Listener Crossword 4155 Body of Evidence by Jacques

[Zabadak]

Interesting this one in that I know what the end result should be, with the evident truth clearly displayed, but I can't see how best to get there: I have a number of viable options depending on what you count as a considerable body of letters.
Otherwise a decent set of clues, though I'm not sure about the definition at 1d
Thanks to Jacques and regards to all.

[fyellin]

Very nice construction. Beautiful endgame. My only problem is that I see two possible sets of letters to highlight: (1) the letters moved, plus an obvious 3-letter word hidden near the obvious place, or (2) an apocryphal phrase that comes into existence.

[I'm trying my best not to actually reveal any information.]

The latter feels more like something "revealed", the former feels more like "the evident truth." We're supposed to "reveal the evident truth."

By the way, my husband, an expert in the field, notes that the setter has his/her "facts" mirror reversed.

[IainGrace]

Completed the grid and working on the endgame. We see the thematic elements. At the risk of asking the obvious, presumably one does need literally to move letters in the completed grid? On the face of it, the completed grid itself reveals the evident truth.

[Ruthrobin]

Fyellin, I believe a few of us are agonising over that question since clearly both could be justified. Neither could, in fact, exist without the other in a sense, since it is our moving that has done the revealing, and, in order to demonstrate that you have fully understood what is going on, only your 'three-letter word' remains to be highlighted - you couldn't complete without the rest of your (1) and (2) being correct.
I am sure (2) is intended but opted for all of your (1) in addition - highlighted the lot. Why not put a note with your entry pointing out the ambiguity? If enough of us do that, the point might be made - or not - a dilemma indeed.

[AndrewG-S]

Dangerous territory here, but it sounds like you may be missing the final step, which at least for me at the moment does not seem to leave much ambiguity...

[Walterloo]

I'm in the same position as IainGrace on this one. I too saw 'the evident truth' in the grid without having moved anything. Lots of letters highlighted plus a much smaller collection and I thought that was that and the preamble was trying to trick me into looking for more. I admit that it didn't sit right but I was close to sending it off. AndrewG-S's post is now making me look at the grid again but I can't as yet see what I've obviously missed! Will probably put it away for a day or two and hopefully a fresher mind will see it.

[TheBear69]

I do not really think there need be doubt about what to highlight if one has fully solved this. The instructions say to move a body of letters and that movement will reveal what is to be highlighted. So what is to be highlighted will not be 'evident' before the movement. Neither the letters moved nor the 3-letter word fit that description.

[Coalminers]

Absolutely with you on that one, TheBear69

[borealis]

fyellin, the mirror reversal depends on your point of view, although the grid is certainly non-standard. On the other hand, consult your expert on the apparent eccentricity, which worried me more!

On highlighting, I’m with TheBear, although I would have been happier with “fully reveal” in the preamble. I thought the movement was adequate to demonstrate solution, so I left both “bodies” unhighlighted.

Not so sure about the significant date - it’s a bit undefined, and we may be a few months after the most relevant one. Not that it matters - still one of the top half-dozen puzzles for me this year.

[IainGrace]

Now finished, thanks to an earlier post which perhaps gives too much away. Agree there is no doubt in our view as to what is to be highlighted.

[aldanna]

Visitors this weekend, who have just left, so hardly any time for the Listener so far, but feeling quite enthused by the general level of enthusiasm for this one. Will get down to it soon.

[trux]

I suspect either highlighting option will be accepted ... would be grossly unfair if there is only one possible solution. My cautious approach is to highlight everything (all of which, one way or another, could be said to reveal the evident truth)

[jabone]

I have really enjoyed this puzzle; such satisfying clueing and brilliant construction. Many thanks to Jaques. Regarding highlighting I am inclined to agree with trux on both points.

[perseverer]

The Oxford English Dictionary is available online (if your library subscribes.) Check at

http://www.oed.com/

This week the additional reference is the OED, last week it was the ODE. Hands up if you are confused.

[jim360]

I'm only halfway through completing the grid so can hardly wait to see what everyone is talking about at the endgame, or the whatever-you-call-the-bit-you-do-after-puttin
g-all-the-letters-in.
Seems that the first part of the puzzle works in a similar way to last week's?

[jim360]

2 hours later... a grid that's complete apart from 24a which I've not been able to solve yet. Think I know the theme but endgames are totally new to me so not sure how to proceed from here. Still, if I'd looked at this listener a month ago I'd have thrown it away in disgust - so made a lot of progress!

[TheBear69]

perseverer, my hand is up - I am confused about OED online....

Regarding the highlighting, I suspect that the only highlightling that will be counted as correct is what is revealed by the movement and not the body...Of course we will not know until the spring, unless the editors put a note in the solution about what was accepted.

[Cruncher]

A lovely puzzle. Just what the Listener is all about. Thank you Jaques.

[pushmi-pullyu]

Well done jim360 - it's amazing how much better you get at these once you've joined the message board.

[jim360]

Still not got the movement done. Noticed two thematic elements in what I've got so far, which at least means that I've got everything right up until now. Kind of a surprise to see one of them pop out suddenly, almost.

[fyellin]

borealis: Yes, I was aware that the problem depends on one's "point of view." Perhaps I should have added "from the traditional point of view." I also knew about the second problem, but just took it is as artistic license. :-) I also didn't know how to say it cryptically.