My Friend and I
Post-Script: No relationship is perfect, and ours is no exception, but we respect one another enough, and sufficiently value our friendship, that we're willing to overlook our differences for the sake of a common union that mirrors what our Founding Fathers envisioned for the way in which a People should conduct themselves. Which makes me wonder if the disharmony seen in the public discourse mirrors the dysfunction found in our collective private lives, the whole being composed of the sum of its various parts.
I am brought to the point of reconsidering the value of "social networking" and other forms of remote communication that eschew live, person-to-person discourse. While relationship by telecommunication might appear to be highly efficient, time-wise, which our culture has been engaged in since the post-WWII era and the demise of letter-writing, replaced by telephone and now Internet-based chat, such methods lack the depth intrinsic to face-to-face dialog, or at the very least a well-reasoned letter that requires a commitment of time and effort to both pen and read afterwards.
Our society seems to be structured at a macro scale by those fundamental methods at the micro level that we've come to take for granted. The quick, expedient methods enabled by telecommunications seems to be creating a society well enabled to broadcast aloud their every thought at a moment's notice, but lesser able to communicate with any depth of reason. Another example of how erecting purposeful obstructions and boundaries can, counter-intuitively, create a greater depth of reason and meaning, which artists have been well aware of for centuries, another reason for why I prefer blogging over other methods of Internet-based discourse.
Typecast via Corona 4, photo via Lumix G5.