September 30th 2016
Precis: Gorgias, Encomium of Helen
Gorgias’s work, “Encomium of Helen,” asserts that one can easily be fooled to
blame someone who is innocent and praise the individual who is actually guilty. Gorgias
backs this claim during his first seven passages, by pointing out the innocence of Helen
and how she was deceived. Gorgias’s purpose is to shift the negative blame associated
with the stigma surrounding Helen to another party. This is immensely important because
he plans to use Helen to exhibit his own rhetoric throughout his work.
He starts his argument by stating, “For it is equal error and ignorance to blame the
praiseworthy and to praise the blameworthy” (Gorgias, Passage 1). Gorgias explains that
it is inappropriate to blame someone who should be praised the same way it would be
wrong to praise an individual who should be blamed. Furthermore, he makes it clear that
he wishes to exonerate Helen by stating, “I myself wish to absolve this ill-reputed women
from responsibility” (Gorgias, Passage 2). Gorgias believes that anyone who is willing to
blame Helen is ignorant; this is evident when he says, “having shown the truth, to put an
end to ignorance” (Gorgias, Passage 2).
Gorgias further supports his argument by giving a brief description of the lineage
of Helen. He likens Helen to that of a god in stating, “Her father was in fact the god, but
said to be mortal” (Gorgias, Passage 3). Gorgias then states, “She had godlike beauty,
which having received she not inconspicuously retained” (Gorgias, Passage 4). This
exemplifies Helen as a woman who had obvious beauty and who was sought after.
Furthermore Gorgias states, “They were all there together out of contentious love and
conquerable ambition” (Gorgias, Passage 4). He states this to inform his audience that
many individuals loved her and had an undying ambition to win her love.
When Gorgias states, “Who it was, then, who fulfilled the love by gaining Helen,
and the means and manner of it, I shall not say” (Gorgias, Passage 5), he uses a sense of
patriarchy by shunting Paris off the stage. He states this to portray himself as the
protector of Helen. He then informs his readers that he will now explain why Helen chose
to come to Troy by saying, “I shall set out the causes which Helen’s journey to Troy was
likely to come about” (Gorgias, Passage 5). Gorgias uses this passage in order to ease
into his thesis.
Gorgias explains the reason why Helen chose to go to Troy when he states,
“Either by the wishes of Fortune and 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>”
(Gorgias, Passage 6). This is Gorgias’s thesis for the Encomium of Helen. He starts by
stating the possible reasons why Helen decided to go to Troy. However, he later on
reveals that she should not be blamed for any of these reasons. Additionally, Gorgias
states, “For it is not natural for the superior to be hindered by the inferior” (Gorgias,
Passage 6). This statement demonstrates that individuals of lower class would not burden
individuals of high stature. This exemplifies how powerful persuasion can be if it was
able to infiltrate an individual as preeminent as Helen. Gorgias exonerates Helen at the
end of Passage six by stating “If one must attribute responsibility to Fortune and the god, one must acquit Helen of infamy” (Gorgias, Passage 6). Gorgias paints a picture of
innocence here—he uses the gods and fortune as a reason for Helen’s actions.
Gorgias demonstrates that all the reasons stated for why Helen made her decision
are in fact the fault of her abductor Paris. Gorgias argues this by stating, “It is clear on the
one hand that the abductor, as victimizer, committed injustice” (Gorgias, Passage 7).
Gorgias then goes on the offensive and states, “For he did terrible things; she was the
victim; it is accordingly fair to pity her and hate him” (Gorgias, Passage 7). Gorgias
paints a picture of hate in the ending of passage seven—he shows the readers that Helen
can only be the victim; we must all pity her and hate the abductor.
Throughout the first seven passages, Gorgias explains why Helen should be
exonerated from the negative stigma associated with her. It is later on in the Encomium
that he gives greater detail on how persuasion of speech can be used like magic to
persuade and infiltrate an individual’s soul. Gorgias expresses his thesis in the beginning
of his work, which ultimately is the core value of what he is trying to depict to his reader.
Encomium of Helen is a way to exhibit Gorgias’s own rhetoric through the embodiment
of Helen’s beauty, but imitates Paris in abducting the figure of Helen, to amplify his
work.
Precis: Gorgias, Encomium of Helen
Gorgias’s work, “Encomium of Helen,” asserts that one can easily be fooled to
blame someone who is innocent and praise the individual who is actually guilty. Gorgias
backs this claim during his first seven passages, by pointing out the innocence of Helen
and how she was deceived. Gorgias’s purpose is to shift the negative blame associated
with the stigma surrounding Helen to another party. This is immensely important because
he plans to use Helen to exhibit his own rhetoric throughout his work.
He starts his argument by stating, “For it is equal error and ignorance to blame the
praiseworthy and to praise the blameworthy” (Gorgias, Passage 1). Gorgias explains that
it is inappropriate to blame someone who should be praised the same way it would be
wrong to praise an individual who should be blamed. Furthermore, he makes it clear that
he wishes to exonerate Helen by stating, “I myself wish to absolve this ill-reputed women
from responsibility” (Gorgias, Passage 2). Gorgias believes that anyone who is willing to
blame Helen is ignorant; this is evident when he says, “having shown the truth, to put an
end to ignorance” (Gorgias, Passage 2).
Gorgias further supports his argument by giving a brief description of the lineage
of Helen. He likens Helen to that of a god in stating, “Her father was in fact the god, but
said to be mortal” (Gorgias, Passage 3). Gorgias then states, “She had godlike beauty,
which having received she not inconspicuously retained” (Gorgias, Passage 4). This
exemplifies Helen as a woman who had obvious beauty and who was sought after.
Furthermore Gorgias states, “They were all there together out of contentious love and
conquerable ambition” (Gorgias, Passage 4). He states this to inform his audience that
many individuals loved her and had an undying ambition to win her love.
When Gorgias states, “Who it was, then, who fulfilled the love by gaining Helen,
and the means and manner of it, I shall not say” (Gorgias, Passage 5), he uses a sense of
patriarchy by shunting Paris off the stage. He states this to portray himself as the
protector of Helen. He then informs his readers that he will now explain why Helen chose
to come to Troy by saying, “I shall set out the causes which Helen’s journey to Troy was
likely to come about” (Gorgias, Passage 5). Gorgias uses this passage in order to ease
into his thesis.
Gorgias explains the reason why Helen chose to go to Troy when he states,
“Either by the wishes of Fortune and 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>”
(Gorgias, Passage 6). This is Gorgias’s thesis for the Encomium of Helen. He starts by
stating the possible reasons why Helen decided to go to Troy. However, he later on
reveals that she should not be blamed for any of these reasons. Additionally, Gorgias
states, “For it is not natural for the superior to be hindered by the inferior” (Gorgias,
Passage 6). This statement demonstrates that individuals of lower class would not burden
individuals of high stature. This exemplifies how powerful persuasion can be if it was
able to infiltrate an individual as preeminent as Helen. Gorgias exonerates Helen at the
end of Passage six by stating “If one must attribute responsibility to Fortune and the god, one must acquit Helen of infamy” (Gorgias, Passage 6). Gorgias paints a picture of
innocence here—he uses the gods and fortune as a reason for Helen’s actions.
Gorgias demonstrates that all the reasons stated for why Helen made her decision
are in fact the fault of her abductor Paris. Gorgias argues this by stating, “It is clear on the
one hand that the abductor, as victimizer, committed injustice” (Gorgias, Passage 7).
Gorgias then goes on the offensive and states, “For he did terrible things; she was the
victim; it is accordingly fair to pity her and hate him” (Gorgias, Passage 7). Gorgias
paints a picture of hate in the ending of passage seven—he shows the readers that Helen
can only be the victim; we must all pity her and hate the abductor.
Throughout the first seven passages, Gorgias explains why Helen should be
exonerated from the negative stigma associated with her. It is later on in the Encomium
that he gives greater detail on how persuasion of speech can be used like magic to
persuade and infiltrate an individual’s soul. Gorgias expresses his thesis in the beginning
of his work, which ultimately is the core value of what he is trying to depict to his reader.
Encomium of Helen is a way to exhibit Gorgias’s own rhetoric through the embodiment
of Helen’s beauty, but imitates Paris in abducting the figure of Helen, to amplify his
work.
1 comment:
Daniel,
You lead us through your selected passage sentence by sentence in a way that may be useful for you during the writing procedure, but not ideal as a finished piece of writing for us as readers. Since you are addressing the overview thesis of Gorgias' argument (i.e. that the aggressor and not the victim should be blamed) you only need to take out the select sections of your textual evidence and integrate them into your own cohesive report rather than drop in whole quotes. You also need to clearly foreground each of the component parts of Gorgias' strategy for us. Your insights often come after you give us the quote; they need to be stated first, and evidence presented judiciously. Also, some of your paraphrasing can be better and more accurate. When Gorgias states that it is not natural for the superior to be hindered by the inferior, is he really saying that about Helen's class status? It seems he argues the "natural" order of the superior over the inferior in the case of gods over mortals, and he illustrates this in order to show that if Helen's abduction happened because of the plans of the gods, then as an inferior power she could not help but yield to fate..
Post a Comment