D Arun Khopkar numbers, and Eisenstein's essay is called "Odd and Even'. It begins with a long quotation from Granet, and shows a number of compositional factors—all odd numbers are unity, for instance, all even numbers are reflection. An odd number is a centering of a reflection. Then he shows how Chinese thought, which was imagist thought—even in terms of language—is to be interpreted in terms of geometry. Using this odd-even divide as a basis for analysis, he analyses this famous triptych of Utamaro, Fisherwomen ofAwahe, where there are three panels and two women on each of the panels, and how the elements like earth, water, relate panel one and three in one 23 way (two related odd numbers), and one and two through some other compositional element, maybe colour. He then shows how this interpenetration of odd and even works, using random examples, like a comic book illustration. He shows how this kind of thinking is at the basis of his own compositions—like the crowd sequence in The Battleship Potemkin. From Chinese philosophy, there are a number of other things he brings in to understand Western painting: the work of Piranesi, Leonardo's nature studies, his preoccupation with things like water. The other thing that fascinated him about Chinese theatre was something he used in an analysis of El Greco—which was the multiple meaning of a sign. For instance, how just one object like a table might be used in various ways, say as a ladder, as a battlefield. In Chinese theatre a single stick would be used in a multiplicity of ways. So this concept becomes very important when he analyses Greco—e.g., the figures he lifts from one painting into another. The multiplicity of a sign and the actual lifting of the sign and fitting it into another system of signs. There are elements of Eisenstein's thinking that might sometimes sound like Orientalism, like when he speaks of 'passive ecstasies' of the orient and the 'active ecstasies' of the west. But these are rare, and one attributes them more to the kind of information he has access to rather than a basic attitude. An understanding of the Other culture is an understanding of both function and structure. He is extremely careful, when for instance in hi s essay on Mei-Fei Lang he talks of gesture, not to glorify it—he says here that while we are extremely privileged to see such great theatre, we are also seeing something that is a museum piece, and unless we revitalize it—maybe in cinema—we shall not succeed in preserving it. So there is a dynamic relationship he wishes to establish with these other cultures. The third culture that fascinates him is the Pre-Columbian culture, and he shot this remarkable film in Mexico, Quo Viva Mexico. There is this mutilated version of the film by Grigory Aleksandrov with an awful musical score. But if one sees the footage one does get an idea of what Eisenstein was trying to do. For one thing, he was trying to establish a different kind of space-time continuum. This film was to have six different episodes, which were to come from pre-Columbian culture right up to the day he was shooting. He used deep-focal length lenses for this particular film—but perhaps J should explain this a bit. When you are focussing on a point with any lens you get a certain range of admissible visibility. The deep-focus gives you a possibility of keeping everything in focus, from something close to the camera, to infinity. This is a peculiar lens, its uses would be very different. Bazin was advocating deep-focus length as a sort of democratization of film, because the spectator is free to see what he wants to. The Number 19