Strategic Storytelling

By Coach Camille Rowley 

Any debater who has dabbled in speech knows that stories are a compelling rhetorical tool, but speakers often drop them at the door to the debate room. Telling a story is too cliche, unprofessional, and time-consuming, debaters say. 

But what if a new tactic could turn storytelling into a winning strategy for debate, too?

Drop the anecdotes.

Perhaps you have a pretty good case, plenty of evidence and rhetoric to defend your arguments, but it seems to be lacking color. Someone suggests you add a story, and you like the idea, but… the case is already finished and pushing the time limit. So, you drop the pithy quote introduction and instead open with a dramatic anecdote you found online about a stranger’s personal experience in the topic area.

For the first thirty seconds of your speech, the stranger takes center stage. But forty-five minutes and five speeches later, he is forgotten. Even if his name is thrown out a time or two more, no one quite remembers the details of his story or why it matters. 

Maybe stories aren’t so memorable after all. 

Or maybe we’re implementing them ineffectively. 

Structure your case like a story.

1. Framework is a comfort zone 

Dan Harmon’s story circle, a different model of the plot roller coaster, begins with a character in a comfort zone. For a debater, nothing is more comfortable than some definitions and framework. 

At this point, don’t attempt to show the conflict between the sides of the resolution. Just present the judge with the basic information as efficiently as possible. Comfort only lasts an instant before a need or desire is introduced. This is Frodo in the Shire. 

2. Values demonstrate a need

When you offer the judge a value, you are showing them something which is desirable to achieve. Your judge will be listening for you to fulfill the implied promise that your position proves the value. Just as Frodo seeks to destroy the Ring, you seek to actualize the ideal of your value.

3. Contentions build tension

Do not immediately satisfy the promise by showing the judge how your position meets the value. The character needs to first endure trials, so demonstrate the hopelessness of other positions. You can do this through the classic “my opponent's side fails my value” contention if you want. But other methods work too. For example, maybe there are two facets to your value. Break your contentions into those two steps, and begin each contention with how the best alternative won’t even meet one facet. End it with how your side does, then raise the question: can we achieve the second facet? 

The goal is to build tension. The specifics of how you do that are flexible. You want the judge wondering if you can really make it to the conclusion. This is Frodo entangled in Shelob’s lair.

Then, release the tension. Offer your side as the hero of the story, entering the dialogue to rescue the broken and hopeless system, finally reaching the long-awaited value. After all, who wouldn’t vote for Samwise the Brave? 

4. Applications put a face to the story

This is my favorite part, the trick to making your story obvious and meaningful: use the same application for both sides of the argument. 

Let’s assume again you use a basic case structure of “the other side is bad” and “my side is good.” Instead of choosing random or extreme applications and data points for each contention separately, pick one story and break it into two parts. 

For example, in the 2021–2022 season, I went 6–0 three tournaments in a row running a negative case for scientific advancement that only ever talked about one disease. In application one, I told the story of how stem cells from bone marrow were used to cure Sickle Cell disease in children through a risky experiment. Then I built tension in application two, sharing how doctors were too afraid to try the same treatment on adults. Twenty-one years and 16,000 patients passed before they finally took a risk and discovered the cure worked for adults, too. 

However you adapt this strategy for your case, your applications should be related to each other. Your second contention should refer to examples comparable to those presented in your first contention.

5. Conclusions are comforting 

As your case winds down, your judge should feel like you are coming full-circle, like Frodo returning to the Shire, his perspective changed by his experiences. Restate the resolution so the judge can hear the familiar phrase again. His perspective will be firmly in your favor because of the story you told.