these strange books I found by accident called University Debaters
Annual. One was published for
each academic year from sometime around 1900 until well past 1950. The books feature briefs on a motion, followed by the
transcript of a debate on that motion between two universities. Many are available for free on Google Books, and most of the ones I’ve
been picking up for very little money are ex-library from all over
the country. These books were being sold and stocked in libraries,
both public and educationally-based, for decades. I have to wonder why. These books are more than just a curiosity.
More
than just an interesting piece of US debate history, these books, as
part of debate’s material history, raise what I believe to be the
most vital question about debating today – What is the discourse of
debating? Another way: What type of conversation is the debating
conversation? What are the aims of it, what is the purpose, why does
it take place, and how are all of these questions both posited and
answered via the existence of that discourse, as if in one movement?
than just an interesting piece of US debate history, these books, as
part of debate’s material history, raise what I believe to be the
most vital question about debating today – What is the discourse of
debating? Another way: What type of conversation is the debating
conversation? What are the aims of it, what is the purpose, why does
it take place, and how are all of these questions both posited and
answered via the existence of that discourse, as if in one movement?
Today
American debate coaches will not hesitate to spit out several
answers about the value of debate – it prepares students for
critical thinking, citizenship, a career in law, a career as an
active democratic participant, and other such defenses.
American debate coaches will not hesitate to spit out several
answers about the value of debate – it prepares students for
critical thinking, citizenship, a career in law, a career as an
active democratic participant, and other such defenses.
These
defenses indicate that they believe the discourse of debate is one
that is a teaching discourse, but
one that teaches the individual debater a discourse that is for the
self. The debating discourse is one of the self, of self-improvement,
and a highly individualistic one.
defenses indicate that they believe the discourse of debate is one
that is a teaching discourse, but
one that teaches the individual debater a discourse that is for the
self. The debating discourse is one of the self, of self-improvement,
and a highly individualistic one.
At its
worst, the debating discourse is one about power over others,
domination, and success via causing others to fail. This is embodied
in one of the most common tropes from American debating, often used
as a compliment about a particular strategy: “They’ll have nothing
to say.” Rendering opponents into effective silence is, ironically,
what good debating is all about.
worst, the debating discourse is one about power over others,
domination, and success via causing others to fail. This is embodied
in one of the most common tropes from American debating, often used
as a compliment about a particular strategy: “They’ll have nothing
to say.” Rendering opponents into effective silence is, ironically,
what good debating is all about.
But
the presence of these books has to suggest an alternate, if not alien
debating discourse, one that is not focused on the self, domination,
or on self-improvement. It too is a teaching discourse, but I would
argue that it suggests a pedagogical discourse,
differentiated from teaching in that through learning one learns how
to teach others. Traditional debating discourse can do this as well,
but it is most often a teaching directed toward improving one’s
ability to win debates in tournament settings. Most debate
scholarship starting after the creation of debating tournaments
begins to quickly turn inward, and becomes only valuable for the
immediate practitioner of competitive debating.
the presence of these books has to suggest an alternate, if not alien
debating discourse, one that is not focused on the self, domination,
or on self-improvement. It too is a teaching discourse, but I would
argue that it suggests a pedagogical discourse,
differentiated from teaching in that through learning one learns how
to teach others. Traditional debating discourse can do this as well,
but it is most often a teaching directed toward improving one’s
ability to win debates in tournament settings. Most debate
scholarship starting after the creation of debating tournaments
begins to quickly turn inward, and becomes only valuable for the
immediate practitioner of competitive debating.
These
books can be used for that purpose – but if that was their aim, why
are they so abundant? Even at the height of the golden era of
collegiate competitive debating there would not be enough debaters to
create such a presence of these texts. If we read them as for those
who are not competitive debaters, we get a very different debate
discourse. This debate discourse is about the motion
and about disseminating the best arguments about the motion to a
wider public audience.
books can be used for that purpose – but if that was their aim, why
are they so abundant? Even at the height of the golden era of
collegiate competitive debating there would not be enough debaters to
create such a presence of these texts. If we read them as for those
who are not competitive debaters, we get a very different debate
discourse. This debate discourse is about the motion
and about disseminating the best arguments about the motion to a
wider public audience.
This
would explain the value of having these books in a library. Students
of one topic or another could, through print, see skilled advocates
go through the various arguments for and against a particular motion
in order to inform their own position, or the position they are
working on for some assignment or project. This could be garnered
from straight research, but that would leave out one of practiced
debate’s most valuable elements – contingency – as some arguments
only work in some situations, and some are not apparent until those
situations appear.
would explain the value of having these books in a library. Students
of one topic or another could, through print, see skilled advocates
go through the various arguments for and against a particular motion
in order to inform their own position, or the position they are
working on for some assignment or project. This could be garnered
from straight research, but that would leave out one of practiced
debate’s most valuable elements – contingency – as some arguments
only work in some situations, and some are not apparent until those
situations appear.
Contingency
is seen here in these volumes very clearly – I speculate the
editors were aware of this value-added element – since each motion
(the books are arranged by debate topic, not school, not team, and
certainly not by quality of where the debate took place) contains
both the briefs constructed by the debaters on their side of the
motion and the speeches as given during the debate. Such
an arrangement allows the reader to compare the prepared strategy
with the way the arguments were deployed. The remainder of such a
comparison is what I would call the effect of contingency, something
that rhetors attend to with such frequency that we would not be far
off the mark calling rhetoric, in so far as it is the teaching of the
production of persuasive messages, “Studies in Human Contingency.”
is seen here in these volumes very clearly – I speculate the
editors were aware of this value-added element – since each motion
(the books are arranged by debate topic, not school, not team, and
certainly not by quality of where the debate took place) contains
both the briefs constructed by the debaters on their side of the
motion and the speeches as given during the debate. Such
an arrangement allows the reader to compare the prepared strategy
with the way the arguments were deployed. The remainder of such a
comparison is what I would call the effect of contingency, something
that rhetors attend to with such frequency that we would not be far
off the mark calling rhetoric, in so far as it is the teaching of the
production of persuasive messages, “Studies in Human Contingency.”
What
changes here? Instead of debate being a practice that serves the
participant by persuading and arguing for whatever he or she wants,
debate is the practice that shows how the participant can serve
others via argumentation. This service is primarily to cut a clean
swath through the foreboding morass of public discourse on a
controversial issue, and line up what, in his or her phronetic
opinion, are the best arguments for that side of the issue. The
speeches show how those arguments, identified in brief, are
constructed and deployed for the general audience. This helps readers
arrange their own thinking in a productive manner on the topic.
Debate here allows an exponential effect in helping people move
others toward what they think are good ideas. This
might be democratic
participation, at least in one simple form. It’s
certainly not the form that the mainstream debate discourse takes –
that of the leader standing up before the group and concentrating
their minds on one belief with powerful words.
changes here? Instead of debate being a practice that serves the
participant by persuading and arguing for whatever he or she wants,
debate is the practice that shows how the participant can serve
others via argumentation. This service is primarily to cut a clean
swath through the foreboding morass of public discourse on a
controversial issue, and line up what, in his or her phronetic
opinion, are the best arguments for that side of the issue. The
speeches show how those arguments, identified in brief, are
constructed and deployed for the general audience. This helps readers
arrange their own thinking in a productive manner on the topic.
Debate here allows an exponential effect in helping people move
others toward what they think are good ideas. This
might be democratic
participation, at least in one simple form. It’s
certainly not the form that the mainstream debate discourse takes –
that of the leader standing up before the group and concentrating
their minds on one belief with powerful words.
These
books, their large presence in used bookstores, as library discards,
and on Google Books, are a testament to an older and potentially much
more valuable answer as to what debate’s discourse is all about.
Pedagogy, related to topics, by skilled advocates, for
a general audience to reach others within that audience, or perhaps
other general audiences. Debate as a pedagogical discourse allows it to serve more than just the limited audience of college students who choose to take it up as an activity during college.
books, their large presence in used bookstores, as library discards,
and on Google Books, are a testament to an older and potentially much
more valuable answer as to what debate’s discourse is all about.
Pedagogy, related to topics, by skilled advocates, for
a general audience to reach others within that audience, or perhaps
other general audiences. Debate as a pedagogical discourse allows it to serve more than just the limited audience of college students who choose to take it up as an activity during college.
