Precis 

In the Encomium of Helen, Gorgias takes on the role of defending Helen’s actions and character against the notoriety that had encompassed her name due to her representation in many poetic works. Though seemingly a defense of Helen and placement of blame upon the potency of discourse, it is the defense itself that functions implicitly as a lauding of the power of rhetoric and perhaps thereby Gorgias himself. The argument he makes, “by means of words, inspired incantations serve as bringers-on of pleasure and takers –off of pain. The incantation’s power, communicating with the soul’s opinion, enchants and persuades and changes it, by trickery” (10), emphasizes the seductive potency of rhetoric and as a byproduct dissolves Helen’s own agency.

The explicit message is that the “persuasive discourse deceived [Helen’s] soul,” which makes it easy to “absolve her of responsibility” for the tragedy of the Trojan war since, as Gorgias’ expounds, “discourse is a great potentate, which by the smallest and most secret body accomplishes the most divine works” (8). Gorgias makes the argument that all blame is to be taken away since it was simply the powerful, compelling discourse that deluded her soul and caused her to do what she did. Gorgias goes on in his text by listing the captive, hypnotic, and seductive power of not just discourse, but its most captivating forms as well, which include poetry with meter. Gorgias’ words rhymed and set up structural parallels and echoes, which often repeated and doubled back on itself. Within his text, i.e. when he says “for discourse was the persuader of the soul, which it persuaded and compelled to believe the things that were said and to agree to the things that were done” (12), Gorgias utilizes words, sounds, and rhythms of words as a style of oration, a kind of rhetorical tool, as a way of captivating and persuading his engaged audience.

Gorgias suggests that the tricky, persuasive power of such discourse would obviously work on anyone just as it has on Helen. Therefore, Gorgias expects his audience to understand and realize that they are being persuaded all the same by his adept performance of rhetoric. With such mirroring of content, between the explanation in describing rhetoric used on Helen and his own utilization of rhetoric towards his audience, Gorgias’ makes the texts’ implicit argument that rhetoric is a worthwhile and praiseworthy profession and practice, deserving of Athenians’ patronage. Such paralleling of content in style is most obvious when Gorgias says, “He who persuaded (as constrainer) did wrong; while she who was persuaded (as one constrained by means of the discourse) is wrongly blamed” (12). Gorgias explains how Helen’s volition was undermined by “false speech” since she was persuaded by the assumed truth of Paris’ speech, thereby suggesting that it was the words used on Helen that were to be blamed since it was what took control of her mind. Moreover, in this text, rather than explicitly placing the blame on Paris, Gorgias simply refers to Paris as “the who has persuaded” and Helen as, “she who was persuaded.” By using such style of inferring rather than explicitly stating names, Gorgias indirectly made the case for rhetoric: whether or not his arguments were valid, they are presented in such a convincing manner that the audience falls under the influence of Gorgias’ “incantations”. 

Gorgias’ claim that Helen was persuaded and unable to defend herself, similar to his own enrapt audience, places her (or her as a figure) in his own rhetorical toolkit, a device by which he can accomplish his own rhetorical, self-promotional goals. Following that Gorgias’ defense and performance are effective, Helen’s identity and her existence as a figure determining her own choices and legacy are subordinate to him. As a piece of writing that purports to defend Helen from all vile conceptions of her, the Encomium of Helen also examines of the power of persuasion as Gorgias, through his own rhetoric, abducts his audience the way Paris abducted Helen.