The Stickler Weekly 131 Solution

Not long ago I talked about the problems that can occur in cryptic clues if care isn’t taken to avoid potential issues that may cause offence. While a cryptic clue is usually not to be considered as a statement/phrase in its own right (due to the two-part nature of most clues), it may still offend especially if the solver isn’t that familiar with cryptic clues. There’s an exception, of course, in the case of &lits, where the entire clue can be read separately as wordplay and definition. Last week a letter appeared in The Age (“Slipping under radar”) highlighting a clue that caused concern for a reader (and I suspect many others too). The clue for SHINER was Visible punishment for her sin? (6), and it appeared last year in a cryptic in the Herald-Sun which is published in Victoria. The reader had complained to the paper but received no reply, so she wrote a letter to the “opposition” who were only too glad to print her concerns. I can’t confirm, but it seems this cryptic is published in all News Ltd’s mainland dailies, and it replaced The Stickler in The Daily Telegraph. Clearly this is a clue from a bygone era – sad that it would have been deemed acceptable at any time – but it’s age is irrelevant: it just shouldn’t have been published. There’s no excuse either, as the News Ltd cryptic is a syndicated one, which means it’s either created for a publication and then sold to others, or created for an agency that sells it multiple times. Regardless, it must have been checked and approved a dozen times across the world, so a flag must have been raised at some time. I have the sneaking suspicion the whole crossword could be an old recycled one that wasn’t checked with a modern eye as such necessities require subediting work that just isn’t done these days.