Jump to content
1offframework

How to answer a performance

Recommended Posts

Whenever I have faced a poem/performance I have either inadequately answered it or just dropped it altogether. Ive had people tell me to treat it like a peice of evidence but that doesn't make a lot of sense in the context of the performances I've encountered. Any help would be appreciated

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just a general question about performances in general. Of course they have a methodology, but that varies from round to round. I'm just looking for some generic advice or answers against any methodology

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Narratives are uniquely bad in debate because they force us to provide moral judgements on both the narrator and the subject of the narration. 

Talib 4 (Ismail S Talib is the associate professor at the Department of English Language & Literature of the National University of Singapore “Narrative Theory: A Brief Introduction” Chapter 13: Narrative and Morality. https://courses.nus.edu.sg/course/ellibst/narrativetheory/chapt13.

 

Moral judgments are quite frequent in our response to narrative, and have been discussed a few times already in some of the earlier chapters. ● In the chapter on characterisation for example, I spoke of our judgments of characters as ‘good’ or ‘bad’. In spite of our belief in ‘plausible’ characters who are not entirely virtuous nor evil, we still look for such morally ‘good’ or ‘bad’ aspects of characters, and we may even attempt to classify characters as entirely ‘good’ or ‘bad’. ● In the same chapter, I also mentioned that some characters are illustrative, in the sense that they serve the didactic function of demonstrating certain virtues or vices. ● Moral judgments or expectations play a part not only in our response to characters, but also in our response to point of view. In the chapter on cinematic narrative for instance, I mentioned Sarah Kozloff's image-maker, which can be compared to the implied author of written prose narratives, and which Kozloff views as the moral/ideological agency of what is presented in the film. We can easily extend Kozloff's view here to the implied author of written narratives, who is also the moral agency of what is presented in the narrative. 13.2 Ancient Origin in Aristotle The moral dimension of the response to narrative has an ancient origin. As we have noted before, Aristotle's approach to narrative is fundamentally ethical: ● Aristotle’s idea of catharsis involves the idea of a moral cleansing which is experienced by members of the audience. ● His idea of the ‘structure’ of narrative can be said to be determined by ethics, as his idea of plot is dependent on the audience's perception of the moral goodness or badness of characters (see also 13.8 below). Aristotle has been a major early influence on the importance of the ethical dimension of narrative. 13.3 Still with Us Although the ethical approach to narrative and to literature in general is perhaps associated with ancient or even archaic theories of literature, and is actually problematic when employed for the analysis of some modern stories (as has been pointed out by Chatman), the ethical approach to narrative is still very much alive. It is clearly there, for instance, in Northrop Frye's approach to narrative; for example, in the essay on ‘Ethical Criticism’ in his Anatomy of Criticism. Likewise, it can be seen in the literary criticism of Wayne Booth, whose interest in the moral dimension of narrative is uppermost not only in his later works, such as The Company We Keep: An Ethics of Fiction (1988), but also in his apparently more technical discussion in The Rhetoric of Fiction (1961). It is also very much part of the late twentieth-century interest in narrative as part of moral philosophy amongst thinkers such as Paul Ricouer, Richard Rorty, Alasdair MacIntyre and Martha Nussbaum.

Edited by aprasad202

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're probably not going to win that they shouldn't get to read poems. People should get to talk about their own experiences, and most judges will agree with that unless you're in a more conservative/traditional circuit. It's more strategic to just say that reading framework doesn't exclude that - the interp is that they should defend the usfg, not that they shouldn't read poems. Say that the performance can be used as a justification for a policy. The most likely aff answer is that attaching a policy would undermine the value of the performance, but then it's just a question of weighing your impacts versus what's really a semantic nitpick.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're probably not going to win that they shouldn't get to read poems. People should get to talk about their own experiences, and most judges will agree with that unless you're in a more conservative/traditional circuit. It's more strategic to just say that reading framework doesn't exclude that - the interp is that they should defend the usfg, not that they shouldn't read poems. Say that the performance can be used as a justification for a policy. The most likely aff answer is that attaching a policy would undermine the value of the performance, but then it's just a question of weighing your impacts versus what's really a semantic nitpick.

 

While I agree with this, I think you can make the argument that Talib makes as to why narratives/poems shouldn't be allowed. But, obviously you shouldn't be like "no one cares about your experiences"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not even trolling one off baudrillard is really good. If you are up for it you can go for an afropess k thats centered around the libidinal economy. Semiocap k's by people like james would also be good. Psychoanalysis probably also links super hard.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vs a K aff I go for suffering economy K (B-Drill stuff) or Tuck & Yang. Vs a K just use your generic K answers then look through the poem and see if there's certain instances of oppression etc they talk about the world of the aff could solve or make better effectively "solving the I/L of the poem". Just make sure in 1st CX to thank them for thier performance and ask them how to engage the poem "is it an arg etc" "What does your poem provide for this debate? Framing? Alt solvency? Offense?" Then go off of that, if you dont you've got a huge chance of catching more links than usual.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also sorry for the double post but ditto on the points above-probably won't win on poems bad unless you have something like one of thr counter K's i mentioned above or if its an aff go super hard in on fw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i agree w above ^ tuck & yang is really good for negating personalized approaches to the resolution

 

if you're interested in running it, i would recommend reading r-words: refusing research 

Edited by versace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i agree w above ^ tuck & yang is really good for negating personalized approaches to the resolution

 

I feel like tuck and yang are not very strategic against people presenting their own experiences. Refusing research is about refusing people not in one's community from researching said community and scarred bodies is kind of the same as telling people "you commodify yourself" which is not a great argument. Edited by seanarchy
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like tuck and yang are not very strategic against people presenting their own experiences. Refusing research is about refusing people not in one's community from researching said community and scarred bodies is kind of the same as telling people "you commodify yourself" which is not a great argument.

Yeah Tuck and Yang is more a K of the academy as a whole. Go for Bauddy, charity cannibalism is a good arg, and then just read args about how the ballot has no power. I have a performance block on my CtP file in the Novice Starter Pack thread, it has most of this either. Against performance affs I just read T, CC, and then case turns about no power of the ballot and just straight turns on performance bad. Be very careful, however, to explain the difference between personal experience bad and performance bad. The arg I make is it gets co-opted by the audience. 

 

The advantage of going for FW and a K (something I'm normally very opposed to vs K affs) is that with performance, it's really hard to uplayer them just with T, because performance itself is kind of a metadebate thing like T itself. When you run a K, you have more than one way to uplayer them, you can either go right and get into the heavier side of metadebate, or left and question their reps. Against most K affs, I just go T-case, but with performance, I'd recommend a shorter T shell, mostly focusing on limits and procedural fairness as the voting issues, and instead of running more lefty fwk standards (CtP, advocacy skills, dogmatism), run some K of suffering reps and commodification - if you don't wanna go for Bauddy/CC or you're not comfortable with that literature, there's some excellent cap lit on the topic, look into Bifo (I actually run a hybrid Bauddy/Bifo K).

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...