Posted for Alejandra Colon

Précis: Encomium of Helen

            In Encomium of Helen Gorgias tries to defend Helen, and argues that she should not be accused for her abduction. He wants to “absolve this ill-reputed woman from responsibility, and to show that those who blame her are lying…to put an end to ignorance” (2). To accomplish this, he not only uses particular techniques in his discourse. The discourse he provides in Encomium of Helen magnifies through rhetoric. It is clear here that discourse is powerful, just like Helen’s beauty is powerful. In this précis, I will be drawing your attention to techniques Gorgias executes when making his discourse on Helen’s innocence in Encomium of Helen.

            Gorgias understands Helen’s beauty, and the effect it has on others. Therefore, Helen is “the foremost of the foremost men and women, by nature and by birth” (3). Furthermore, he mentions, her “godlike beauty” (4). The power her beauty has is depicted in section 4 when he mentions she “produced the greatest erotic desires in most men” (4). These men include those with power and wealth: more importantly, men who have political influence. Through beauty, Helen is able to bring powerful individuals together, and it is through beauty that she is able to influence a political force. With this, Gorgias is able to provide a platform on his argument: because of Helen’s beauty she was already exposed to becoming a victim.

            Gorgias mentions three primary reasons that might have caused Helen to leave and begin her “journey to Troy” (5): God’s will, by force or through “persuasive” (8) discourse. If it is through God that Helen left, then Gorgias argues she is not at fault because “the will of a god cannot be hindered by human forethought” (6). Therefore, anything caused by her leaving is something that is out of her control because all she can do is follow what is in God’s will. If one blames this as the reason, then he argues, “one must quit Helen of infamy” (6). If it through force that she left, then he argues perhaps she did commit “injustice” (7). However, if this is the case, then there should be compassion of her situation. He argues, not only is she ripped away from her homeland, but also taken away from friends: brought into isolation. Due to this, she should not be at fault but rather “hate him” (7), the abductor. Lastly, if it is through discourse that she left, then he argues she should not be responsible because of the power that discourse has. For it can have “a peculiar feeling, on account of the words” (9) to the soul.

            Although Gorgias mentions three possibilities to Helen’s abduction, it is clear he believes it was through discourse Helen left. In this he believes she is innocent, and “wrongly blamed” (12). In Encomium of Helen, Gorgias focuses on the power of discourse. He believes discourse is something that can persuade anyone to do something, as it is “the persuader of the soul”. Therefore, what occurred to Helen was out of her control. Gorgias believes discourse is so powerful he compares it to drugs, and the effect it has on bodies, “the physiology of bodies” (14).

            Throughout Encomium of Helen, Gorgias is strategic in using rhetoric in his discourse to prove Helen’s innocence. It is through his particularity of techniques in his rhetoric that make his argument strong. Interestingly enough, discourse it able to be seen as layers of different elements that bring the innocence of Helen into light. In Gorgias words, discourse “can stop fear and assuage pain and produce joy and make mercy abound” (8).     Discourse can persuade individuals into taking actions that might lead them to be accused and removed of their innocence. However, it is also through discourse that the individual’s innocence can be proven, and ignorance can be put to an end. In Encomium of Helen, Gorgias is able to display the power of rhetoric in a discourse.