i Cryptic Crossword 3136 Klingsor

February 25, 2021

An enjoyable challenge from Klingsor that I found to be on the tough side, but doable with a little thought applied. Did you know 1ac? I must admit to not knowing it either, but with all the checking letters in place (yes, it was my LOI) and some perfectly clear wordplay, there was little doubt at the close as to the outcome. Elsewhere I wasn’t sure what was going on with 15ac despite being pretty sure of the answer, and would have managed to parse 19ac on a better day, but I’m not having a better day. Roll on the weekend. Finished somewhat over par for the i, though in less time than it took to solve Tuesday’s Radian, should that be a useful measure of difficulty for anyone. 🙂

COD? In another puzzle 1ac and 9ac might have been hands-down winners, but Klingsor being Klingsor we have loads to pick from, with my nomination going to 12d – “Group of isolated geographical forms… this? (11)”.

To November 2016 for all the answers and parsing of the clues:


18 Responses to “i Cryptic Crossword 3136 Klingsor”

  1. Cornick said

    I have only one complaint: Why is there only one person on Fifteensquared who appreciated this wonderful crossword puzzle?
    Apart from all the perfect wordplay, invention, and immaculate surface readings I especially enjoyed the choice of vocabulary in the grid. Words like Threnody, Exaltation (of larks) and, yes, Tmesis, are there not as obscurities because the setter had painted himself into a corner, but rather as a celebration of words which lovers of the English language should surely relish – and presumably that includes most people who tackle cryptic crosswords!
    We’ve had an excellent week so far in the i, and this was the best of them – roll on tomorrow!

  2. Denzo said

    Agreed, challenging, but a littlle less so than Tuestday’s Radian. After a slow start, I completed this in slightly longer than yesterday’s by Dac. Amongst so many smooth surfaces and ingenious but efficient wordplays, I particularly liked the clever 11a, which, when you see it (as I did after quite a while) is so obvious that you feel sure it must have been done before – I think Klingsor has produced similar penny-drop clues in the past.

    I needed 225 to check on 22a and 12d which I had only partly parsed, and 10a where I had CAST UP (so a DNF!), probably because it’s almost a year since I used any CASH!

    There is always at least one obscure word with Klingsor; like Jon I needed to look up my LOI, TMESIS. I remembered THRENODY from my piano lessons; it was the name given to a short piece in a sight-reading book, which I looked up. I then decided all the pieces in such books were threnodies and never managed playing from sight.

  3. Cornick said

    As a group, lorry drivers are incredibly gifted in the use of tmeses. When I used to go hitch-bloomin’-hiking, I would collect examples, including the occasional, rare, double-tmesis for longer words.

  4. batarde said

    What Cornick said: that was very tasty indeed. At no stage was there the slightest sense of the setter just going through the motions, and I expect that’ll be why it was such an absorbing treat from start to finish. Nothing to report here, which is to say no quibbling, looking-up or grinding halts.

    As for tomorrow, according to my calculations Anax, who is about as frequent as Halley’s comet these days, is due to turn up any day now. 🙂

  5. Saboteur said

    Good one! Really enjoyed this, so many good clues to admire. Apart from the ones already mentioned, I loved HEATH. Very neat.

    Of course TMESIS was my last one in, and I am pleased that I resisted the use of crossword-solver, but instead trusted the word-play, to be rewarded with a very satisfying yellow tick. Only then did I look it up.

  6. Veronica said

    Each to their own. 😊
    Nope. Didn’t like it, because too difficult. Unsatisfying.

  7. Veronica said

    Each to their own. 😊
    Nope. Didn’t like it, because too difficult. Unsatisfying.

    • Veronica said

      Sorry. Keep managing to double hit the post comment.
      Not really so bad I wanted to say it twice. 😮

  8. The Nanas said

    We haven’t attempted this yet so I’m not looking at the blog but wanted to post re Inquisitor from Saturday which we were advised was entry level. We tried it and did relatively well with only about 2 clues missing which we made up!! Would really like to get answers etc. Is there similar blog to this where feedback can be found?? Thanks all.

  9. tonnelier said

    Responding to The Nanas, it’s a bit misleading to call last Saturday’s Inquisitor entry level. It was in fact by a long way the easiest I can recall, and sadly not at all typical of what we’ve come to expect from the Inquisitor.

    • jonofwales said

      It is a debate for next week, but surely by virtue of being straightforward, and attracting new solvers as above, it is entry level? And has indeed, done its job admirably. The Nanas should be encouraged to continue and not put off by what can come over as elitist, well it was an easy one, type statements.

      Chalicea’s puzzles in the Inquisitor and elsewhere are known for being fairly straightforward, but are always enjoyable, and widely admired. The EV used one of her puzzles to kick start their entry-level, “let’s try and attract some new solvers” month, because the editor knew that it would.

      Anyway, one week when I can pretend that I’m actually good at these things gets a thumbs up in my book.

    • batarde said

      Wasn’t going to look at it, but you know me: a hint of controversy and I’m going to want some of that. 🙂

      My message to The Nanas is that you’re within an ace of finishing, and undoubtedly will beat the puzzle if you persist. If you haven’t addressed the “observation” yet, it might be an idea to transfer your attentions to that because it may well help.

  10. thebargee said

    Sadly I had no time today for the crossword and unfortunately it’s way past crossword-o-clock for me.

    I suspect I wouldn’t have finished it, some of the words are a bit too abs-flipping-truse for me, but I think I would’ve enjoyed the challenge.

  11. dtw42 said

    Well, 1ac was my FIRST one in, but that was probably my high point. I almost always struggle with Klingsor, and so it proved again today. I ended up resorting to electronic help quite a bit, and bunging in answers on definition without understanding the parsing a fair amount too. Got there in the end, but not my cup of tea.

  12. Grodnik said

    Very busy today for a change hence the late solve, and the fact that I thought it quite tricky. However, the redeeming feature for me was THRENODY, a word (like some others I have commented on) once heard never forgotten. Where did I get it from? Hymns Ancient and Modern, as a seven-flipping-year-old post-war new choirboy at the local village church about to be exposed thrice weekly (two Sunday services and Friday practise) to that, the New Cathedral Psalter, and the King James Bible. I thank these three for the vocabulary and love of singing, but can’t forgive the brainwashing. NDY

    • batarde said

      I think I might have waxed lyrical about threnody before, too, Grodnik, thanks to a music teacher who thought that Penderecki would be just the fellow to fire the enthusiasm of thirteen-year-olds. Don’t know about the others, but it did work on me.

  13. Willow said

    Most people seem to have loved this. I found it an enormous struggle, but, on reflection, I do now appreciate many of the clues and, like others, the wide range of interesting words included. However, I can’t agree that all the surface readings were fluid. I found some very clunky indeed. For example, what exactly does “Source of annoyance not against hiding key for larks” actually mean? And who would say or write it? The occasional contorted clue is always a welcome challenge, but I find it disheartening when such clues are combined with nonsensical phrases.

    Having said that, I needed electronic help with only one answer – FELICITATE – which was my LOI, at about 7.15 on Friday morning, so long did I have to ruminate on these things …

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: