AZED CROSSWORD 298

NOSER

1.  L. May: Elevated debate precludes one (re(a)son (rev.), & lit.).

2.  C. H. Hudson: I must know – what’s this bloody organ doing in a piano serenade? (hidden, 2 defs.).

3.  J. D. Moore: Parker? No Parking sign makes person like him upset (anag. less P; ref. Nosey P.).

VHC

E. Akenhead: Punch as apéritif to claret (2 mngs.; claret = blood).

T. Anderson: One’s very curious – right? (anag. + r, & lit.).

G. Aspin: On mulled rose, a pinch of nutmeg produces a robust and heady snifter (n + anag.).

M. J. Balfour: It’s said to cut grass right (nose r).

P. R. Best: What kind of blow in the face helps to make Cyrano serous? (hidden; ref. C. de Bergerac).

Rev C. M. Broun: Could come from North-east, that could, the bloody thing (comp. anag.).

P. R. Clemow: This could wreck bridge, north, south or east requiring redeal (anag. of N S or E; bridge of nose).

R. Dean: Result of argument one lost, facing up? (re(a)son (rev.), & lit.).

P. Drummond: ‘No Observer’, though not involving end of magazine, is still a blow (no seer, less e).

B. Franco: No sprinter wanting to make an impression invokes it (no s(print)er, & lit.; i.e. headwind).

S. Goldie: What rebuffs possible threat from northeaster – a sou’wester? (northeaster less anag.).

A. H. Harker: This makes service jam: it’s hard to make progress against it (i.e. no ser makes service vice).

J. G. Hull: No service is without fault in such a strong headwind (no ser(vice)).

N. N. Inglis: A strong head-wind – no services free from faults (no ser(vices)).

W. Jackson: Occupational hazard for the ratings in a cruiser – or a ‘cruiser’ in the ratings (2 mngs.).

M. D. Laws: You’ll see this potential blood-letter lie uneasy in Elsinore (comp. anag.; ref. Hamlet).

A. D. Legge: This rebuff quite confounds questioner (comp. anag.).

D. F. Manley: Small number attending first of ‘supertests’ – indication of hesitancy or hostile reaction? (no. + s + er; ref. cricket).

D. P. M. Michael: No Sunday paper? Without that sop, what a facer! (no S (pap)er).

C. J. and R. S. Morse: Small number getting inside section of Observer is a blow (no. + (Ob)ser(ver)).

T. E. Sanders: A blast in the face from the solano seriously discomfits a senor (hidden, anag.).

W. J. M. Scotland: Resounding snub? Not half! (reson(ating) (rev.), & lit.).

Mrs E. J. Shields: Possibly personal, prying friend (anag. less pal, & lit.; pry = extract).

W. K. M. Slimmings: Reason for one being K.O’d, boxing? (anag. less a, & lit.; for = but for; box = overturn).

Brig R. F. E. Stoney: Effect of beating up? This makes it hard for sailor (2 mngs.).

Rev C. D. Westbrook: Inquisitor – torturing senor (anag.).

D. C. Williamson: Take after one’s pappy, i.e. dad, in the face (anag. + r; pappy adj., dad v.).

HC

C. Allen Baker, R. W. Ashworth, Mrs P. A. Bax, E. C. Bingham, Mrs K. Bissett, J. M. Brown, E. J. Burge, R. S. Caffyn, G. Cuthbert, Cdr H. H. L. Dickson, J. H. Dingwall, S. F. Edwardson, J. A. Fincken, A. L. Freeman, J. A. Gill, D. V. Harry, R. J. Hooper, R. H. F. Isham, W. Islip, V. Jennings, G. Johnstone, Capt G. Langham, J. H. C. Leach, P. W. W. Leach, C. Loving, P. B. Macdonald, W. F. Main, H. W. Massingham, F. Moss, D. S. Nagle, D. A. Nicholls, D. B. Oaten, R. J. Palmer, W. H. Pegram, T. Proctor, A. J. Redstone, K. Reed, H. L. Rhodes, W. Rodgers, N. Roles, H. R. Sanders, J. A. Sefton, M. D. Speigel, T. A. J. Spencer, K. Stewart, J. G. Stubbs, Dr P. W. Thompson, E. Tingle, D. H. Tompsett, G. C. West, Dr E. Young.
 

COMMENTS
265 entries, no mistakes. Clearly the Observer magazine was widely available despite the problems affecting delivery of the paper itself. However, the smallish entry, and the absence from it of a number of regulars, made it equally apparent that some would-be solvers were foiled in their attempts to get hold of any part of the Observer. In the circumstances the fairest thing seemed to be to judge the competition normally but to exclude the results from the cumulative points table on which the annual honours list is based. I hope you all agree. It justifies the efforts of those who did compete and does not unduly penalize those who were unable to. Let me just emphasize that in situations like this one, the magazine is usually more likely to be available than the paper section since it is printed and delivered separately and earlier.
 
A nice varied entry, however small, as I’d expected from a word with a variety of different meanings. Indeed it was quite easy, and perfectly sound, to devise clues which simply juxtaposed two or more meanings of NOSER and leave it at that. Many of you settled for that approach and may feel peeved at my apparent indifference to your efforts, at least in so far as the upper echelons of the lists are concerned. As I’ve said before I have to look for little extra imaginative touches when judging a generally high-quality entry, as I hope is apparent from the clues quoted in full above. Incidentally, Mr. May’s prize-winning clue is a fine example of the succinctness one can achieve in a good ‘& lit.’ I wavered fractionally before giving him first prize as the thought crossed my mind that perhaps the definition implicit in the clue is not as unambiguously clear as it should be. Does his lofty discussion preclude a punch on the nose or a sharp verbal rebuff? I settled firmly for the former (despite distinct memories of examples of physical assault in such august chambers as the House of Commons and the Oxford Union!) and passed judgement accordingly. Perhaps ‘… should preclude one’?
 
I was reminded by one solver that I clued NOSER myself as long ago as No. 116. No one repeated me word for word though one or two were close. I am amazed that anyone should keep such a detailed record of my past output and have to admit that my own determination to mark up my dictionaries each time I use a particular word has had to be abandoned for lack of time. It is possible therefore, that I may choose as the clue-word a word I have myself clued on a previous occasion, but never mind – I’m sure you can improve on my efforts!