Figurative Reading on the ‘Encomium of Helen’ by Gorgias

Jes Armenta-Roman

Professor Carrico, GSI: Jerilyn Sambrooke 

Rhetoric 103A, Figurative Reading

26 November 2016

Figurative Reading on the ‘Encomium of Helen’ by Gorgias 

Gorgias: “By this discourse I have removed infamy from a woman; I have continued in the mode I established at the beginning. I tried to put an end to the injustice of blame and ignorance of opinion; I wanted to write the discourse, Helen's encomium and my plaything.” (21)

In Encomium of Helen, Gorgias comes to the defense of the beautiful Helen of Troy. In mythology, Helen of Troy is blamed for the Trojan War. In her defense, Gorgias attempts to absolve her of responsibility by debunking the reasons many believe she is to blame: whether she was moved by the gods, by physical force, by rhetoric, or by love. In doing so, Gorgias appears to expose the fallacies present in philosophy, and thus, delineates the importance of persuasion and rhetoric. However, in a turn of events, Gorgias concludes Encomium of Helen with a powerful statement in which he states the piece was written as a ‘plaything.’ This figure retrospectively forces the audience to question Gorgias’ motives and transforms the effect of his overall argument.

From the beginning, Gorgias wrote the encomiums’ primary purpose sought to shed light on discourse surrounding Helen’s fault in starting the Trojan War. “I myself wish to absolve this ill-reputed woman from responsibility, and to show that those who blame her are lying--and, having shown the truth, to put an end to ignorance.” (2) Gorgias approaches this goal by introducing four reasons considered to hold her culpable, “the…plans of the gods and decrees of Necessity she did what she did, or abducted by force, or persuaded by speeches, or conquered by Love.” (6) Throughout the rest of the encomium, Gorgias address each of these main points by refutation. In response to the argument pertaining to divinity, “if one must attribute responsibility to Fortune and the god, one must acquit Helen of infamy.” (6) In order to refute, “by physical force,” Gorgias shifts the blame to “the barbarian assailant” citing “how is she not to be pitied rather than reviled? For he did terrible things; she was the victim.” (7) Next, Gorgias invalidates “by rhetoric” citing discourses’ great influence, in “which by the smallest and most secret body accomplishes the most divine works” (8) Finally, “by love”, “if Love, being a god, has the divine power of gods, how could the weaker being have the power to reject this and to ward it off? (19) Through this brief account of the forensic framework in Encomium, one concludes it unjust to regard Helen as the sole catalyst that led to the actualization of the Trojan War, who, either moved by divinity, abducted by force, persuaded by rhetoric, or intensely in love, evades accountability for her actions in every way. 

By the end of the encomium, Gorgias has revealed the piece was written as a ‘plaything.’ This figure retrospectively forces the audience to question Gorgias’ motives and transforms the effect of his overall argument. Gorgias employs the narrative of Helen of Troy to explore issues centered around agency, responsibility, and gender. In his conquest to defend Helen for eloping with Paris, Gorgias argues Helen was an innocent victim of forces beyond her control. This approach makes her, in turn, an object of his manipulation, her agency and control over her own story are appropriated by Gorgias. If Gorgias truly argued for the purpose of absolving Helen, then doing so has consequences entirely unacceptable to his audience, namely, a radical presentation of the female persona as identical to that of the male. By calling his encomium a “plaything,” Gorgias reassures his audience that it intends to amuse — not convince — and removes any validity from his argument to absolve Helen. 

In Encomium of Helen, Gorgias appears to defend Helen of Troy from beliefs attributing the Trojan War to her actions. Gorgias ventures to vindicate her of liability by challenging the reasons many condemn her and her actions: whether she was moved by the gods or by physical force, by rhetoric, or, by love. However, Gorgias concludes Encomium with an impactful figure, citing the piece was written as a ‘plaything.’ This figure reconstructs Helen into an article of his manipulation and retrospectively forces the audience to reevaluate the effect of his overall argument. Gorgias’ argument shifts from one of absolving Helen, to one that bolsters her ridicule.