About Probability Storm

This is my personal blog, where I try to offer a new perspective in reviews of niche music, essays related to the perception of said music or culture around it, essays related to my other interests, and stream of consciousness posts that I'd feel dishonest to call essays. As someone who doesn't relate to many common human needs or desires, and doesn't feel like a part of any group (or identify with anyone else who is alienated) I believe I can offer different views. I prefer not to state positive qualities about me or my blog, and believe they should come out through the content. And if they don't, sucks to suck.

The music part of the blog

The more niche side of extreme metal (like tech death, dissonant death, industrial black etc) is my main area, but dabble in a few other genres. I definitely do not identify with any music subculture. I am not here to show off my taste, or give you recommendations. I don't rate or rank things, unless the site I post to requires me to have a score (like the Metal Archives), in which case I put a number that "feels right". I don't even listen to music with the intention to enjoy it, but to "educate" myself about different genres; if I enjoy it, that's a bonus. I sporadically make electronic dissonant metal.

When I review something, I try to weave a part of my beliefs about music, art as a whole or culture around it into the writing. Otherwise I'd find it dry and boring, and I am certain all of my favourite reviews didn't try to hide the author's beliefs, even if I strongly disagreed with them. I doubt I'll persuade you into liking new music, unless you were already open to it.

A music review can have up to 4 angles:
1. Musical analysis, which is required by definition.
2. Context about the musicians, their lives and beliefs.
3. Subjective experience, preference or beliefs - stating personal beliefs about what music or art should be falls here.
4. Addressing other people's perception of the music, could be fans or detractors, but it's an outside conversation the reviewer can join. Historical significance falls here as it's about 

Reviewing popular to semi-popular music is easier, because there is an ongoing conversation around it that I can join - there is a public perception around the artist that I can respond to. On the other hand, I might not have anything to say that someone else hasn't said already, since the music is known and has been talked about. I could express existing opinions more eloquently, in more depth or with a different writing style, but it'd be disrespectful to myself. I stick to "semi-popular" music, because it's less likely the discussion around it has been dried up.

If I review obscure music, and I mean genuine nobodies, there is no conversation around them to address, which makes it harder to engage the reader. Yes, I can cover new ground by reviewing unknown artists, but I lack the influence to push them into relevance. And even if I somehow did make them relevant, the writing will still be valued less than writing about more popular artists, simply because the latter has more demand for discussion.

In other words, if I discuss popular topics, more people will care even if I have nothing interesting to say.

The non-music part of the blog

My other interests are literature (literary fiction specifically), philosophy, game theory without actually playing games that much, astronomy and astrophysics. Sociology maybe?

I thought I should stick to music topics on this blog, but I won't write that many posts about my other interests, so I see no reason to make a separate blog just for them.