In the Court of the Kritikal King

The champion of Wake Forest, co-champion of the Crestian and CBI, a finalist at the Florida Blue Key, and top speaker at VBT, Josh Marshall is an extremely accomplished debater and unabashed supporter of the use of critical theory in debate rounds. But, more importantly, everyone who knows him - and even those who don’t - know that he is a great person.

A man of deep conviction (spiritual and personal), a man of great warmth, a man with a desire to question assumptions, and a man with impeccable taste in music (this piece’s name is derived from one of his favorite band’s song titles), Josh Marshall joins us today for this exclusive VBD interview.

Jon Cruz: How is your evening going?

Josh Marshall: er…i suppose i’ll have to punctuate and spell and grammatificate correctly for this wont i ;-)

JC: [laughs]

JM: My evening’s going fine, fairly relaxed now that school is out.

JC: Don’t worry, I correct everything afterwards.

JM: ah, wl in tht cse ;-)

JC: [laughs] Let’s get down to it.

JM: Okay.

JC: Before I met you in person, I knew you were one of the nicest people in the community. I don’t think that’s a subjective comment, and I am pretty sure that it’s agreed upon by just about everyone who knows you or knows of you. Do you find it difficult to keep this disposition in an activity that, on a rather deep level, is based upon competitiveness?

JM: [laughs] Um…first, I don’t know how true the basic premise is. [rolls eyes] But, assuming it has any validity, I’d say that I make it a goal of mine to maintain that disposition. But I know full well that I can be just as guilty of unkindness/judgmentalism as the next person. It’s difficult not to be that way.

JC: Do you feel that many people have seen that side of you?

JM: Fortunately, no. ;-) As I said, I try to do the right thing; just doesn’t always work out that way.

JC: How did you first get involved in debate?

JM: Mr. Clemens (our coach) was my AP Euro teacher in tenth grade. I was actually deathly afraid of public speaking at the time, which is why I initially shied away from the activity.

He saw something in me though, and convinced me that I wouldn’t have to worry about speaking in-front of lots of people until I “got good.” If I’m not mistaken, Mr. Clemens drew Pat Fitch to the activity in the same way.

JC: [laughs] Nice. Do you feel you “got good” fast? You were novice state champion that year.

JM: [laughs] I’m not entirely sure I ever “got good.”

JC: Oh, come now. Admirable modesty aside, how quickly were you satisfied with results?

JM: I suppose I did have a fairly high learning curve (if I’ve got the idiom right there). But yes, I was blessed with a fairly successful novice year. Mr. Clemens is an amazing teacher.

JC: How does the Lake Highland team work? It’s a fairly young team.

JM: We’ve a very…umm…decentralized modus operandi. ;-)

JC: [laughs hard]

JM: All kidding aside, the way it pretty much works is like this…. Actually, it’s hard to say exactly how it works, because as you said, we’re a young team. Initially Mr. Clemens just coached us all. Then, as novices became varsity debaters and so on and so forth, Ryan and I found ourselves coaching novices along with Mr. Clemens. These days its really one huge collaborative effort. As there aren’t too many of us, we all know each other fairly well and work with each other/help each other out.

JC: I think teamwork is essential to any successful organization. It seems like you guys have discovered that as well.

JM: I think its immensely beneficial. Personally, I know that even simple things like collaborative case-writing make for some really dynamite positions. Two heads are better than one, I guess.

JC: Speaking of “dynamite positions”….

JM: Oh dear…. ;-)

JC: You’ve been known to run some fairly unique ones. Thoughts?

JM: It pretty much started when Ryan brought up this article which was this incredible Feminist Kritikism of Privileged Communication. That eventually became “The Malinda Seymour” affirmative that I enjoyed so much.

Actually…to back track, it probably all started when I went to camp with Tom Evnen. [laughs] Two years of camp gave me, amongst other things, the incredible opportunity to see Tom in action, and to learn straight from him how to run more unique things. I learned a ton from him, ranging from how to properly run things like kritiks to the all-encompassing maxim on theory debate. I can’t disclose here, but if asked privately, may be willing to share. :-)

Anyway, after that, Ryan and I wrote up the fem-kritik, which I loved, not only because it made for incredible debate, but also because it highlighted a real issue plaguing society.

JC: Agreed.

JM: And so, in my small way, I was (hopefully) educating people.

Part two of our wild ride into the “out there” came the night before Greenhill, where we painstakingly cut two CLS articles (by Hutchinson and Monahan) which eventually became “The CLS Kritik.” I ran it once at Greenhill, and I swear, it was one of the most fun rounds I’d EVER had.

JC: Who did you run it against?

JM: Steph Bell.

JC: Cool.

I’m glad to see a major proponent of kritiks make clear the educational benefits of critical approaches. Many people are skeptical of kritiks.

JM: [laughs] You’re right. A lot of people are skeptical of them.

JC: Why do you think that is?

JM: I think there is a number of reasons.

First, a lot of people associate kritiks with “policy debate,” which I find ironic; from what I’ve heard when policy debaters started running K’s it was due to an LD influence. It’s an indict of many more “progressive” styles out there, which I personally disagree with. I find that regardless of what the event is called, things like argumentative techniques/styles should transcend this odd little dichotomy we’ve established.

Second, some people have problems with the positions themselves, which is in part expected, as the whole purpose of kritikism is to broaden one’s horizons, if you will. We tend to view the world through a particular lens (be it majoritarian, minority, white/black, male/female, or whatever), and, as such, find ourselves hesitant to embrace positions which ask us to view the world through a different lens.

Either way, what I’ve found from my experience is that although many are skeptical, there are also many who are willing to listen. And, in those cases, running a more out-there position makes for an incredible round.

JC: I try to coach a style that has broad appeal - I don’t know how much I believe in the need for a sharp divide between “traditional” and “progressive” schools of thought - but my debaters have run cases that range from stock philosophy to analytical logic to evidence-based argumentation to relativist theory. I think part of debate is to educate, and telling people that they must accept what they are told on face is not only authoritarian, but non-educational, and the problem with much of the education system in this country and elsewhere. I think the world would be a lot better off if we questioned assumptions sometimes…assuming, of course, that the questions are understandable and logical.

JM: Definitely. I think its good that you mention “broad appeal,” because one thing I’ve had to learn - in many cases the hard way - is that no matter what your ideal judge or round looks like, adaptation is huge.

JC: Definitely. I find that even with the broadest of appeal, you still have to adapt to a particular audience. That’s my experience coaching, judging, and debating, at least.

JM: Precisely. Knowing what the judge wants is half the battle…er…maybe a third of it. [shrugs] I’m terrible at math.

JC: [laughs hard]

So, to the naysayers, you would say with conviction that kritiks are not simply tools for strategy and confusion - “shock and awe,” if you will - but that they can be educational and enlightening?

JM: Oh, definitely. You just have to make sure - as sappy as this is going to sound - that your heart is in the right place.

JC: I don’t think that’s sappy. I think that’s pretty wise.

JM: If you run Critical Race Theory in round, and then as soon as the ballot is signed start making racial slurs; you have no business running that position. Rather, read it over a few times and learn something.

JC: Turning briefly back to a previous topic - that is, your formative years - when did you first meet Pat?

JM: Hmm. Well, I’d seen him around campus my freshman year, but I had no clue who he was. I only “met” him December of my freshman year, when he came to help us prep for the January/February resolution. I remember seeing him debate a practice round against Jen Sanders (she graduated my novice year; incredibly supportive of me) - and seeing him confusing Franz Kafka with Greg Kafka.

JC: [laughs hard]

JM: Sorry, Pat!

JC: This year he’s become much more involved with you guys. How did that come about?

JM: Hmm. I think this year we’ve been more nationally competitive than in previous years, and Pat had more time to spare, so it just made sense I guess. Plus, he taught Ryan a lot Ryan’s novice year, so that connection had already been established way back.

JC: I ask because a lot of teams face travel issues, and Pat seems to have really helped you guys make more extensive travel a possibility.

JM: Hmm, I don’t know about that. Mr. Clemens has really been the one to make us a formidable travel team. Pat’s invaluability (definitely not a word) comes more in the coaching he gives us once we’re at the tournament. ;-)

JC: Oh, I didn’t mean to imply that he didn’t travel or was anti-travel. Just to be sure!

JM: But yes, assistant coaches are awesome.

…and if any schools in the Northeast is looking for one…

;-)

[Editor’s note: Josh is going to school at Brown University. For what it’s worth, he gets Jon Cruz’s personal recommendation.]

–
JC: Fripp. Crimson King. I love them. So do you.

JM: YES. YESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYESYES.

JC: [laughs] Ever seen them in concert?

JM: Actually, I saw them for the first time my…sophomore year here in Orlando. I was BLOWN away.

JC: Nice.

JM: So we drove up to St. Petersburg, which is a few hours north of Orlando, to see them again. BLOWN away again. So in December, which was a few months later, we flew up to New York to see them twice more! :-)

JC: [laughs] Nice! Where in New York?

JM: Manhattan.

JC: Greg Lake pwnd when I saw him in concert with Ringo Starr a few years back. I almost died when they belted out “In the Court of the Crimson King.”

JM: [laughs] Nononono…you’re not allowed to use Cali speak! You’re from the Northeast!

JC: [laughs hard] Oh, that’s just geek speak, come on.

JM: [laughs]

JC: My friend Shep, who posts on some anime board, claims they all say it, too. I’m not letting anyone get away with appropriating the term ‘pwnd.’ If I let anyone, I’ll let Daryl Pinto lay ownership to it. [laughs]

JM: Meh, I’ll pwn all y’all aeyyeight, dont be hatin!

JC: Do you like later prog rock? Or the King specifically?

JM: Hmm, I never really got into the “prog” scene, like Genesis, Yes, etc. T hey all just seemed like Krimson wannabes.

JC: [laughs] Alas. Ouch!

JM: I love Krimson because they have the most innovative and ingenious approach to music.

These days - along with the King, Fripp, and all the various relations to them - what I love about pretty much all the music I listen to is how the artists put so much emphasis into truly creating art. Be it Krimson’s epic instrumentals, complex time signatures, or ingenious interlocking patterns, or Godspeed’s pure FURY, it’s art. Thought is put into it. It’s beautiful in its own way

[shrugs] But that all sounds pretty pseudo-intellectual on my part.

JC: But it’s Crimson, so it’s all good. :o)

JM: True. Only the most (pseudo-)intellectual people can truly appreciate The King. ;-)

I guess you can plug this: Bielski & Marshall. Brent and I have recorded two pieces thus far. :-)

JC: Nice. :o) Tell us more.

JM: Brent and I both have various bits of recording equipment. So when we have free time, we hang out and improvise/write stuff, and then record it.

JC: [laughs] Nice. How would you describe your style? King Crimson wannabe? ;o)

JM: Hmm. Varied. Thus far it’s all been instrumental stuff, excluding the spoken word dialogue in one of the pieces. [laughs]

JC: What instruments do you play?

JM: I’m most experienced with the sax and guitar, but I dabble a lot with keys (which is primarily what Brent and I play on the stuff we record), and pretend I have some clue as to how to play the Chapman Stick.

–
JC: How did you feel about your accomplishments this past year?

JM: I’ve been incredibly blessed. Going into the year I just wanted so desperately to qualify to the TOC. (One bid without the at-large last year left a sore spot in me.) I must admit I wasn’t expecting things to turn out the way they did, but then again, we never know quite what God has in store for us. :-)

JC: You’re a deeply religious man in a community that attracts many atheists and agnostics.

JM: [laughs] Very true.

I find that a lot of people draw sharp contrasts between “God” and “intellectualism” because of an unfortunate history of church/academic relations. But, I’ve found that not only are the two not ireconciliable, they in many ways go hand in hand.

JC: I was raised Jewish, am an atheist, and am gay - some qualities that often aren’t very attractive to deeply religious folk, and as a result, people with those qualities can be anxious around more deeply Christian individuals. But I find you to be one of the least judgmental people I’ve been fortunate to meet.

JM: Ah yes, I wrote about this once in my LiveJournal. I think that a lot of people kind of distort the Christian message to be one of legalism and judgmentalism, when Jesus and the Bible both make it very clear that the greatest commandment is to love God and the second most is to love one another. “Judge not lest ye be judged” is something I try to take very seriously.

JC: I think that’s awesome.

JM: There are some links in that entry which is very interesting. They talk specifically about things like judgmentalism and tolerance. “The Digital Priest,” in particular, provides an incredible perspective on a lot of issues confronting a modern society, and different ways for Religious people to approach those issues. (He’s close on as radically left wing as I am. :-))

JC: Do you find it more difficult to be leftist and Christian? Or is it a similar challenge to being deeply religious in the debate community?

JM: The only difficulty lies in the skepticism one encounters. I personally find it to be very simple because I find the message of the left to be one easily reconcilable with that of Christianity: that being “love.” Now, admittedly, that doesn’t mean that every liberal is a loving, caring individual. But, in general, I think leftism promotes an agenda which strives to care for others, to create a more tolerant attitude towards others, and generally improve the lives of people.

Things like legalism/judgmentalism - which i find a lot of right wing positions to be wrought with - assume we have a power which is not ours. That power being to, well, “judge.”

JC: I agree, and think that’s awesome. Granted, I’m biased, because we have almost identical political views. But, I think you bring an interesting perspective to justify your stance.

JM: [laughs] I think the important thing for me is that Christianity isn’t like the thing I use to justify politics. I believe that it should be the center of my political/philosophical views.

JC: You often say you are blessed with accomplishments. I am certainly not denigrating that, but, of course, there is also a great deal of hard work that must go into every debate.

JM: [laughs] Yes, debate does take a lot of hard work, and a lot of time. But I still hold to the fact that I’d never be where I am without God.

JC: Many critical theorists are anti-religion.

JM: Very true.

JC: Do you ever find it difficult to reconcile? Or do you not use those theorists?

JM: The stance I tend to take there, though, is that a) just because they say one thing I disagree with doesn’t mean everything they say is bunk, and b) a lot of critical theory is, once again, reconcilable with religion.

JC: Very cool.

JM: Admittedly, there are still some gray areas that I have to think about (and, in all things I’d default to Faith).

But, the way I tend to approach a lot of it is as such: there is a world of absolute objectivity/truth/morality, etc. That’s God’s world. We as humyns, though, mess things up, construct things, etc., hence the need for critical theory.

–
Upon my request for submission of photographs, Josh sends me this.

JC: What is that?

JM: My hero, Alyssa Price from King, created that to depict a scene from my childhood. When I lived in South Africa, I used to pick strawberries.

JC: I totally forgot to touch upon South Africa. When did you live there?

JM: From 1986 - when I was born – till, um, five or so years later.

–
JC: Did you discover critical literature through debate, or outside it?

JM: Through it. Mostly through people like Evnen and my lab mates at camp.

JC: Awesome.

JM: I’d say what really spurned things for me was when I started reading Critical Race Theory to research evidence for a narrative I ran. One article in particular, by Alex Johnson, made me see things in a whole new light.

JC: It’s clear you feel you’ve given a lot to debate, and I think your deep sense of character and desire to help others has already given a lot back to the community. Do you plan to keep giving back to the community? (I want to shamele

JM: Shamele? [laughs]

JC: I got cut off! [laughs] (I want to shamelessly plug you as an incredible assistant coach once again.)

JM: Yes, I’ve a deep desire to “give back” to “the community” as they put it.

JC: [laughs]

JM: I’ll definitely be devoting time to teaching at, um, “generic” ;-) camp this summer, and hope to judge/coach as much as possible next year.

JC: Could you see yourself coaching after college? Or are you not thinking that far ahead?

JM: After college? Goodness knows. As of yet, I’m not committed to any coaching for the years to come.

JC: Hopefully that will change. :o)

JM: Admittedly, I haven’t exactly taken a proactive role in trying to procure anything. :-)

Still trying to decide whether I should single-handedly revolutionize the Rhode Island debate circuit or coach more long distance. ;-)

–
JC: Random silly question. What’s the deal with the photo on the front page?

JM: [laughs hard] Okay. When I was in 7th-9th grade, before I was enlightened, I was a pretty hardcore sXe punk/anarchist. (Goodness, do I regret that.) I always spiked my hair, and, to “complete the look,” wore on a fairly consistent basis - simultaneously - TWO ball-necklaces…

JC: [laughs]

JM: …FOUR wallet chains (two per wallet…yes…I wore two wallets)…

JC: [laughs harder]

JM: …a studded bracelet, a studded belt…

JC: [laughs harder]

JM: …either Converse, Vans, or synthetic leopard fur platform shoes…

JC: [laughs harder]

JM: …and a wide array of plaid pants, including my mom-bought Bondage pants from Hot Topic.

JC: [laughs very hard]

JM: The colors were for a party. As I said, I’m much more enlightened now.

–
JC: What would you say was (were?) your proudest accomplishment(s) as a debater?

JM: Ugh. That’s a tough question to answer. As a competitor, I’d say…winning that CFL my novice year. ;-)

But, as cliché as it sounds, I think my “accomplishments” this year are much wider in scope than picking up ballots here and there. I think I’ve immersed myself in an incredible community of students and educators and, even if it’s in a small way, I think I have somehow contributed to that community, with my…”unique” perspective on things. ;-)

I remember last year hearing one of the captains at the time, Josh Swartsel speak at our student chapel. (Josh won the NFL in congress, this was before then.) He talked to us about how things hadn’t gone as well as he wanted at one tournament, and that when that happened, he got to kind of sit back and think of himself as a coach and thought about all the success going on around him…how well “his kids” were doing, and how that made him feel.

I’ve found that as this year has progressed, I’ve come to care more and more about things like those I “teach.” ;-) So although I don’t in anyway mean to claim the success of others, I’d like to think that one of my bigger “accomplishments” is having something to do with the AMAZING performance of Lake Highland’s younger members.

JC: I don’t think that’s stealing anyone’s thunder. Don’t worry. And, to comment on something you said just before, I think the community is enriched by people like you.

JM: Most people who know me know (and anyone reading this can learn) that if you need anything you should feel free to call on me. (AIM: Larxtunginaspic)

Popularity: 1%

test

This entry was posted on Thursday, May 20th, 2004 at 11:49 pm and is filed under Interviews. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.