Competition Events
POI: The Stock Issues of Interpretation by J. Scott Baker
W
e’ve all had those late nights going home after a tournament: debaters analyze the progressive strategies heard in Policy rounds, extempers argue the socio-economic struggles of a country no one else even knows exists, and interpers re-enact every moment of a competitor’s Dramatic Interpretation. When all you want is quiet, these extremely different worlds all collide into a buzz behind you—three different worlds that almost never collide, until. . . it happens. The scrawny, nerdy 15-year-old Policy diva happens to glance over and see a bubbly, expressive 15-yearold Dramatic dude, and a love connection is made. This is the moment you, as coach, dread. As nauseating as this scenario may be for most coaches, how does it happen? These students don’t even speak the same language. How can a topicality-loving debater really communicate effectively with a poetic Romeo? If we truly want our squads to unite with a single language, we must teach our oral interpretation students how to debate. How do we do this? The answer is simple: give them a single
36
Rostrum | SUMMER 2015
event they can both love. This event is called Program Oral Interpretation (POI). POI, as described by the National Speech & Debate Association, is a “program of thematically-linked selections of literary merit, chosen from two or three genres of competitive interpretation.” The intent of the event is to make an argument using literature. Interpers simply must realize POI has more to do with debate than meets the eye. To begin, POI performers write their own resolutions. While these resolutions may lack the depth and sophistication of Public Forum,
“POI cross-applies performance and argumentative perspectives; and while my approach to the event may be unique, the union may just impact our programs in a positive manner.”
Lincoln-Douglas, or Policy topics, the fact that a performer is writing a resolution is a step in the right direction. Some of my students’ recent resolutions are simplistic in style, but heavy in commitment: Resolved: Gender inequality still exists in the United States workplace; Resolved: Same-sex marriage ought to be legalized throughout the country; Resolved: Racism is detrimental to society. While none of these would be considered for a national topic, oral interpretation students are taking their idea and cutting it into a 10-minute program. We then progress to the next step: stock issues. Significance: The debater quickly provides you with at least 10 experts who can demonstrate scope of the problem debated. The POI performer has to explain to the audience, either through a strong introduction, and/ or the literature itself, why this particular issue is so important. This isn’t about a plan being implemented in POI; it’s about the justification of their self-created resolution and literature choices. Harms: What is wrong with the status quo? The performer pulls together literature directly showing