How the gift of the gab took them places

Karthik Sivaram and Prasun Bhaiya, fourth-year students of RV College of Engineering, Bangalore, are a proud debating team. They won the 2011 Asian British Parliamentary Debate Championship (ABP) in Dhaka, Bangladesh—the only Indian team to have won the ABP, which sees participation from all major Asian universities.

Since engineering and debating are different ball games altogether, how do the duo strike a balance between T-square calculations, leaky-bucket algorithms and squirrels & heckling? “If Humpty Dumpty was put back together, we’d never have heard about Humpty Dumpty,” Sivaram says about their heterodoxy.

Sivaram and Bhaiya’s proficiency at debating has taken them far and wide—across the country and to places like Bangkok, Malaysia, Macau and New York. They were among the 16 teams chosen from around the world to attend a workshop-cum-debate tournament in New York, organised by Hobart and William Smith Colleges, in conjunction with the International Debate Education Association. Sivaram will soon be attending the United Asians Debating Championship 2012 in Malaysia.

Parliamentary debating is modelled around the proceedings of an actual parliament and involves the side proposition (the government), the side opposition and a Speaker. The government’s objective is to pass the motion and the opposition’s, to counter the same. Each side has two or three members, depending on the format.

The Speaker (also called an adjudicator), who finally decides the outcome of the debate, is also a student. There is also a coveted ‘best adjudicator’ category in tournaments. Thus, the format is different from conventional debate competitions held in schools. The preparation time, after the motions are tabled and the teams are announced, is about 15-20 minutes.

“We must think on our feet,” Sivaram says. “It is an intellectual battle, a pressure test which should be handled extemporaneously.”

Bhaiya, known for his use of analogies in the debating circuit, says, “There is no time for research. Hence the need to stay abreast of current events ensures that we are well-read.” Though parliamentary debating has mostly remained a domain of the law schools, Sivaram and Bhaiya say that the pursuit of an elusive prey is that much more exciting.

“RVCE has been very encouraging in our endeavours,” Sivaram says. “The faculty and management have been very accommodating and have given us a lot of leeway in terms of attendance and academic commitments.” He makes a special mention of the support provided by Professor RS Kulkarni, his department head.

Both Sivaram and Bhaiya consider themselves lucky to have supportive parents who also fund their travel expenses. “Debating is an expensive hobby,” Bhaiya says. “It involves a lot of travelling and unless a team begins winning, sustaining the costs is difficult.”

Sivaram, a mechanical engineering student, and Bhaiya, a computer science student, are quick to stress the importance of academic excellence.

They say that debating complements their education. “It improves comprehension and logical thinking,” Sivaram says. “It equips one with a rational appetite. Opinions should be cultivated. The gift of the gab and rhetoric skills alone cannot make good debaters.”

There are various intangible benefits of debating, apart from the ‘CV value enhancement’. Their performance in viva-voce and placement interviews is better than many peers because of their acquired and honed ability to ad lib and think impromptu.

“The two recruitment letters I have were both based on an interview entirely about my debating experience,” Bhaiya says. Sivaram, on the other hand, will work with a start-up initiative that develops educative board games.

RVCE’s debating society keeps the debating culture alive in the institution. Auditions are held every year to induct new members into the society and the “sharpest pencils in the box” are chosen. “The juniors are living in our shadow,” says Sivaram.

“After us, there is definitely a promising future for the society.” But he worries about the wavering interest among the younger batches due to increasing academic pressure.

Teams from outside India have a better record in world championships because in many countries parliamentary debating begins in schools—unlike here, where it is restricted to colleges. To combat this handicap, Sivaram and Bhaiya have, along with others in the debating circuit, begun a ‘Bangalore Schools Initiative’, which recently conducted a parliamentary debate tournament for school students at the National Law School of India University, Bangalore.

“We get to meet diverse people through these competitions,” Sivaram says. “Also, since it is a team event, there is immense preparation and practice that goes into it. We have regular practice sessions on campus and in Cubbon Park on holidays.”

Team dynamics is the key. “Our dynamics has worked for each other,” he says. “We share similar interests and complement each other. These tournaments have strengthened our bond.” But Sivaram and Bhaiya also sound a note of caution for budding debaters.

“Get your life together first,” Bhaiya says. “Sacrificing everything in pursuit of a hobby is unwise. Pop culture is contagious, yes. But remain grounded, for rebellious behaviour is for the movies.”