with enough information do the job.

So a great effort, and one far superior to anything I’ve seen published locally.

I hope this exercise has also given some insight into what an &lit is, as understanding the concept isn’t as easy as it appears.

The Stickler