Sedation in
Gorgias’ Encomium of Helen
In the Encomium 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 effort 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. Instead, she 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. Even in the liens of
the previous quotation, this idea is present in the language: the persuader
(position of power) is denoted by the pronoun “he,” and the persuaded (position
of weakness) is denoted by the pronoun “she.” 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? Gorgias’ assumption, and that of his audience, is that
she couldn’t, 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, while delivering his defense of Helen by highlighting
Rhetoric, also imposed Rhetoric; he, like that of which he describes the
perpetrators of Helen’s actions, administers a sedation unto his audience. It
is a powerful performance of the conditions by which he is arguing; one, that
leads to a position of defending Helen to no longer be an impossibility, but
instead, executed in high-fashion through the discourse Rhetoric.
1 comment:
Shoaib,
A good précis; you do a concise explication of Gorgias' main arguments about Helen's status as a victim while simultaneously giving an account of the reflexive element of Gorgias' rhetoric, all while keeping your analysis around the notion of the mind-altering effects of words.
Post a Comment