Swansong

Two days ago, on the 11th of February 2006, my debating career at JC level officially came to an end. We never made it past the preliminary rounds of the NUS Challenge Shields. We won one out of three, and lost the other two by a very small margin of about one point. SA never seems to win in split decisions.

I guess one never knows how much something means to you until it's gone. A few weeks ago I was complaining about the workload and about how debating didn't seem so fun anymore. I was wrong. I relished every single moment spent on the floor on Saturday. If I can take one thing away from the challenge shields, it is this: the knowledge that we gave it our best, and that each of the three rounds was a good, solid debate. The very fact that they were close debates testifies to the defence we put up. We ARE on par with the very best. Did we not show that last year during the national championships? And this precisely makes defeat so bitter: Knowing that you are just as good as your opponents, and seeing victory slip away only because of technicalities.

It is an established fact that debating is a subjective sport. Every debate is a circle, a balance of finely weighed arguments. Even as this phase of my life dies down another begins. Now I will move on to another level: adjudicating debates. That may prove potentially tortuous.



Sometimes when I have a free moment I stop to think about certain things that stir up within me anger and impatience. And I wonder then if it is all worth it. Of all the things in the world to get angry at.

I wish I could just let go and release my cares and anger more freely.