Listener 4189, 8 by 13

[Zabadak]

Best of luck with this one, everybody. I nearly quit with it being a carte blanche (sort of - at least we have word lengths) with indeterminate numbers of letters to be removed from clues, clashing letters and mysterious curves in the grid AND (dammit) yet another hunt the missing words game made extra tricky by having to guess the setter's name.
I'm still puzzled by that last bit: "extended sequence" is open to all sorts of interpretations and, while I have the theme, I'm inclined to think I may not know when I've reached the answer the setter intends for entry under the grid. You know how cheesed off I can get with that!
Up to there, a (just about) fair challenge and a tidy enough construction, so as far as that goes, thanks setter, you know who you are even if I don't!

[cluelessJoe]

In defence of the Cruciverbal Stig's 'unfair' answer, the current editors inherited a big backlog of unvetted puzzles dating back over several years. We have now finally seen some of those published (at least one within the last month), so there's every chance that The Crig's puzzle was set 4 or 5 years ago, pre-dating not just the current BRB but also BRB 2008. At the time of setting, the answer would certainly have been fair, and there's no way a setter could guess that it might disappear from the current BRB.
A fine piece of construction, many thanks to .............

[tilbee]

jockie - really pleased you managed this on your own, though confess I am now curious as to the alternative way of deriving the title. I also note the previous comment on the 'Easter Egg' so maybe the grid deserves further analysis.

[magichour]

This has been one of the hardest in a long while. I've finally staggered to the end - other than the last step of finding the title and setter. From the comments on here, it seems as though a complicated process is needed to find them. Back to the long grid staring...

[tilbee]

magichour - no I think that some of the comments here may have made this out to be more difficult than it actually is. Like any (good) Listener, it is a question of understanding the theme and then logically applying this to th eend game.

[magichour]

Thanks, Tilbee. I have done just that (before having read your post) and am left applauding the mysterious setter. As so often, it fell into place after posting here. I found this a really tough puzzle (the preamble alone nearly put me off), but I'm glad I persevered, because the reward is worth it. What a great Listener.

I think cluelessJoe is right regarding answers from the previous edition of the BRB. Setters have to submit puzzles something like nine months or more prior to publication, so it is fair to assume that any puzzle submitted for most of this year is going to be based on the previous edition.

[Philoctetes]

Still plodding on with NW corner proving recalcitrant. If it is the case that this is just a puzzle submitted before the latest BRB would it have hurt anyone to put in the rubric that a clue needed a prior edition. Sloppy, IMHO

[IainGrace]

A step behind magichour, having finished all bar the title/setter. Agree with x_word_fan that the thematic element in the omitted clue letters is an additional fine touch to a puzzle that we found challenging and enjoyable in equal measure. Assuming we will finish it.................

[pushmi-pullyu]

Like IainGrace, I am left with the title and setter. At least, what seemed to me a thematic solution has come up with a title, but I can't make it produce the setter. Time to sleep on it.

[Staurologist]

What an excellent puzzle, using a theme that has appeared several times in the Listener before (in whole or in part in 1947, 1990, 1996, 1998, 2002, 2005, and 2006), but none the worse for that. By my reckoning this is this composer's third outing. I had expected, given the theme, that the composer would turn out to be Phi, but he seems to have missed an excellent opportunity. Perhaps he will produce something on the same lines with a different twist.

For those who want to read more about aesthetic matters related to the theme, and for whom the Wikipedia entry with the rational two-word title (6,5) may be a bit technical, I strongly recommend the 2002 book cited as footnote 2 in the Wikipedia reference list, which is an excellent account, and which demystifies the whole subject, in more ways than one.

I initially felt like Zabadak and others (carte blanche .... etc), but the puzzle turned out to be not nearly as hard as I had expected, especially when the theme tumbled out. As IainGrace says, the positions of the would-be bars should be obvious from the symmetry, the word lengths, and just one or two lights, after which it should work out gradually. So to those who are still struggling, or have given up, keep trying, folks. If you finish it, you will particularly enjoy the very clever way in which the omitted letters reflect the theme, confirming that you have identified them correctly.

As for the missing light, the preamble should have said, as others have already pointed out more definitively, that one of the lights is to be found in earlier editions of the BRB (e.g. 9, 10, 11), but is not in the 12th. Surely the composer was given a chance to proof-read the puzzle more recently than it was originally set? If the puzzle was set a long time ago, the original preamble, which presumably referred to a different edition, has since been changed to "2011"; therefore, someone should have checked that the 12th edition is as relevant as any previous edition was.

[tilbee]

Que ?

[midazolam]

This was great fun and one of the setter's best (an indeed one of the best this year). Thoroughly enjoyed.

I disagree that we now have to include previous Chambers for an example like this. In general proper nouns are in ODE, but not always. Take the town 3 weeks ago beginning with Z (solution out this friday). That is not in ODE but is on a map. Do we have to specify which map? No, of course. The same now goes for first names and famous surnames in history.

The setter has had more than three outings. Well done on a fine performance.

[Ruthrobin]

Yes, to Midazolam's comment, I would add that the Editors carefully include that statement that 'The Chambers Dictionary (2011) is the PRIMARY reference (my caps). This precludes the need to list other sources and departures from Chambers unless there is a specific reason for doing so.

[Philoctetes]

Midazolam - the problem is not with the use of a proper noun, which, as you rightly say, need not be in the Primary source. It lies with the use of an attribute of that proper noun, which was to be found in previous Chambers. As such attributes are in many cases in dispute, it was handy having a "definitive" source to which one presumed setters were confined

[teuchter2]

I have finally got there, having found my mistake and had a PDM about the theme. A very nice conclusion.

[sunny-dave]

Have had a look back at this today - and the more I see the more I like.

Anyone else think this is the best of 2012 so far - actually a toss-up with "4182 Breach of Contract by Ron" for entertainment, but I think this edges ahead because of the 'level of difficulty'.

[word_cross]

A lovely and challenging puzzle, the only stumbling block was with finding the setter due to mis-transcribing the 3rd letter of the name as I moved between working copies of the grid; which led me towards another potential setter, and trying to find all sorts of convoluted ways of extending the sequence!

[Alan7777]

I nearly didn't start because it looked difficult and the early posts seemed to support that view. However, I had an inkling of the theme and after solving only a few clues I had most of the initial removed letters and the shape of the grid. This made solving the rest of the clues possible for me. The title and setter were identified after a number of plausible but incorrect approaches were tried. Overall a tough but enjoyable Listener.

[the_heisman]

Thank you very much to our anonymous benefactor. A crossword that anyone would be proud to put their name to notwithstanding that s/he didnt

[s_pugh]

I'm with sunny-dave on this one - an exceptionally clever and challenging puzzle which almost defeated me until I unravelled the clashes to get the theme which Google then assisted on expanding - not all of us had the benefit of an Oxbridge education! ;¬) Bravo to '13' for a cracker!

[pushmi-pullyu]

Yes! Have finally got there after realising that I was making things unnecessarily complicated for myself. What a brilliant puzzle.