SpeechGeek Postings

After several rounds, the original field of 210 competitors is down to six finalists for the 2010 installment of Supplemental Extemp Commentary. We’ll have live coverage as it happens.  The round is scheduled to begin at 2:00 p.m. CDT.

Blogging the Supplemental Events may prove a bit more tricky than the Main Events, as information has been a bit more hard to come by.  We apologize for any misspellings of names and welcome corrections from our readers.

Topic Area: The United States of Anger and Demonization

Speaker 1 — Louis Lee
Topic: “Demagogues unite.  Democracy needs you.”
Talk show hosts have a substantial effect on discourse in America.  Democracy needs unity among the groups.
1.  They deter Americans from participating in the political process.
2.  They convey information to Americans, albeit in a biased way.  They are useful as a means to share information.

Speaker 2 — Eli Bernstein
Topic: “Just say no.  Always, no.”
Debate has come to an end.  Taking away the power of debate diminishes the power of the USA.
1.  How Republicans have transitioned further to the during Obama Administration.  Shouting down the opposition and the filibuster are the key tools for accomplishing their “no.”
2.  How this affects Average Joe voters by turning them off from voting.  Americans are quickly losing trust in both political parties.

Speaker 3 — Rohan Pi
Topic:  ”Don’t tax me, Bro.”
Ultimately, we have to acknowledge that taxes are the down-payments we make for an advanced society. The lifestyle we enjoy is not possible without taxes.
1.  They maintain the goods, services and entitlements we enjoy as a society.
2.  We are in debt to the idea of prosperity by utilizing increased taxes to bring down the deficit and provide a better future.  This can be accomplished through reduced spending and higher taxes.

Speaker 4 — Nathaniel Hass
Topic: “Glenn and Rush: Ranting all the way to the bank.”
There are voices that are willing to make offensive, harmful arguments in public that are based on cultural stereotypes.
1.  What these people say, which is just plain wrong.
2.  Why are there people who say this, and who in the world is employing them?
3.  These people are paid to say such racist, terrible and untrue things.

Speaker 5 — Davis Mattick
Topic: “Nattering Nebobs (sp?) of Negativism”
We’ve become a negative culture.  (As negative as Harry Potter in the fifth novel.)  Giving up on an idea before it’s given time is unfair.
1.  Americans, in general, have a fatalistic attitude.
2.  We’ve given up on the future; however, there’s no reason to maintain that negativity.

Speaker 6 — Trevor Griffin
Topic: “Internet Flamethrowers”
We forget that what we do on the internet and social networking websites is a metaphorical flame-thrower that can have serious ramifications.
1.  Social such as Facebook and other social media.
2.  The political napalm thrown via the traditional media (FOX, NBC, etc.)
3.  Solutions for political and social flame-throwing and their extremities.

Original Oratory, Duo Interpretation, Humorous Interpretation, Dramatic Interpretation, United States Extemp and International Extemp postings for the round of 30 were made available earlier this evening at the Postings Party in downtown Kansas City.  SpeechGeek was on the scene and snapped some photos.  Official, though unaudited, breaks should be listed on the NFLNationals.org website later this evening.

Groups of students milled about Oak Park High School this morning to the point even a casual observer could tell that many of the individuals gathered there for the first day of competition at the 2010 National Forensic League National Tournament were nervous.

Very nervous.

As the moments wound down before the first draw of Extemp and rounds in Original Oratory, coaches pulled students aside to whisper final words of encouragement.  For individuals who spend several weekends out of the year at high school speech and debate tournaments, the scene was fairly ordinary: a typical high school, students dressed in suits and brightly-colored schematics already showing signs of wear.

Among the crowd was Michael Curry, a coach from Salem, Ore.  Like other coaches, though, Curry knew all-too-well that this was no ordinary weekend tournament.  However, the advice he offered to his students was quite basic: though these young adults are competing in the world’s largest academic contest, they shouldn’t let that fact overwhelm them.

“I try and get in the mindset of that it’s going to look and feel like other tournaments,” Curry said.

Read the Full Story at NFLNationals.org

As the old saying goes, you can’t get to Carnegie Hall without practice.

To the over three thousand forensic competitors swarming the streets of Kansas City this week, the road to the national tournament has been wrought with far more than just practice. For some, the journey has been paved with worn-out high heels and blistered feet, empty water bottles, beaten down storage tubs filled with countless hours of research and a forlorn stack of ties that never get untied – just readjusted for the following weekend. (After all – who has the time and luxury to waste on ties when the van leaves in five minutes?)

Sure, there’s a comfort when competing in one’s home district all year. The competitors, coaches and campuses are fairly familiar and reasonably consistent. After about nine months of tournaments, it feels downright natural.

Then, you have Nationals. That’s when things start to get real. Suddenly, the stakes are higher and competitors are embarking on an entirely new journey.

For some the journey through Nationals is a new and tumultuous one, for the mind as well as the gastrointestinal track. Leading up to the first day of competition, Emily Boysisio of Canyon City, Colo., admitted that she was “Totally nervous. I got sick this morning. But it’s worth it.”

Read the Full Story at NFLNationals.org

Months of research, practice, and competition come down to these all-important break rounds.  As the field of competitors narrows from hundreds to just twelve, we take one step closer to naming the 2010 National Forensic Association Champions.  Be sure to follow SpeechGeek postings for live updates as the tournament unfolds.

Keep reading to see the competitors who advanced to the quarterfinals in Impromptu Speaking and Duo Interpretation.

(more…)

For those interested in competing in one of the more unique tournaments of the year, the Extemporaneous Speaking Tournament of Champions at Northwestern University, the registration form has been posted online at the TOC’s website. The Extemp TOC has existed since 2003 and offers one of the more competitive fields of the season. Last year, the top three competitors in the National Points Race: Stacey Chen, Dillon Huff, and Matt Arons fought it out in the final round. This year’s TOC is a third tier tournament in the Extemp Central National Points Race and it will award 100 points to the winner.

The tournament also boasts one of the stronger judging fields in the nation with former extempers and recognized high school and collegiate coaches evaluating extempers performances. Extempers are guaranteed six preliminary rounds and for those that do not break to elimination rounds there is a supplemental impromptu competition that they can enter.

The cost per covered entry is $125 (one judge may cover two entries) and there is a $40 entry processing fee. Extempers can look at the invitation for the tournament on the TOC”s website to see if they meet the eligibilty requirements. The deadline for registering for the tournament and paying these fees is May 7th.

If you do not meet the eligibility requirements, you can submit a bid application. The deadline for this is April 1st. The cost of a bid application is $25.

SpeechGeek’s Extemp Central plans to do some live blogging from the tournament this year so those that cannot make the tournament will receive updated information about pairings/results/etc. However, it is hoped that extempers around the country plan to attend this year’s TOC.

An Extemper’s dilemma

Extemporaneous speaking is perhaps the most demanding of all forensics activities. It requires the research skills of a policy debater, the theory of a Lincoln-Douglas debater, and the speaking of a polished orator.  However, there are a few key differences between extemporaneous speaking and the previously mentioned events.  The first of which being that in extemporaneous speaking there is no one arguing against the speaker (barring a round with a built in cross examination period), thus a speaker must sufficiently address all arguments in order to have a complete persuasive presentation.  The extemporaneous speech is more analytically demanding than an oratory, and its topics change every round.  Perhaps, the most vital difference is the fact that an extemporaneous speaker only has seven minutes and just one speech to relay to the judge a message.  The speech must include analysis that is as deep-if not more so- than a debate case, while speaking well and engrossing the judge.  For unlike a debater an extemporaneous speaker doesn’t have the option to speed up to include all of his/her information.  This brings up an overbearing burden on the modern speaker: how to most efficiently include arguments while not increasing the rate of delivery.

The clearest way to resolve this issue is to use substructure.  Despite the way that this word strikes fear in the hearts of speakers across the nation, it is actually quite beneficial.  Unfortunately, it seems that the world of extemporaneous speaking has been burdened with adherence to the universal two sub point formula.  This format is highly unspecific and maybe a hindrance to effectively answering a question.   The following paper will seek to resolve this particular quagmire by addressing three specific types of substructure with direct application to extemporaneous speaking.

(more…)

Background

Over the last several weeks, international extempers have most likely read about the recent political developments in South Africa, arguably the strongest power on the African continent.  For those extempers that have not had a chance to catch up on these developments, Thabo Mbeki is no longer president of the country.  After a prolonged political struggle between Jacob Zuma, who was Mr. Mbeki’s deputy president (a position most akin to vice-president in the United States) and who deposed Mr. Mbeki as leader of the African National Congress (ANC) in December, it appears that Mr. Zuma has won.  This victory came within the span of a month when Mr. Zuma was first acquitted of fraud and corruption charges based on a judicial technicality.  The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), the body of the South African judiciary who initiates criminal cases for the government, was said in the dismissal of the charges to have been influenced in its prosecution by Mr. Mbeki and his supporters.  This finding by the judge overseeing Mr. Zuma’s case gave weight to charges, long echoed by Mr. Zuma’s supporters, that Mr. Mbeki has been an overzealous president who has been intolerant of political opposition and that Mr. Mbeki has been willing to use the instruments of the state to clamp down on this dissent.  On September 20^th, the ANC decided that Mr. Mbeki should resign his post in order to end the political struggle that has gripped the country for three years.

Having set the background, this brief will give an overview of the structure and history of South Africa’s political system, the current state of the government, and what challenges that government faces in the future.

(more…)

Overview
Before you can really get going on the season, there are a few fundamental that are always worth noting. Many judges will tell you they can get a sense of where a speaker will place in the round within the first minute of the speech. To that end we are going to focus more on theory and strategy. In that vein we are going to start with analysis on how to write a quality introduction. In extemp, a good introduction is supremely important, without one a good speech is impossible. In a good intro you will set up all of the background for the speech and justify why you speech is the most important in the round. Moreover, the better the introduction the less work you have to do in the body of the speech. Follow this formula and your intros will be golden in no time flat.

(more…)

Overview
What is the first rule of extemp? Answer the question. In the majority of rounds if you are able to answer the question, you will be one of the top extempers in the round. When I say answer the question, I mean this very specifically. Answer every aspect of the question, don’t just use it as a prompt to talk about what you want to discuss. Because answering the question is so important, this brief is going to explain how to break down a question so that you know exactly what it is asking. Once you know this, you can formulate a speech that is a direct answer. Away we go, into how to answer the question land.

(more…)