i have always loved to argue. well, that makes me sound like a dick. i love debate. i appreciate it and cherish it; i feel it is a vital part of the human existence. Debate nurtures and solidifies our values and beliefs, while exposing us to viewpoints and experiences of which we most likely were not aware. Arguing, on the other hand, i just am always ready to do. it has been an innate reaction in me. i attribute this to my ardent compulsion to have order, rationale, and logic. i have a fervent sense of justice that was ignited before my conscious memories.
that being said, i also love stories of racial issues, the underdog, classism, the elite's ignorance (as it justifies my hate for the wealthy) and the underdog.
i love film. i love reality. i love documentary.
"Resolved" is a film that encapsulates all of these aspects into a spark of frustration and resentment. Life ain't fair.
as i began watching Greg Whiteley's 2007 film, i simply thought i was watching a doc on High School debate teams. Which, despite my rejection of any organized, school supported team or club - had wished i could have been a part of. but my hick-ass town did not have one. And the film began as that. it focused on two lower-middle class white kids that were getting the shaft in many area (from funding to respect). These were clearly brilliant, determined kids with an amazing talent to research, memorize, and enunciate specific, challenging ideas.
These two (as schools usually have teams, and couplets face other duos) kids were kicking ass. One - and the most obvious factor in a healthy debather - is his/her ability to speak "spread">
"Spread" - developed by some debate dude in the 1960's or 1970's to literally speak as fast as he could. this approach allowed him to put as much information as possible in his arguments, as debates are timed. *(wikipedia: Policy debaters' speed of delivery will vary from league to league and tournament to tournament. The fastest speaking debaters in the nation speak from 350 [1] to in excess of 500 words per minute [2][3]. In many tournaments, debaters will speak very quickly in order to read as much evidence and make as many arguments as possible within the time-constrained speech. Speed reading is referred to as "spreading.")
These two white kids were damn good at the execution of "spreading". This bolstered their arsenal of intelligence and debating even stronger. in practice when, 'spreading' one has to to take two deep breaths every 30 seconds or so. it sound as if they are mimicking a seal in between speaking far beyond the speed of normal conversation.
as i began to watch this, i thought - "gee, if your purpose is to win an argument - is it really helpful to speak so quickly that people can not understand you?" Now, most debate judges are/were debaters - so, they must be able to process. these genius minds were spending their youthful summers piled under library books and their parents money ($5,000 each time, give or take) to compete in cross country debates. All in hopes of a college scholarship - a reward 2 - 4 years away in benefit. In lieu of social rewards of parties, girls, cars, etc. And it is all hinged on mastering this form of articulation that half of a percent can even fathom. seemed odd. These two prodigies were battling preppie/yuppie school kids who - dressed in crested, matching blazers - were sponsored by their schools. While these poor kids watched town funds go to cheerleading instead. no glory in the pursuits of the brain.
So as all of this is sifting through my brain, another school gets introduced into the schema. Jordan High School - Long Beach from LA. these people were really poor. and working 25 hour weeks - taking from research time, etc. all while trying to get regular homework done. and avoid all trouble, as any blemish on the record yields a suspension from the debate team. and i can't imagine, in the city that Snoop Dogg brought to National attention with a gangsta swagger, that the debate team is the cool thing to do. so, imagine the social price on top of the aforementioned.
now, these young black kids - Richard and Louis - begin to become the center of the debate landscape. the are brilliant and damn good in the constructs of debate. they are known on a national scene. Well, the summer between 2005 and 2006, these kids start to wonder about their effect on this world - the debate world and the earth's populations. They, objectively and correctly, assess their and fellow debaters' actual impact. "Real world' impact, some marketing guys would say.
Basically, they try to determine what is the point of all this. Well, following the existing paradigm, it simply is to win these tournaments within their debate microcosm. Richard and Louis ask, "why?". they establish that they should expand to a macro attack plan and have actual results stem from debate.
this is where the film truly takes form. as the kids are questioning theexisting structure - they learn of
Paulo Reglus Neves Freire [(Recife, Brazil September 19, 1921 – São Paulo, Brazil May 2, 1997) was a Brazilian educator and influential theorist of critical pedagogy.] *see Pedagogy of the Oppressed. They implement his 3 point approach to convincing the hierarchy of realistic approaches. The speak slower. They use reason to argue. they do not just spit facts ('banking'), but interact with opponents and gradually build their argument from responses.
they address the class structure of the country and the debate environment, the racial constraints, the economic ones, and a slew of other factors that kept me captivated. My heart sank as i watched their passion land and slide off the ignorant, resistant others. These kids' sheer brilliance - and their strength to objectively challenge the structure was inspiring and enchanting. And the judges lapped it up. they too gave respect to this new approach. for a short while.
as these two continued to step away from the architecture laid to try and apply the topics into the real world and an INDIVIDUAL's reality. i cannot stress the last point enough. the gave each debate personality and a unique face. Earlier in the film, a debate was on "Should the US go in and stop genocide in Darur?". Well, as R&L would approach that type of subject; they looked beyond, statistics and figures to try to establish a proper response. One that could approach real-life players in the scenario and not just debate judges.
their approach quickly turns into debates that hey attend actually debating their style vs. the traditional debate form.
This film was remarkable. it addressed a gamut of concerns in a forum that i adore but am completely alien to.
Guest stars have (some actor you know as a "that guy!"), Justice Alito, Jane Pauley and others. with their comments on debate and its rippling effect on the individuals that participate in it.
but the real essence of this film is how these two street kids eviscerated the archaic system and show the hierarchy the heart of it. and how, eventually, the upper echelon only want to perpetuate their own kind and agenda. when the revolutionaries dissect the pith of a system, we as a society, stand to learn so much. but often they do not want to see what they are shown. these brave children - who had parallel stories to the original two white kids - both found some tattered glory, but essentially fail to make a dent in the armor. which solidifies my constant chorus of how this country's plague is economic and not racial. this is a class war.
i tend to walk away with the cynicals' treasure - but there are some silver linings. and the fight is always worth it. What's right is right. i fester an indignation wheni fail to see complete victory, but these brave kids had the notion and the fury to challenge the well-established foundation of a backwards, impotentture. i am proud to watch this.
this was hardcore.
this was punk rock.
class war.
fuck the system.
all that.
please watch this amazing film of kids who wanted to make a difference. simply because they took a step back and questioned the erroneous logic of an established method.
i would also like to add - that i love documentaries - but i often concede that when given a powerful story, how much is it the filmmakers' skill and how much is just the stroy? i.e., could anyone stand there and make this? not in this case. the filmmakers' here truly crafted a well-told, emotional, and gripping tale.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1068161/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resolved_(film)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tournament_of_Champions_(debate)
