This song will make you cry for a sewing machine. If you have never cried for a sewing machine (or similar) you should give the experience a try.
Also this song is exactly why I get so angry sometimes. It works like this:
People notice that I, or people like me, have relationships with objects that can be every bit as deep as our relationships with people.
Instead of seeing that I live in a world where everything is alive. Where you can have a relationship with any part of the world, not just the human parts, not just the animal parts, not even just the living parts. Where nothing is empty or dead. Where everywhere you look, if you look close enough and get out of the way of your own perceptions, there’s a light that shines through everything.
They think of how they see objects. As if they’re never anything more than the dead backdrop against which real life takes place. As lifeless and without that light shining through them.
Then they assume that my relationship to the entire world, including my relationships with human beings, matches how they perceive objects. Because it can’t be that I form rich and meaningful relationships with rocks and sewing machines and the like. It can only be that I am so lacking in awareness of the richness of human interactions that my entire world is empty and devoid of depth. Blank, empty, and meaningless -- the way they happen to view objects.
The first time I ever tried to write about this, I got a long, condescending response. In which all of this was just a cognitive glitch known as anthropomorphism, the assigning of human qualities to nonhumans. And like... yeah, the song as written may engage in some of that, although I take that as poetic license, it’s far from the first art to use that kind of thing. But the relationship i have with objects is as them -- different from humans, also different from each other. “Not flat, not empty, not devoid of meaning” is hardly qualities unique to human beings.
Jim Sinclair, in an article dealing with asexuality, wrote about times “...when someone who has not even bothered to look at my world dismisses it as a barren rock.” Exactly.
This song shows why emotional relationships with objects -- in whatever form they take for different people -- are not evidence that our world is a barren rock. Often quite the opposite.
Also: Don’t be confused by things that are entirely different from this, yet could be described with similar words. Having an emotional relationship with a rock or a sewing machine is not the same as having destructive materialistic attachments to “things”. I can’t explain the difference, only that it’s so vast that it’s a shame the same words can be used to describe both a beautiful and deep thing, and a shallow and destructive thing. Forming meaningful relationships with parts of the world (even inanimate parts) is in fact in many ways the opposite of that kind of destructive materialist attachment.
Also I grew up with an Oregonian (or Oreganoid as we often say in my family) Singer sewing machine around the house, passed down from my great-grandmother. (And my grandmother was born in the rather small place this musician lives now or came from or something like that.) It’s beautiful and greatly adds to my enjoyment of the song.