Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

The Press Saturday, January 22, 1927. Debating Methods.

New Zealand opinion is fairly sharply divided.over the relative methods of Oxford and New Zealand debating as revealed in local contests with visiting students. There are those who think the Oxford style far superior to our own—easier, more graceful, more tolerant, and altogether more cultivated. On the other hand, some hold strongly that the Oxford debaters only toy with a subject instead of grappling with it; that they are flippant where they should be serious; and that the more earnest and more aggressive style of the New Zealander is much to be preferred. Really the contests were a clash between systems; products of an old foundation, which is steeped in culture and tradition and has formed the habit of not taking things overseriously, met those from a new university, which has more of the earnestness and intolerance of youth. Supporters of both sides will be interested to know that the Oxford method has made a mark in a country which, though much older than our own, also exhibits many signs of youth—the United States.

We learn this from a most interesting article in the Christian Science Monitor. According to Mr George L. Moore, visits of English University teams to America have created a new interest in college debating and have caused Americans to review their methods. "College debating has ac- " quired a new inflection. There was "a day within the memory of many a " younger alumnus when the teams of "campus pleaders displayed their stiff "white shirts and their starched "oratory before an audience numbering only.a few somnolent fraternity " brothers, a trio of bored judges, and " the visiting team. The new inflection "has brought out really interested " hearers. It has supplied new features; has stimulated live publicity; "has aroused new life in an old dog "whose best friends had begun to despair of its ever learning a new "trick." This inflection, Mr Moore goes on to say, is English, "flavoured "with the traditions p| Oxford and "Cambridge, seasoned by the charm " and individuality of the English "University man." Even those who do not entirely approve of Oxford and Cambridge methods on the platform will be pleased to read this tribute of an American to the good qualities of the English University debater. Mr Moore is too wise to suppose that the style of Oxford and Cambridge can be reproduced in its entirety in American colleges. The pattern of life in Oxford and Cambridge is a flower of old soil. He believes, however, that American, students can learn much from England. The English style, he says, is "more '.'natural, more spontaneous, with a "greater latitude for conviction and "belief as opposed to cold fact and "pure logic." He seems to think that the deepest fault in American debating is determination to win regardless of certain important considerations. .-The same criticism has been levelled at American athletics. Mr Moore quotes an American professor who has charge of debate in a large Western University as saying that such discussions are dominated by " an itch for ,a school " victory," and that the English practice of throwing open the issue to debate by the whole audience is com.mendable. Mr Moore evidently prefers the English system of deciding through a vote,. of. the" audience, and not by a decision of. judges, and he quotes another American professor as condemning the appointment of judges as "the big blight upon American "college debating." That is to say, debaters eye the judges much as candidates in public examinations eye the and prepare their case, not with free "minds, but in such a way as. they think will impress the judges. In other words,' contest-winning and the technique "of debate have counted for more than the discovery and promulgation.of truth. How far is this true of New Zealand? We would not care to say," but we believe the faults of which these Americans complain are present in some degree in our college debating. If the Oxford method exposes its men to the danger of thinking that wit is argument, it is possible that an impartial observer may find in New Zealand debating what an American college magazine, in commenting on an Eng-lish-American, debate, calls "a profes- " sional spirit which demands victories " and which brings in its wake canned " speeches, and a dearth of that easy "capable assurance which charmed the "audience." We may leave the subject at that, with an expression of pleasure at reading these handsome tributes to English methods from a nation that has long prided itself on its public speaking.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19270122.2.76

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 18906, 22 January 1927, Page 14

Word count
Tapeke kupu
761

The Press Saturday, January 22, 1927. Debating Methods. Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 18906, 22 January 1927, Page 14

The Press Saturday, January 22, 1927. Debating Methods. Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 18906, 22 January 1927, Page 14

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert