Monday mopes.

There was a sample four questions in the N.Y. Times for a college entrance test: 3 of the questions were liberal arts or social science questions, and I was pretty sure I knew the answers. The fourth question was a math question, and I felt like I knew the right answer.

So I got all four right.

Except, I can't tell you why I got the math question right. I just intuited the answer.

Sure it could be luck, but I had the same experience back when I was younger and taking these tests -- I'd do much better on math than I had any right to.

Because I don't know WHY I got the right answers.

If you don't know WHY you get the right answer, did you really get the right answer? If you can't explain it? If you just puzzled it out, using a bit of logic and counting on your fingers and drawing crude pictures?

Just wondering.

Later: took the more extended sentence completion and reading comprehension samples, and they seemed easy. Am I getting smarter in my old age?

************

Went to see The Lincoln Lawyer, which was surprising good.

It was also surprisingly faithful to the original novel. Which just confirms my long held belief that the closer a movie sticks to the source material, the better it is.

But I also wonder why, with all the great mystery and thriller writers out there, so few of them become movies. Lee Childs, James Lee Burke, John Sandford, John Connelly, and on an on.

Some of them have one movie made out of a major character, and that's it. Most don't even seem to get that one movie.

Just wondering.

**********

I spent several hours building a book order, until it was over 100 books. They were all good books. Books I think I can sell. They were cheap.

But I deleted the order.

I never do this.

But I came back from the store, where I looked around and realized that no matter how good the books, I didn't have any place to PUT THEM.

So, I'll spend about the same amount of money on fewer books, that I absolutely need in stock, but which are full wholesale price. The evergreens -- and restocking Game of Thrones.

**********

Speaking of Game of Thrones.

I liked it, O.K. I wish they had done two hours.

Like all fantasy, when it is actually visualized, it brings it a bit down to earth. Some visual elements, like the ice wall, were impressive. Others, like the White Stalkers were kind of disappointing...

I loved Tyrion. One of the reviewers was calling Peter Dinklage the "Jack Nicholson of dwarf actors" which I think is right on. Forgot what rotters the Lannisters were (except for Tyrian, who along with Arya, are two of my favorite characters) -- hard to imagine that Martin actually makes some of them more sympathetic (?) later in the series. Or that the Starks "nobility" becomes annoying later in the series. Nice trick.

SPOILER:

What happens to Bran is like the "original sin" of the series, from which the rest of the plot flows. No matter how insufferable the Starks become, and how sympathetic the Lannisters, it's hard to forgive that act.

You end up almost cheering for the Targaryen's, who in most fantasies would be the bad guys, to sweep on in with their fire-breathing dragons and clean up the freaking mess that the royal families have made of it.

**********