The Use Of Rhetoric In Leontini's Encomium Of Helen

The art of rhetoric is an essential and prevalent tool in various aspects of past, present, and future societies. Aristotle lets “rhetoric be [defined as] an ability, in each [particular] case, to see the available means of persuasion” (Aristotle, 115). Rhetoric, when used accurately, allows a speaker to be inspirational, captivating, and thought-provoking. However, the results of correctly using rhetoric can be negative or positive, for example the horrendous aftermath of Hitler’s use of rhetoric when convincing a whole half continent that race extermination is permissible. Gorgias of Leontini’s Encomium of Helen demonstrates a clear application of rhetoric during his pursuit of riding Helen of Troy of her ill reputation. I will elaborate

One does not have to persuade a group of people in order to be practicing rhetoric, rather rhetoric is the act of compiling and determining what will be persuasive. According to Aristotle, “we believe fair-minded people to a greater extent and more quickly [than we do others]” (115), which is the way Leontini presents himself in the encomium. Leontini begins his speech by stating how a city should embody “good citizenry,” “a body of beauty,” “a soul for wisdom,” “an action of arête,” and anything not meeting these standards is “indecorous” (Leontini, 38). The effect of beginning the speech with these statements is that an audience trusts an individual that exhibits “practical wisdom,” “virtue,” and “good will,” which Leontini attempts to construct himself as the man who embodies these values in order to reassure the audience that he is the man to be trusted (Aristotle, 117). Leontini makes a claim that the “man who speaks correctly what ought to be said has a duty to refute those who find fault with Helen,” and he provokes the thought that he is being heroic by alone standing up for Helen against all those who diminish her (Leontini, 38). Leontini is compelled to tell the truth despite the “single-voiced, single-minded convictions” that are victimizing Helen (38). Leontini describes Helen as a woman who “aroused . . . many men,” but she was “unconquerable,” and Leontini compiles such a statement to further

According to Aristotle, to have a bad character results in the inability to “form opinions rightly,” or “though forming opinions rightly they do not say what they think because of a bad character” (117-118). Leontini exhibits a calm and collective manner as he “form[s] [his] opinions rightly” and begins to unfold the rest of his compiled tools of rhetoric (117). Leontini discusses four various situations that justify the actions of Helen by stating that her departure from her land and husband was either destined by the Gods, an act of kidnapping, an act of brainwashing through persuasion, or inevitably influenced by “the divine power of gods” that is love, therefore how could she “refuse and reject” the Prince of Troy (40). The effect of having these scenarios is that they are very broad scenarios that Leontini attempts to cover all refutable grounds to dispose of her ill reputation. In all scenarios, Helen is completely innocent and she is being illustrated as having no control over her own self. How could she oppose the Gods, how could she be able to defend herself against such a cruel crime of abduction, how could she be blamed for being indoctrinated, and how could she not fall in love when the power of love is divine? Leontini’s “virtue of style [is] . . . clear,” since “speech is a kind of sign, so if it does not make clear it will not perform its function” (Aristotle, 118). Leontini does not