Product Description

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #464871 in Books
• Published on: 2007-10-02
• Released on: 2007-10-02
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 528 pages

From Publishers Weekly
Starred Review. For anyone who thinks of high school debate and envisions nerdy teens, the story of the Kansas City Central debate squad will be eye-opening. Despite the inner-city school's academic deficiencies, and the students' own turbulent home lives, the young African-American debaters have been able to carve out a sphere of success for themselves—in part by making the racial issues surrounding their participation a key part of their arguments. Miller, a local reporter, spends most of his time with two teams of debaters: underclassmen Ebony and Antoine, who are still learning the ropes, and seniors Marcus and Brandon, working their way toward a national championship in Atlanta. Miller embeds himself deep into their lives and is forthright about how his journalistic objectivity slowly eroded. (First, he tells Marcus not to skip a debate; eventually he becomes the team's assistant coach.) Convinced by the energetic competitions that debate is "the best education-reform tool I've ever seen," he attacks the bureaucratic red tape of a "dysfunctional" school system that forces the students to break the rules in order to travel to out-of-state events. The reporting is both lively and engrossing, and even at nearly 500 pages, the book encourages most readers to learn more about these remarkable teens. (Oct.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From School Library Journal
Adult/High School—Kansas City's Central High is a designated underachieving Missouri school with a dismal record. It has, however, a strong debate team that has qualified to compete in the Tournament of Champions on the national level. Miller spent several years in the city's debate scene while writing this book, although his primary focus here is on one season with the top team. He follows the students as they cope with the highs and lows. To his credit, the author admits that his journalistic objectivity was compromised by spending so much time with his subjects. However, it is that commitment that makes this book an engaging read. Debate on the national circuit is political, occasionally nasty, and as much about style as it is about substance, and Miller exposes these facets, while taking readers into the lives of four teens surviving in a poor school and poor homes. The story is about race, teens, and the art and science of debate; it is also an indictment of public education. YAs will find the lives of the participants, particularly aspects of college recruitment and the daily school environment, as interesting as the details about how the team wins.—Mary Ann Harlan, Arcata High School, CA
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From Bookmarks Magazine
Journalist Joe Miller's first book is highly political, and very important. Not only does it point fingers at the deficiencies of the Kansas City School Board, but it also reveals how race, class, and poverty affect education in America. While Miller's analysis of these issues may seem old hat, his in-depth portrayal of the debaters' complicated, troubled family lives elevates his narrative's significance. (One student comes from a family of sharecroppers; another lives in homeless shelters.) Miller also provides an interesting history of debate in America—from the Lincoln-Douglas debates through today's speed-reading tactics. If the book loses some focus or seems overly long when Miller details his own role as coach, it nonetheless should serve as a wake-up call.

Copyright © 2004 Phillips & Nelson Media, Inc.

Customer Reviews

I wanted to like this book
I really wanted to like this book. As a debate coach for an inner city school, I looked forward to having my own problems and complaints validated. To some extent they were. However, the book as a whole left me with more questions than answers, more anger than acceptance, and more frustration than appreciation. Let's start with the obvious: the author is a reporter and the book was an to be an unbiased look at the debate culture and how it affected an inner city school. That the author not only became a part of the story but actually directed the actions of the story is an appalling breach of jounalistic ethics. While I did not expect the writer to remain entirely neutral, and I do give him credit for portraying the debaters honestly, his own leap from neutral observer to debate judge to coach while still writing this book crosses a line.
Secondly, we are introduced to the major characters and confronted with an injustice: these students are prohibited from attending a major national tournament by a set of archaic state rules. Forgive me for being confused, then, when the team attends national tournaments in Washington, DC and Atlanta. The writer never clarifies this point, perhaps because it minimizes the conflict. The book gives short shrift to a comment by James Copeland of the National Forensic League that Central attends major tournaments throughout the year that the majority of competitive teams cannot afford to go to.
It bothered me as well to read about debaters who come to practice late--if at all, work that does not get done, late night partying and yet, and yet, debaters that rise to the top of each tournament. How? Was it too much to ask how the debaters got from point A to point B? I was troubled throughout the book by Mr. Miller's attempt to minimize the role of coach Jane Rinehart. Other than a few exercises she leads new debaters through, her only role in the success of her team appears to be as driver, observer and censor of language. One can't help but wonder if this is deliberately done to make his own debut as an assistant coach who literally takes over more impressive.
That leaves me to deal with the issues of debate style and content. I have, in the past, been a big fan of the Urban Debate League and its quest to bring minorities into what is largely a "white" activity. I am not a fan of programs that tell debaters they cannot succeed in the event as it currently exists because of their skin color or their poverty. Originally debate centered on analysis and persuasion, something that cannot occur in 300 word per minute speeches designed to cram in as many cards of evidence as possible. While both the book and Rinehart reject local tournaments that condemn speed and require debaters to talk to "Suzi's Mom", these tournaments teach students to really understand what they are saying and to be able to explain it coherently to someone who is not an expert in philosophy, who does not understand how simply passing one piece of legislation will lead to nuclear war. Rinehart elects instead to compete on the National level but condemns those tournaments for not rewarding the very things local tournaments would: analysis and persuasion. I find it insulting that the author makes the gigantic assumption that having his debaters turn to hip hop and a rejection of the structure of debate would have magically saved a young man from being a gun shot victim. The message he sends by the end of the book is that he is one of the few visionaries of debate; that the only honorable style of debate is one that rejects debate as currently played. I am not an apologist for many of the abuses in the activity today. I am, however, a firm believer that debate can change lives, regardless of skin color and family income. I am a firm believer that debate teaches students skills that will serve them throughout a lifetime--organization, the ability to structure their arguments and presentations, the composure in unfamiliar situations. If we accept Miller's assertions that the entire activity has to change to accommodate a few, that without these changes minorities can never succeed in this activity, then we are buying into a even more racist mindset and it disturbs me that Miller's book perpetuates this myth.

Excellent Book On Many Levels
This book works on many levels. It has a great narrative, which drives one to keep reading. The fast-paced story is also one of underdogs who succeed against all odds.

The exciting narrative is a vehicle the author uses to effectively share with the reader how truly awful some inner-city schools are and how uneven the playing field really is. This information is contained in the story and is not preachy.

The author also uses the narrative to teach readers about debate and the on-going controversies within the debate world. I highly recommend this book for both teenagers and adults.

Similar to 'The Game', but not about pickup artists
The premise of Cross-X is very similar to 'The Game: Penetrating the Secret Society of Pickup Artists' by Neil Strauss; a journalist decides to write a book. Joe Miller wrote it about a debater; Neil Strauss wrote it about himself. There are actually a few parallels in debate and pickup; there are rules and guidelines, some people obsess and know every little detail, it's considered a game by those who play it, etc.

So if you liked The Game for its writing, you'll like Cross-X. If you liked The Game for its subject matter, you'll probably be disapointed; Joe Miller is a cool dude, but he doesn't know NEAR as much about social dynamics as Neil Strauss.