The State of the Union address is one of the most unifying rituals of our nation and, like most rituals, more pays homage to a revered ideal of the past than illuminates a pathway into the future.
When President Obama delivered his 65-minute speech to a joint session of Congress and an estimated 37.8 million television viewers, he was carrying on a tradition begun by George Washington in 1790.
Washington was honoring Article II of the U.S. Constitution, which directs presidents to communicate with Congress.
"He shall from time to time give to Congress information of the State of the Union and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient," Section 3 reads.
Thomas Jefferson skipped the speech beginning in 1801, sending a letter to Congress instead. He viewed the practice as too monarchial, as in Britain's Speech from the Throne.
Woodrow Wilson brought back the address to Congress in 1913 and presidents since then have, for the most part, continued the tradition with all its pomp and circumstance.
There is something awe-inspiring about the spectacle of the State of the Union atmosphere. As a majority of the 435 House members, 100 Senators, Supreme Court and Cabinet, along with scores of spectators settle in to hear the president's assessment of the year past and his vision for the year ahead, it is a credit to our form of government that civility replaces partisan retorts for at least an hour.
But the State of the Union, like so many of our rituals and traditions, has been changed by time, opportunity and technology. While Washington addressed only those in Congress and the spectators who may have made their way to the provisional U.S. capital in New York City in 1790, today's presidential address is as much an effort to influence public opinion as it is a bid to direct Congress.
But the same technology that broadcasts the speech into the homes of millions of Americans also gives those would-be listeners other options. Of the 37.8 million who tuned in to Tuesday's State of the Union coverage at 8 p.m., 27 percent of them turned to another channel within five minutes - before the speech began.
And in our environment of instant analysis, there were conservative pundits who quickly compared this year's speech to Obama's previous two and pronounced the trio of addresses virtually identical.
Of course, someone compared Obama's speeches to those of previous presidents and pronounced them all close cousins if not siblings.
As for Obama's speech itself - it was a well-written, well-delivered compilation of the president's many points made repeatedly in previous speeches. Some have described it as soaring rhetoric without much substance. There were some memorable lines. His acknowledgement of the military was appropriate.
But the high point of the exercise was not the speech.
The high point was the exercise itself - the majority of our federal elected officials gathering to consider the State of the Union and, we can only hope, emerging with a little better idea of how they can proceed in the days ahead to improve upon it.