Quantum

I read an interesting article by Benjamin Ogden where he introduced the term quantum criticism. And this described a set up where an article was setup with pages  divided into three horizontal chunks each containing a different continuous text, all in dialectical relation to the others. So on each page there are what seems like three voices putting forward their individual points of view. And presumably the task of the reader is to contain these disparate voices and somehow think through them or think with them.
How does this relate to the swirl experience?
What the article illustrates and instantiates is complex cognition, and a process that sets up an almost constant interrogation of both the article itself-why on earth is the author doing this? Why is this so hard to read? What is the point? And so on. And in addition each segment sets up questions about the ostensible subject which is a novel by Coetzee.
But in a swirl there are no contending disparate voices. Indeed the swirl experience is marked by a unitary negative voice. Even if there are different elements they all cohere in their unrelenting negativity. Now this must bear on thinking.
The Ogden article provokes thinking, stimulates it even if it is perceived as problematic in its structure. The swirl experience does the reverse. It seems to shut down thinking almost completely. In its place there is the visceral experience of negative affects. And this is where it is difficult to analyse the experience. Because of course thinking takes place but in an almost subservient way. Thought at the service of feelings.
'I am no good' is a thought not a feeling. But in a swirl it might portend a feeling. Or it might seem like the thought has the texture of a feeling.