Rhetoric & Sedation

Shoaib Rasooli

GSI: Kuan Hwa

Assignment: Précis 

In the Enconium of Helen, Gorgias positions himself to be in the defense of Helen—a position previously understood in his modernity as one of impossibility. Gorgias uses his stance as a demonstration of the power of Rhetoric—as well as his mastery of the discourse—to attract students to his school if discipline. In an attempt to relieve Helen of her accusations, Gorgias primarily focuses on attempting to portray Helen as a victim of the power-function of language and its sedative effects.

 Helen’s actions were not of her own, as argued by Gorgias, but she instead was made to commit her acts of treason through the oral sedation of speech. He likens the use of words to that of a powerful narcotic; one that “serve[s] as bringers-on of pleasure and takers-off of pain.” Gorgias argues that Helen had committed her actions while under a status of sedation; a status that was placed upon her through the function of drug-like words. The likening of language to drugs is a powerful remark—one that Gorgias uses both as the stabilizing force of his argument, as well as performative structure for him to conduct in the public sphere. In the former, it leads to Gorgias’ presentation of Helen as the victim.

The heart of Gorgias defense is the victimization of Helen. By presenting Helen as a victim of the crimes, rather than the perpetrator, he has enacted upon the public’s moral and lawful spirits. In line with his premise of words as sedation, Gorgias argues that the fault lies with the one who is possession of the tongue of persuasion, as exemplified in the following: “He who persuaded (as constrainer) did wrong; while she who is persuaded (as one constrained by means of discourse) is wrongly blamed.” The grand conclusion brought to us by the presented arguments is that Helen is wrong to be blamed, as she is helpless to the power of oratory. This idea gives credence to two notions: one is the highlight of rhetoric as a powerful, mind-altering discourse. This notion serves toward Gorgias’ platform as a Rhetorician, and a performative advertisement for his school. It is interesting to note that this entire work on Rhetoric is done in a public forum; Gorgias attempts to exonerate Helen by speaking on the effects of language, while concurrently seducing his audience through the function of language.

The second notion is the reinforcement of ideas of helplessness surrounding the womyn form. In the patriarchal structure, womyn are seen as weak beings; Gorgias uses this premise to support his structuring of the victimization of Helen. The weak will of womyn (as presumed by Gorgias’ audience), coupled with the seductive strength of speech (as argued and demonstrated by Gorgias) leads to a perspective of Helen’s actions to be viewed as both natural and obvious given the presented conditions. How could a womyn be resistant to something as powerful as the discourse of language? She couldn’t, in the minds of the Greeks. Helen, in Gorgias’ performance, was never a perpetrator; no, she was a merely a victim that was met with the misfortune of oral seduction. This idea of victimization is further reinforced in the following: “…it has been said that if she was persuaded by discourse, she did no wrong but rather was unfortunate.”

Through the use of the case of Helen, Gorgias had presented Rhetoric as a discourse of power. It was one that, in his argument, had led to Helen committing her “indefensible” actions. The alliteration to Rhetoric as a drug had allowed Gorgias to present a defensible case in her name; the use of patriarchal elements also aided him in this ambition. Gorgias, whilst delivering his defense of Helen by highlighting Rhetoric, also imposed Rhetoric; he, like that of which he describes Helen’s condition, administers a sedation unto his audience. It is a powerful demonstration of the conditions by which he is arguing; one, that leads to a position of defending Helen to no longer be an impossibility.