Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Okay

About Mitch13

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Name
  • School
    Walter Payton
  1. Mitch13

    TOC watching

    Just found this doc, almost has everything on it https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AigGLMu42q-ddHU2RTZQT09UNzFFNzdYSDdkemdRRGc&f=true&noheader=true&gid=0
  2. Mitch13

    TOC watching

    Just wondering where I could get a live stream from some TOC rounds.
  3. Pretty sure this what you're lookin for Western critical studies often create boundaries and exclusion of other areas of studies which fails to include people and studies with intersecting ideas, creating academic borders. Donadey, ‘7 (Anne, Department of European Studies and Women’s Studies at San Diego State University, “Overlapping and Interlocking Frames for Humanities Literature Studies: Assia Djebar, Tsitsi Dangarembga, Gloria Anzaldua,†College Literature, Fall, Volume: 34(4), p. 25. DAP) Several thought-provoking comparative models along the lines that I am interested in have recently been proffered. The first scholar to propose radical intersections between U.S. Third World feminist, postcolonial, and post-structuralist theory has been Chicana theorist Chela Sandoval. In her long-awaited Methodology of the Oppressed, she argues that it is crucial to map out “permeable boundar[ies]†(2000, 130), points of intersection and divergence between cognate, yet separate fields that are all motivated by what she calls “an ethically democratic imperative†lest we be faced with constantly having to reinvent the wheel (112). For example, Sandoval focuses on the permeable boundary between two thinkers who are rarely discussed together, theorist of decolonization Frantz Fanon and French structuralist Roland Barthes, proposing “a new kind of interfacing: the ability to tell another story, a differing version, facing the degree of difference between versions, while recognizing a function that recurs in spite of all disparities . . . . The methodology of the oppressed is that interfacing . . . a neorhetoric of love in the post-modern world . . . as a means of social change†(130) which “operates differentially.†This “coalitional consciousness†must be able to shift to recognize the similarities and the differences between fields of study (131). Sandoval demonstrates how Fanon and Barthes can be traced as possible precursors to feminist theory and ethnic studies. She highlights the necessity of mapping out these fluid intersections in order to avoid the danger of one field appropriating and denying the insights of another, as Barthes and “much academic work in the West†unfortunately do (132). A major difference that Sandoval foregrounds between Barthes and U.S.Third World feminism is that whereas Barthes felt alienated by the mixture of oppositionality and complicity that his theory of semiology entailed, U.S. Third World feminism embraces this mixture as “a necessary standpoint for ensur ing survival and social evolution†(133).
  4. Mitch13

    Anthro K

    Another thing that's good to do with a K is to read a value to life impact in the block. What you can do with this is go up in your 2nr and say,"No value to life without our alternative" Then from there you can take out their extinction impacts.
  5. A team at my school runs a similar aff and they usually go for discourse in the 2ar, so I think a good strat would be discourse doesn't shape reality and/or framework that says the judge should only evaluate the post-fiat implications of the plan.
  6. https://sites.google.com/a/d219.org/niles-west-policy-debate/summer-debate-camps Heres a pretty good list
  7. Mitch13

    Poetry Bad

    Not a great card, but it's better than nothing Poetry is dead, we killed it Newsweek. "Poetry Is Dead. Does Anyone Really Care?" Newsweek. Newsweek, 1 July 2010. Web. 4 Feb. 2014. <http://www.newsweek.com/poetry-dead-does-anybody-really-care-137385>. It is difficult to imagine a world without movies, plays, novels and music, but a world without poems doesn't have to be imagined. I find it disturbing that no one I know has cracked open a book of poetry in decades and that I, who once spent countless hours reading contemporary poets like Lowell and Berryman, can no longer even name a living poet.¶ All this started to bother me when heiress Ruth Lilly made an unprecedented donation of $100 million to Poetry Magazine in November. An article published on the Poetry International Web site said critics and poets agreed that the gift "could change the face of American poetry."¶ Don't these critics and poets realize that their art form is dead? Perhaps not. They probably also don't realize that people like me helped kill it.¶ In high school, I, like most of my classmates, hated the poetry unit in English class that surfaced annually with the same grim regularity as the gymnastics unit in physical education. Just as I was a good athlete who detested the parallel bars, I was an avid reader who despised rhymed and rhythmic writing. Plowing through tangled symbol and allusion, I wondered why the damn poets couldn't just say what they meant.¶ Then I went to college and at some point, I got it. Maybe it was when I was infatuated with some girl and read "I Knew a Woman" by Theodore Roethke: "I knew a woman, lovely in her bones/When small birds sighed, she would sigh back at them." Or maybe it happened when I read Keats's odes or Eliot's "Prufrock" or that haunting line in Frost: "I have been one acquainted with the night." For the next 10 years or so, I was hooked. I read poetry, wrote it and recited verse to impress dates.¶ And then my interest waned. On the surface, I suppose it was because I had other interests that demanded my time and attention: I got married, had children, pursued my career, bought a house. With apologies to Frost, I began to find more relevance in articles about interest rates than essays on the sprung rhythm of Hopkins.¶ Society, too, was changing in a way that did not favor the reading of poetry. From the Me Generation of the '70s to the get-rich-quick '80s, our culture became intensely prosaic. Ambiguity, complexity and paradox fell out of favor. We embraced easily defined goals and crystal-clear communication (Ronald Reagan was president, presiding over the literalization of America). Fewer politicians seemed to quote contemporary poets in speeches, and the relatively small number of name-brand, living American poets died or faded from view.¶ By the '90s, it was all over. If you doubt this statement, consider that poetry is the only art form where the number of people creating it is far greater than the number of people appreciating it. Anyone can write a bad poem. To appreciate a good one, though, takes knowledge and commitment. As a society, we lack this knowledge and commitment. People don't possess the patience to read a poem 20 times before the sound and sense of it takes hold. They aren't willing to let the words wash over them like a wave, demanding instead for the meaning to flow clearly and quickly. They want narrative-driven forms, stand-alone art that doesn't require an understanding of the larger context.¶ I, too, want these things. I am part of a world that apotheosizes the trendy, and poetry is just about as untrendy as it gets. I want to read books with buzz--in part because I make my living as a ghostwriter of and collaborator on books--and I can't remember the last book of poetry that created even a dying mosquito's worth of hum. I am also lazy, and poetry takes work.¶ In my worst moments, I blame the usual suspects for my own failings: the mainstream media, the Internet, the fast-food mentality. If it weren't for the pernicious influence of blah, blah, blah... Ultimately, though, there's no one to blame. Poetry is designed for an era when people valued the written word and had the time and inclination to possess it in its highest form.¶
  8. You should look into another country for this aff because 'Maduro says No' is a very strong argument now and you will most likely lose on it. All Venezuela affs are pretty much defunct now becasue of that.
  9. In our aff we read poetry with a card that says poetry is key to resolving conflicts, my partner decided to take this too far. The neg read a conditions CP with the plan text,"Do the plan on the premise that Mexico saves the sea turtles"(something like that) They went for the CP in the 2nr and my partner spent half of the 2ar yelling at the judge panel,"They don't read poetry for the sea turtles and since since turtles can't write you vote aff on the fact that the CP doesn't solve." He then proceeded to spent the rest of the rebuttal on case with no more argumentation on the CP. That being said we still won the round.
  10. Another good drill(especially for getting through kritikal cards fast without stumbing) is reading the card as fast as you can while saying a one syllable expression in between the actual words of your card. For example: Central(blah) Asian(blah) states(blah) For(blah) a(blah) decade(blah) they(blah) have(blah) faced(blah)............. You get the point
  11. A debate computer should have a screen larger than 13 inches (my partner has a 18 inch laptop, but that's overkill) have a good amount of memory and MUST have office word. All other things don't really matter too much.
  12. Anyone know a lot about this camp. I am looking for a well rounded camp, not too kritikal. Any other places I should look into?
  • Create New...