On The Simpsons, a flashback reveals that a teenage Marge Bouvier (future Simpson) did poorly at a competition with her “forensics club” because she had stayed up most or all of the night with Homer. If I recall correctly, Marge’s presentation at her club consisted of her giving a speech, monologue, or other verbal presentation and looking really tired and yawning, and I assumed then that a “forensics club” was a club where you gave speeches and were judged on content or delivery, and Marge did poorly because she did not project an air of professionalism during delivery.
What exactly would a “forensics club” in the US in those days have done? Do they still exist?
I know now that the term “forensic” has a meaning that applies to courts - for example, “forensic psychology” refers to psychologists making recommendations or providing expert testimony in court toward a specific case, such as helping the court determine if a person is sufficiently mentally ill that they are unable to stand trial for a crime.
Would Marge’s “forensics club” have been a club where kids make a mock court and play-act as judges, attorneys, witnesses, and parties?
Speech, declamation and debate are things that are done by members of a forensics club. These clubs usually exist in high schools and hold contests that are judged.
Yep, public speaking, debate, and such. Some forensics clubs compete in debate competitions but others are less formal and may be more like a speech class.
No. “Forensic” can refer to any sort of public argument or debate. Forensic psychology is the application of psychology to matters of public argument–typically, as in a criminal case. Forensics, used as a noun, just refers to any generic public argument, as for example in a scholastic debate. Hence the forensics club practices debate and argument.
Nerd alert–there is such a thing as a forensic actuary. They investigate and testify about matters such as insurance fraud and reinsurance dispute resolution.
Would competitors be judged in terms of delivery and public speaking style, or is the focus going to be on content? Especially if you have seen the episode in question, would a student be marked down for appearing visibly tired like Marge was, or would judging be based on the number of valid points she raised and the real reason that a judge called her performance “terrible” was that she was so tired that she failed to make a valid argument?
Friedo is correct. The categories (at least for the Indiana High School Forensics Assoc.) are as follows:
Sweeps, Broadcasting, Declamation, Discussion, Dramatic Interpretation, Duo Interpretation (Memorized), Duo Interpretation (Scripted), Humorous Interpretation, Impromptu Speaking, International Extemporaneous Speaking, Original Oratory, Original Performance, Poetry Reading, Prose Reading and United States Extemporaneous Speaking.
Our high school has a fairly large contigent of students that participate. <gloat>My son finished second in the 2011 state finals with his Original Oratory.</gloat>
<pseudo-hijack>
I was going to make a joke that the Forensics Club performs amateur autopsies and other scientific procedures to establish scientific facts in solving crimes. A lathis wikipedia subject.
It’s a lame joke, but it reminded me that I didn’t understand the connection between “forensics”, public speaking, and “forensics”, scientific investigation as applied to law enforcement and justice.
I looked up the etymology, and it’s the Latin word forensis: “of the forum”. As in, the public space in every Roman town for public speaking AND the venue of prominent judicial procedures in Roman justice.
Therefore, public speaking is “of the forum”. So is scientific development and examination of evidence in criminal or civil law proceedings, with a view to testimony given in a proceeding “of the forum”.
</pseudo-hijack>
This entirely depends on what the event is. There are a number of interpretation events which will be almost entirely judged on style. For these events, the competitor takes a non-original piece (e.g., a cutting from a play, movie, or literature) and delivers it.
Secondly, there are public address categories in which the competitor must write some or all of the piece. These events are a combination of style and substance. Which takes precedence really depends on where in the country you are, as different circuits have different prevailing norms.
In each of the preceding events, there is one person or duo presenting, and they are ranked against other competitors in the round (usually from 4 to 7 others).
There are also debate events, which pit one team against a second. The teams will consist of either one or two debaters, depending on the event. These are far more content driven, however there are some debate types which emphasize style to a much greater degree. One type in particular, policy debate, has circuits where style is entirely de-emphasized. I’m in the minority, but I have a definite preference for this event.
I was in forensics in high school. In the preliminary rounds at one state competition, we were randomly divided into groups of six students, each of whom recited a monologue from a play. Everyone wrote their name, school, and the name of the play we’d be reciting from on the blackboard. Mine was “The Crucible”, another girl’s was “The Star-Spangled Girl”, and the remaining four were from “The Me Nobody Knows.” (We were all from different high schools.)
It turned out that the four performing from the same play were coincidentally doing the *same monologue. By the final recitation, I could have recited it along with the unlucky soul doing it. I can still remember one of the lines: “Please hear what I’m not saying!” In the case of those four performers, I bet it was something like, "@#!!"
I have coached high school forensics for 25+ years now. If you want a good sampling of what it is we do, go to the link Heart of Dorkness posted and watch a view videos from Nats.
-silenus, coach of a California State Champion in Thematic Interpretation and a Lincoln-Douglas debater who finished 10th in the nation his senior year, among hundreds of others.
A difinative catagory in a Forensics competition is investigatory. A topic of debate or contoversey is given to the participant in a library or resource setting, and she or he has a determained period of time to craft an argument or perspective on the topic. Then deliver the final crafted rationale, then judged. As well as readings of poetry and varied interperative literature.
I did forensics in high school. As I recall, here were the categories:
Debate
Prepared oratory (speechifying)
Extemporaneous oratory (here’s a topic, there’s the library, you have 15 minutes to prepare)
Monologue (someone else’s speech)
Duet acting
I believe in later years they added duet extemporaneous/improv, as well.
That was my role in our high school’s club. In fact we were on the way to a regional “meet” or whatever it would have been called when Kennedy was shot. The event went on so for two days I was away from home and pretty much missed much of the emotional drama.
Throwing in some more background on the etymology. It’s derived from forum, the open marketplace that constituted the centre of ancient Rome (and other cities founded or colonised by the Romans). The forum was where public life was concentrated; merchants had their stalls there, public buildings such as temples or courthouses were located around the forum, people would gather to meet and have conversation. This is where the semantical link both to judicial proceedings and to public debate came from.
