Listener No 4314 Renewable Energy By 'eck

[Ruthrobin]

What a brilliant use of the circular grid. This has been a remarkable piece of compiling and an extremely difficult puzzle which became easier as we progressed (suddenly dramatically so!). Congratulations to 'Eck for a stunning piece of setting.

[Contrarian]

Late start and very late finish here. (I've been v. busy learning Russian this week).

Absolutely stunning. (Although, I still don't really get 35).
I loved the misprint in 39.

[Cagey]

My, my, my. That took a very long time. Finished midday or so yesterday. Almost gave up at several points, and it is only the obsessive aspects of my character that kept me at it. I also think that 56 highlighted cells would of been nicer, but that aside a really challenging and in the end satisfying puzzle. Thank you very much 'Eck.
It is strange (not sure that is quite the correct word) but the same obsessiveness failed to get me through the source material when I was in second year uni, far too many years ago.
Contrarian: 39 was one of the last I got, and it raised a big smile too. If you want my solution / interpretation of 35 please e-mail [email protected]

[Alan7777]

There were several challenging clues and I'm very pleased to have finished. Some of the misprints were hard to spot with plausible options to trap the unwary. I think I know which 40 cells to highlight............

[Cruncher]

Does anyone else own to a feeling of wistful sadness when you finish a crossword like this, rather like finishing a good novel that has been totally engrossing? Maybe I should get out more

[s_pugh]

What a fantastic puzzle! Like many I only managed to grind out a handful of answers on Saturday and was seriously considering giving in, but a few PDM’s on Sunday and everything came together bar the significance of 40 cells. Cue final “d’oh!” moment. Magnificent and well worth persevering with if anyone is struggling. Tough but totally fair and everything eventually falls into place. Thanks ‘Eck.

[EAChaplin]

The only thing which didn't fall into place for me was the requirement to read chapter 21. My library didn't have a copy of the book and Google was not forthcoming on this occasion. I was able to twig what was required to solve those 13 clues but maybe chapter 21 would have saved me some time.
Thank you 'Eck.

[Cruncher]

EAChaplin if you read the preamble it becomes clear that the misprints and extra letters give you the response to the first part of the quotation, all of which is in chapter 21. The missing part, which is quite short, is given online on several sites if you look up the rest of the quotation. That said I went and dusted off my copy and checked to see if there was anything else of relevance. There isn't. Good book though

[angus]

I think the instructions should say '12 clues must be amended' There are two good reasons why number 30 is not amended.

[perseverer]

Definitely 13 clues need amendment.

Wonder if 'eck is a new setter or an existing one who was so impressed with the results that he/she felt, like a number of posters on this thread, that BY' ECK was an appropriate comment.

[fyellin]

I'm think I know what has to be highlighted. I have no idea what it's got to do with the instructions.

[angus]

perseverer Do you include number 30 in the 13?

[olichant]

And FINALLY the pennies have dropped. What an absolutely superb puzzle. I, too, loved 39. Really worth perservering.

[perseverer]

Angus -No, but don't want give anything away on this forum, it's such a great puzzle, but if you want contact me at perseverer49(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)uk and I'll suggest one or two you might have missed. (Sorry, that sounds a bit smug.)

[EAChaplin]

Thanks Cruncher but............it's chicken and egg. If you've got the message and misprints you've already solved the 13 clues:-)

[Speravi]

An exceptional offering. I don't trouble to comment much these days, but I have to congratulate 'Eck on a creative concept executed superbly well (and fairly: no ambiguities or other infelicities in the pre-ramble). My statutory nit-pick: is the 'return' in E superfluous for the answer to E (as opposed to the entry)?

[Philoctetes]

Good meaty tussle, right to the end, just like the novel. But I cannot see the relevance of the title - probably just being dim.

[tramart]

I regard reading fiction as largely a waste of time, but the source material is a work I've read several times and shall now do so again, despite being a practising Atheist.
The most challenging and enjoyable for several years, despite some crackers recently. Looking forward to reading the setter's, or setters', blog.

[Cruncher]

I wondered if the title was a reference to the highlighted cells which, if read a different way, might suggest a source of renewable energy?

[olichant]

Cruncher - I actually had a different interpretation, but I think yours is much better!