UPDATE: Utisz points out an interesting story that throws my original observation out for a creepy loop: woman marries Eiffel Tower following her long and torrid love-affair. Talk about a bizarre fetish for inanimate objects. I wonder what would be an orthodox objectological take on fetishism here? Money quote:
“Someone who falls in love with objects can control that relationship on their own terms,” he said. “Their objects will not let them down. That is extremely attractive for a person who is otherwise often desperately lonely.”
Objectology as a perfect philosophy for control-freaks without any visible attachment to human beings and plenty of feelings for inanimate objects? Jump on this one, kids, once objectology is as mighty and popular as it claims it will inevitably be, you can make a career with this interpretive approach.
This is an interesting essay from THE (Times Higher Education) on Ayn Rand:
A characteristic peculiar to Rand that detracts mightily from her works in a spectacular way is her enthusiasm for such inanimate objects as machines, trains, high-tension wires, factories and industrial areas of cities. Her unstinting praise of the so-called geniuses of entrepreneurial bent is difficult enough to swallow; but her paroxysms of delight as she ponders smoke-belching steel mills or grease-covered railroad bridges, page after page, will cause thoughtful readers to experience feelings of profound and abject embarrassment.
This reminds me of something, but I cannot quite put my finger on it.