Last evening, Excellent Wife and I were watching Hyperbole 44 in between attempting to somewhat work the Sunday crossword puzzle, something that while challenging can be interesting and fun.
I had noticed a bothersome trend over a number of years away from the crossword puzzle style I grew up on, toward a hipper/(allegedly) cute approach that seeks to find out how clever the puzzle creator thinks he can be.
Whereas we used to see clues that would give a clue when requiring multiple words in the answer (3 words, for example), now we are left to wonder whether a seven letter answer needs one word or two (or more); one also cringes when the clue is given in the form of a question, as in the following real world example I recall from years ago, simply because it was the first time I encountered such a monstrosity: Get along with; Gary dined?
The answer was cooperate; (Gary) Cooper ate?
Yesterday's paper had a puzzle that was littered by a number of such "clues", among other horrors, enough so that we finally despaired of actually learning something or solving a worthwhile puzzle, and tossed it into the recycling bin.
Stretching your mind is one thing; stretching the bounds of credulity is quite another