The Stickler Weekly 139 Solution

We all have, both solvers and setters, little annoying problems with devices used in most crosswords. That is, there are things that make us cringe every time we see them, but we tend to accept them anyway. For solvers it might be the use of terms like “revhead” = R or “backdoor” = R or anagram indicators that don’t do their jobs. For setters it might be the overuse of crosswordese or the addition of extra words in clues that play no role. A recent topic on The Crossword Centre’s forum was entitled “More Pet Peeves”, and a couple of people contributed particular things in cryptics they didn’t like. There wasn’t a big response, but a couple of things came out of the topic for me. Firstly, one pet peeve was the use of the term “essence” to mean the centre part of. I don’t think I’ve ever used it simply because I couldn’t justify its use based on the dictionary definition. This is despite its general acceptance in crossword circles by solvers and setters. It was good to see that this crosswordese has its detractors. Secondly there were two quite separate responses which I think says something about how setters can approach the use of a possible questionable device. Alberich (Neil Shepherd), who brought up “essentially” in the first place, refuses to use it because he doesn’t think it does the job even though he could. Andy Stewart sort of feels the same but uses it because “it is in such common use”. Interestingly he compliments Alberich on his restraint since every device excluded reduces the toolset of a setter, making their job harder. I also admire setters who actually think about the true validity of the devices they employ as such setters are all-inclusive, remembering that not all solvers are veterans and new solvers must be able solve without too much inside knowledge.