Corruption and Stupidity in State Forensics

I just got back from a State Forensics meet. For those of you who don't know, Forensics is the art of public speaking -- not the study of dead bodies, as many dumb people have said to me over the course of the last few years.

Anyway, I participated in the Spelling category. I did pretty well -- if one can call fourth place well. It was pretty cut and dry -- it was like a spelling test -- but I'm still pissed, for two reasons: first, they (the Forensics organizers) getting rid of Spelling for Impromptu Speaking (which I think is wrong; they both should be included, even if Spelling isn't public speaking). Second, the judges made some really stupid decisions today.

What do I mean by stupid? For starters, let's take some of the other categories that people were competing in today. Humorous Interpretation, where people do a performance of a humorous piece, was on such category where these fine young people got shafted. Among the six people there, the one that won was, I think, the unfunniest one of the bunch. He did some piece about an actor who's shown up for audition who thinks himself to be above auditions, and puts on a one-man show to prove it. Dumb as can be, and he wins first. What a loon.

The one I'm really pisseed about is the Original Oratory category. This category, where one writes a speech and gives it to an audience, had several good speeches competing. Among them was my friend Holly, doing a spectacular piece on the JFK assassination that won first place in both district and regional competition. She won fourth in state, right behind the speech on how we need more manners and propriety in society. It was determined, at the end, that one judge panned her outright, giving her a rank of 6 (out of 7) and a point score of 85 (out of 100, but 70 is the lowest you can go). The funny thing was that this judge gave her no huge reason for her score, and she recorded a speech length (you have a 10-minute time limit) that was a full minute more than anyone else's. Holly was in tears because of it. I smell a rat with this judging; unfortunately, the judge was neither Russian nor French, so I can't make it stick. My coach, the supportive person she is, did nothing to question that judgement; she thought Holly was being a poor sport -- which, of course, was absolute bullshit. Holly admired everyone in that competition.

In light of all this, I'm glad to be out of it now. While Forensics itself is good, the competitions are about as corrupt as they can be. Which is okay to most people, because next to nobody gives a good goddamn about a bunch of academic kids squabbling over awards. that's the real problem in America; too much emphasis on sports. That's why the majority of Americans are stupid; they'd rather watch Monday Night Football than Win Ben Stein's Money.

Well, that's my rant. I'm glad I got that off my chest. It's more than likely, though, I'll have something better to talk about tomorrow.