The Stickler Weekly 119 Solution

Two clues caught my eye in the last few weeks as I frequented my favourite internet haunts. The first comes from a posting on Crossword Uncluded, an oft-mentioned website here. A recent post titled “Clue Challenge: Annotate These Answers XI” has a number of clues that the poster found difficult to unravel despite having the answers. The challenge to resolve these clues will appeal greatly to some, and have no appeal to others. It’s like solving clues but not really as the answers are given. I’m still stumped on half of them – far too obscure for me. How much value does the wordplay have if given all the variables a clue still can’t be unravelled? The original solvers couldn’t even use the wordplay as a double-check in most cases. There are a number of different styles of clues on the list but basically two types: ones that have difficult but discernable wordplay and others where the wordplay offers no help (that is, there is no way the wordplay CAN help a solver to solve). Noel Jessop used to call these “reflexive” – clues where wordplay cannot be understood without having first obtained the answer. The one I want to focus on is:
Pay attention — this statement is out by a factor of five (6)
which is from Times 26159 in the UK. The answer is LISTEN. A reflexive type clue. Can you work out the wordplay?* There are a few comments about the clue in the blog entry for the crossword that this clue appears in, and in almost all cases the solvers mentioned that they couldn’t work out the parsing. As a setter I know the value of the wordplay I’m writing. I know if a wordplay may be difficult, I know if an anagram indicator may not be fully accepted by all, I know that a synonym is going to stump some. The writer of the above clue knows that the wordplay is of no help and so supplies a giveaway definition, but here’s the problem: doesn’t that effectively make this clue a single definition type clue as the answer can only be obtained from the definition? The wordplay is redundant except that it serves as a pointer (for those who work it out) back to the setter. It’s a self-serving clue, not one that helps the solver but shines a light on the setter. Some may argue that this kind of find-the-answer-then-work-out-the-wordplay type clue is popular with many people, so this kind of clue is fine, and that may be so except this clue has most people stumped even with all the info. So is it a good clue?
The second clue is taken from Alan Connor’s Guardian crossword blog and is right up my alley:
Controversial candidate wanting power … and nearly becoming president? (6)  (TRUMP minus P) + (AN)D = TRUMAN.
This clue has it all for me: topical, witty, beautifully constructed and misleading but not too difficult and all with solvable wordplay. This clue I could happily explain to a solver at any level and I’d receive a smiling nod. That’s the way it should be.

*LISTEN breaks down to L is TEN, but in Roman numerals L is FIFTY, so the “statement” is “out by a factor of five”