Well, it is, I mean Bruegel is an artist I am interested in, but I am interested in particular aspects of Bruegel. I think it is the linguistic terms. I am curious about the way he distorts his figures. You know, when you have a kind of a naturalistic language and you sort, kind of have a character, you know, or characters in whom you have kind of reposed certain elements, you know. You have something like a funny man or a slightly evil character or something peculiar, I think that is what interested me. I’m... of course I am a great admirer of his work, but at a personal level I can only say that, but I think at one level I also got involved in Grosz, George Grosz, and I think the city paintings took me. Initially it was Sienese, no, it was Ambrogio Lorenzetti, which I had greatly admired and which I had discovered while I was a student. In fact, my teacher, Amberkar had helped me in that because I used to respond to that, and he told me about those, and then when I saw them, you know, in reality, I was very deeply, greatly moved, and I realised that there was something very common in my view of looking and painting in movement. Not from a still, one single point of view, but multiple views. You know, you paint as if you are walking in a street. And so Ambrogio’s painting actually deals with that. Actually, you go through the street with him, and the street opens up as you walk and there is a physical walk also. So this brought me back to Ajanta, which is again about walking. This in a way brought me to Hamzanama in which you actually, you know, don’t physically walk, but your eye walks through, and I think Mughal painting, a lot of Mughal painting is about walking, about discovering, and the landscape rises up as you walk, as you go up. So, all these things were sort of in a way, you know, coalescing and coming together, and this is the time then I think with Kasauli, with friends, little groups meeting at home, it finally got sort of, you know, connected with that and that is how the whole thing came about.