Speaking of the structural differences between poetry and stories in novels, (the writer/book)

and referring to Bakhtins’ stance...writes…”The novel, by contrast, reveals the fundamentally

plural nature of language as the interrelation and intersection of many individual and social
languages and voices: the novel orchestrates all its themes, the totality of the world of objects
and ideas depicted and expressed in it, by means of the social diversity of speech types and by
the differing individual voices that flourish under such conditions. Authorial speech, the speech
of narrators, inserted genres and the speech of characters are merely those fundamental
compositional unities with whose help heteroglossia can enter the novel; each of them permits a
multiplicity of social voices and a wide variety of their links and interrelationships."

Any interdisciplinary artist working in Karachi would be confronted by an embarrassing wealth of

options: it is now clear that the citys’ ‘natural’ shift from metropolis to cosmopolis has been
spectacularly and probably irrevocably stymied, but late Eighteenth century and early
Nineteenth Art History, if studied within its context, reveals the possibility of a regional reiteration
of classical Marxist analyses. Be that as it may, the polyphonic registers in all their glorious
multiplicity, as delineated by Bakhtinian theory seem to my mind be here, notwithstanding a
level of caution that should be used when assuming that what is said about writing novels is
unmediatedly applicable to visual art.