i Cryptic Crossword 3101 Donk
January 15, 2021
This crossword is constructed around something I’ve not seen done before – or, more precisely, not done so impressively before: a chain of eight answers, each one an anagram of the previous clue, plus one additional letter, taking us from RIM to the ten-letter IMPERSONAL. This is no small achievement. Donk deserves high praise for it.
To be sure, on my first read-through I was irritated by what I took to be just a high proportion of clues which were cross-referenced. Accordingly, the first part of my solve was largely confined to the left-hand side, which was more-or-less free of the interconnections. Only when I came to solve IMPERSONAL in the LHS, and ended up working backwards all the way to RIM did I realise what a tour-de-force Donk had created.
Moreover, there are some very nice cryptic or whimsical definitions, like “face employee” for MINER and “one lacking depth” for CYCLOPS.
There is one genuine obscurity: EXAUGURAL. This was very neatly and precisely clued, the crossing letters offered substantial reassurance and the possibility of there being an opposite for “inaugural” seemed reasonable, with this being the logical way to construct it. But I did have to go to my ancestral Shorter Oxford to find it (yes, I know I could have googled it, but in my hierarchy of what help to seek, googling comes as the last resort).
I would like to nominate, if I could, the chain-of-eight as the clue of the day. But I don’t think I can, so instead I offer 5d: “Short rotation works for one struggling with depth (7)”.
Click here for the answers and explanations.
Borodin
batarde
Saboteur
Denzo
flashling
jonofwales
Cornick
sprouthater
uiytjhgmj
willow1235
idothei 
I saw the word chain early and thereupon decided the puzzle was entirely compatible with my DNA! (= Do Not Attempt). I managed about one quarter, mainly in the SW corner, correctly guessed TULIP and PERUSAL, but couldn’t parse them so didn’t enter them.
The puzzle clearly had some neat touches such as OBAMA. and I can only offer my congratulations to those who, like Saboteur, persevered and finished or commiserations to any who didn’t – I’m happy in the latter group today!
I certainly found bits of it decidedly tricky and needed quite a bit of help to get over the finish line. Having a word that’s not in Chambers is a bit saucy (though, as you say, it was presented plainly and was etymologically guessable).
This was a very clever puzzle. Donk is very clever – and I do genuinely mean that. I persevered and finished and understood it all, but, like yesterday, it was another test of endurance. Ah well, along with having very little heat (still – thank you British Gas …) it is character building. There were three or four of clues that raised a smile in me – thank you for that.
Wow, that was a bit special. The concatenated anagrams were very helpful, in fact, making this one of Donk’s more accessible puzzles despite early appearances. This setter does tend to leave me somewhat in awe, and I can see this one remaining a leading candidate for crossword of the year for a long time. Bravo.
Re exaugural, yes I did check Chambers and drew a blank. It’s tribute to the meticulous clue writing that I was confident enough to write it in anyway.
Hmmm… now it’s my turn to be in a grump. Didn’t get anywhere at all with this (well, I did write in 5 answers) before giving up. I’m not keen on interconnected clues at the best of times so probably wasn’t trying as hard as I should, but I’m a bit disappointed to fail so miserably after 4 consecutive successes this week!
Congrats to all who persevered; I am now off to 225 to find out how stupid I’ve been.
Very clever, I dare say. I did not like it. I simply thought it was clever for the sake of being clever, without adding anything to the experience of doing a crossword. Turned to the Guardian instead, after an abortive and frustrating attempt.
But I can see that those who continued may well have enjoyed the novelty, and I’m all for setters trying different things.
I did very much like the definition for CYCLOPS.
The chained anagram thing I was very glad to spot eventually, otherwise I expect I would have got nowhere! All very cleverly done though, and once answers started falling I enjoyed the solve. The obscurities I entered confidently, which is always a good sign, and 5d I plucked out of nowhere for reasons I still can’t fathom.
It’s a funny old game – I found this much easier than yesterday’s and all finished off with not much cause for pause until the last 4 in the NW which duly toppled en masse once I realised which fish we were looking for – fish being one of the several words to appear in clues that make me come over all vague.
Loved the COD and the anagram idea, which reminded me of that pyramid puzzle that appears in the i each weekend.
The chain actually goes up to 11 letters with TRAMPOLINES.
Yes, you’re right, Allan. Careless note-making on my part. Thanks for the correction.