Performance debate, often referred to simply as “performance,” is a style of policy debate that integrates elements of performance art, literature, and personal narrative into traditional debate formats. Unlike conventional policy debate, which focuses strictly on logical argumentation and evidence-based reasoning, performance debate incorporates a broader range of rhetorical strategies to challenge and critique traditional debate norms and practices.
The roots of performance debate can be traced back to the late 20th century, particularly within the context of critical debate movements. In the 1990s, debate scholars and practitioners began to explore the limitations of traditional policy debate, questioning its focus on technical proficiency and evidence at the expense of broader social and cultural considerations.
A key moment in the history of performance debate was the rise of critical theory in academic circles. Debaters started incorporating critical race theory, feminism, postcolonialism, and other critical perspectives into their arguments. This shift paved the way for more performative styles of debate, where participants used poetry, storytelling, and other forms of artistic expression to make their points.
Performance debate gained further traction in the early 2000s as debaters sought to address the exclusionary practices within the debate community. Advocates of performance debate argued that traditional policy debate marginalized voices from underrepresented communities and failed to engage with real-world social justice issues.
Key Characteristics:
- Integration of Art and Narrative: Performance debaters often use poetry, music, dance, and other forms of artistic expression to convey their arguments. Personal narratives and experiences are also frequently incorporated to highlight the lived realities of marginalized groups.
- Critique of Debate Norms: Performance debate challenges the conventions of traditional policy debate, including the emphasis on speed (spreading), technical jargon, and evidence-based argumentation. Instead, it promotes a more inclusive and accessible form of debate.
- Focus on Social Justice: Many performance debates center around issues of social justice, including racism, sexism, homophobia, and other forms of oppression. The goal is to raise awareness and foster critical reflection on these issues within the debate community and beyond.
Examples of Performative Arguments:
- Racial Injustice: A debater might use spoken word poetry to discuss the impact of systemic racism on Black communities. This performance could include historical references, personal anecdotes, and critiques of policy proposals that fail to address the root causes of racial inequality.
- Gender and Sexuality: Another example could involve a debater performing a monologue about their experiences as a transgender person navigating societal and institutional barriers. This performance might challenge the binary gender norms reinforced by traditional debate structures.
- Environmental Justice: A team could use multimedia elements, such as video clips and soundscapes, to highlight the environmental degradation faced by Indigenous communities. Their performance might argue for a reevaluation of environmental policies through the lens of Indigenous knowledge and practices.
- Colonialism: A debater might employ a combination of storytelling and traditional cultural practices to critique the legacies of colonialism. This performance could challenge the Eurocentric perspectives often prevalent in policy discussions.
Performance debate has had a significant impact on the policy debate community, fostering greater inclusivity and encouraging debaters to think more critically about the form and content of their arguments. However, it has also sparked controversy. Critics argue that performance debate can undermine the rigor and competitiveness of traditional policy debate, making it harder to adjudicate rounds based on clear standards of evidence and argumentation.
Despite these controversies, performance debate continues to be a vibrant and evolving part of the debate landscape, pushing the boundaries of what debate can be and challenging participants to engage with complex social and cultural issues in innovative ways.