 |
| Richard Lizius from the University of Toronto, the tournament's top speaker, answers a point of information from Jon Laxer in the championship round. (Myles McNutt Photo) |
Months of preparation. Sweaty palms. A game plan primed, but one that could change as things get underway.
Let the debating begin.
This past weekend, AV俱乐部 played host to the 2008 national championships of CUSID, the Canadian University Society for Intercollegiate Debate. More than 100 of the country鈥檚 best debaters across academic disciplines gathered to argue everything from legalizing prostitution to reforming Israel鈥檚 electoral system. The tournament was run by members of AV俱乐部鈥檚 Sodales Debating Society, who also served as a significant portion of the tournament鈥檚 judging pool.
Competitive debating is a rather unique experience. It鈥檚 not explicitly academic, but the exchange of ideas is often as insightful and philosophical as in the classroom. It鈥檚 not a varsity sport, but the competition is no less fierce than on the basketball court or hockey rink. It鈥檚 not a free-for-all, but things can get a bit unruly at times, not unlike the Canadian Parliament which its format emulates.
Here鈥檚 how a round of debate works: teams of two prepare cases in response to resolutions presented to them by the host club. At this particular tournament, the resolutions were designed to be 鈥渟quirreled,鈥� meaning the government had free reign to connect them to any topic that they want to argue. To add a local flavour to the festivities, all of the resolutions were one-liners from videos by local comedy troupe Picnicface, which also performed before the tournament鈥檚 final round.
Once the teams have a resolution to work with, the government team is given 15 minutes to prepare a case of its choosing; the opposition won鈥檛 know the topic until the debate begins. For the next 35 minutes, both sides try and sway the judges to their side with the style and substance of their argumentation. Debaters are even allowed to interrupt each other鈥檚 speeches with 鈥減oints of information鈥� and challenge arguments on the spot.
Although Sodales was not able to compete due to its hosting duties, society president Allison O'Beirne says the club welcomed the opportunity to increase its national profile.
鈥淗osting the CUSID national debating championships is an incredible opportunity for Sodales,鈥� she explains. 鈥淲e feel that we're not just representing Sodales here, but also AV俱乐部 and Eastern Canadian debaters as a whole. The whole club鈥檚 stepping up to the challenge of taking on such a huge endeavor.鈥�
After six rounds of debate on Friday and Saturday, the top eight teams advanced to the quarter-final playdowns on Sunday. The final round came down to two teams from the University of Toronto鈥檚 Hart House debating society, with Jon Laxer and Monica Ferris on side of the government and Richard Lizius and Paul-Erik Veel on side of the opposition debating whether or not blackmail should be legalized. It was a competitive round, but after conferring, the judges unanimously awarded Mr. Laxer and Ms. Ferris the championship trophy. Mr. Lizius was recognized as the tournament鈥檚 top-scoring speaker, while Vinay Kumar Mysore from McGill University won the public speaking competition that takes place in between rounds.
With the debating year finished for the Sodales Debating Society, the club starts to prepare for next year鈥檚 activities. AV俱乐部 will be hosting the 2008 Atlantic novices 鈥� a tournament solely for new debaters 鈥� early in the fall and will send teams to the 2009 national championships at the University of Saskatchewan in one year鈥檚 time.