The Presidency hasn't been so widely - or so wildly - discussed since Eamon de Valera was accused of setting it up as a platform for dictatorship 60 years ago. It's not that a great deal of thought has been given to how the office ought to be developed, now that Mary Robinson has shown what can be achieved without stepping outside the constitutional limits.
In fact proposals, such as those of Adi Roche, to develop the Presidency tend to be given short shrift by the media and treated with disdain by most of the hard chaws on the political front.
Nor has the surge of curiosity made it easier to predict results. Mary McAleese was well ahead in the latest Irish Times/MRBI poll. But that was all of a week ago and, given the pace of events, the electorate's intentions may have been blown in several different directions in the meantime.
I say this with a sense of wonder, not complaint. Few elections have shown such volatility, as the political scientists call it. The evidence of cross-party voting grows with every poll; some say it's the reason for the drop in support for two of the party-backed candidates, Ms McAleese and Ms Roche.
But the most telling reflection of public opinion for the time being is the tally of undecided: just when it should be coming down, it's increasing. It went up by more than five points in the fortnight which ended on Saturday last, from 12.4 per cent to 17.6 per cent.
By then only the principals had made an (undeniably painful) appearance. Ms Roche had been castigated for well over a week by some who said she was too soft-centred and simultaneously by others who accused her of Stalinism.
One of the most seasoned observers in Munster, Donal Musgrave of the Examiner, believed the hand of a Fianna Fail deputy had been detected in the campaign. The suspicion, shared by some of Ms Roche's supporters, has not been proved.
Dana, Rosemary Scallon, had been verbally bludgeoned by Vincent Browne, who attacked her old-time religion with the zest of an old-time barrack-room lawyer. By all accounts she hasn't suffered from the encounter, at least not electorally, and may even have won some sympathy from surprised listeners.
The threats to Derek Nally for the stand he'd taken against abuse in, and of, the Garda Siochana came as a sudden reminder of the ways in which political ambition may be pursued out of sight of the public.
We know that politicians may use a police force either to get results at all costs or to keep tabs on their own troublesome critics.
It's a shock when we're faced with the reality, and the intensity of reactions inside the force.
But it wasn't until Emily O'Reilly's report in the Sunday Business Post about Ms McAleese's (reported) views on Sinn Fein, followed by Gerry Adams's announcement on Thursday that she was the candidate of his choice, that the political heavyweights squared up to each other.
The leak of a Department of Foreign Affairs document outlining Ms McAleese's views was embarrassing all round. Dick Spring said it would do "untold damage" in the Department, and he should know.
But for Fianna Fail there was something more than embarrassment when Mr Adams, who was reminded by Pat Kenny just how awkward it might prove, not only reiterated his preference for Ms McAleese but went on to say that the only candidate to whom he wouldn't give a vote was "the token male".
When the Sinn Fein leader was reminded of Mr Nally's concern for gardai murdered by the Provisional IRA, he replied that Mr Nally also co-operated with the RUC "who have yet to call a ceasefire".
By now the full election cast was on stage, with the significant exception of Mary Banotti, whose reluctance to become involved in controversy was announced in a brief statement issued yesterday.
Hers has been the most traditional, but in many ways the most subtle, campaign. After some bungled remarks about Ms McAleese's origins she was content to declare herself a liberal and leave the cut and thrust to others.
Her leader, not her candidature, has been Fianna Fail's main target. Bertie Ahern, supported by Brian Cowen and Noel Dempsey, concentrates on the leaked document, challenging John Bruton to say whether he or his officials are responsible for it.
On RTE radio Mr Dempsey also made much of a sighting of Mr Bruton in the company of his one-time adviser, Eoghan Harris, who had lately presented a document on strategy to Mr Nally. The implication that Mr Harris was, in effect, running two campaigns was in the air. Phil Hogan of Fine Gael denied that he was running theirs.
Mr Bruton seems to have the stronger hand: whatever members of Fianna Fail may think, being advised by Mr Harris scarcely qualifies as an offence to be compared with being supported by Mr Adams.
Indeed, the point was made - obliquely, of course - by John Hume when he replied to a question about his preferred president some hours after Mr Adams had declared for Ms McAleese. Mr Hume smiled a little and said nothing.
A moment later he added that he never intervened in political affairs in the South, "for obvious reasons".
Given the nature of the Presidency, and the fact that four of the five candidates are women, some thought the current campaign would be a tame affair. They were wrong: this weekend it looks as if the competition is as tough as anything experienced in general elections of late.
Discussion of both central and side issues has revealed more of the state we're in than many had expected. Indeed, in many ways, the side issues are more interesting.
For example, it becomes clearer with every outing on the old liberal-versus-conservative front that the real argument is not between Catholics on one side and atheists, agnostics and sceptics on the other.
In the main it's between Catholics, practising or otherwise, whose attitudes to their church and its teachings differ. The wider argument, which concerns atheists, agnostics and members of other churches, is about the relationship between the Catholic Church and the State.
Mary McAleese discovered in her first sojourn in the Republic that even those who described themselves as nationalists here would, when pressed, define their nationalism differently from many, if not most, of those who would call themselves nationalists in the North.
She will find, as she travels the country, that the gap has widened in the past few years. But that's a subject to which we will return.