Re: all watched over

If one has the frame of mind that technology and nature are mutually exclusive, the poem could be interpreted as anti technology because of the general tone of sarcasm. The images he is presenting are so ridiculously contradictory; one must assume they are mocking. The parenthetical comments in particular are so enthusiastic, especially with their exclamation points, that irony seems to be the only explanation. Furthermore, rather than mention humans specifically, the poem references “mammals”, a term that seems to undermine human dignity. This is underscored by the title and last line which say that we will be “watched over by machines”, implying we are somehow subservient to them in a matrixesque sort of way.

Alternatively, the poem could be genuinely asking for a technology-facilitated return to nature. The idea that mentions that technology will “free” us of our labors is certainly old and generally accepted as truth. The fact that we need to “return” to our mammal brothers and sisters acknowledges that the ideals of the 19th century are well behind us. With respect to the phrase “it has to be”, the poem seems to indicate that with the trends away from nature continuing in the future, perhaps the only way to get back to nature is to embrace the aspects of our improving technology enough to help us in this goal. One might argue that recent trends in environmentalism are fulfilling this, as technology is driven towards being helpful to nature.
for me, the first approach to this poem seems more credible. Each parenthetical comment has the feeling of being insincere, weather by being outright sarcastic, or simply longing. It is difficult to imagine technology being either like pure water or clear sky. “spinning blossoms” invokes images of unwieldy, bulky processors that seem the furthest thing from nature. I would consider it a loss if nature had to change to such docility to live with technology.