-Joachim Vogt Isaksen on "The Looking Glass Self"
This idea, first published in 1902 by sociologist Charles Horton Cooley, asserts that how others perceive and treat us will, without conscious contrary action, overpower a personality, opinion, or even identity of an individual- be that for better or worse (see The Stanford Prison Experiment). Cooley had finally solidified why man has always, to some degree, feared his peers, and this base fear actually manifests as the root of two semi-effective rhetorical devices:
Ad hominem, which involves undermining a man's character to decrease the validity of his argument, and inter se pugnantia, the reproof of a man before an audience, typically to point out contradictions.
In The Iliad, while contrasting characters with varied viewpoints employ both devices, most have one thing in common: The aspect of character under siege.
"Weakling cowards, women rather than men..."
Ad hominem, which involves undermining a man's character to decrease the validity of his argument, and inter se pugnantia, the reproof of a man before an audience, typically to point out contradictions.
In The Iliad, while contrasting characters with varied viewpoints employ both devices, most have one thing in common: The aspect of character under siege.
"Weakling cowards, women rather than men..."
"Like children or widowed women, they murmur..."
"He came into the fight with gold about him, like a girl..."
Why would an attack on machismo matter so much? In his post, Michael talked about how the kairos can create the "perfect storm" for a rhetorical or literary device. Although masculinity may be losing its connotation in our western society, as evidenced particularly in the art of the era, masculinity was revered in the culture of Ancient Greece. With manhood being synonymous with respect, power, courage, and authority, it would only make sense that someone like Ulysses would publicly slander a man like Thersites in such a manner, going for the kill with a physical beating delivered by a staff that represents generations of male conquerors and leaders. With his manhood publicly called into question, Thersites found himself backed into a corner with no back-up. Having lost most of his credibility already, he falls back into the ranks, presumably accepting his emasculation.
Ad hominem: Brutal, but effective.
I find this concept fascinating, and very very true, that you present yourself based on what you understand others' opinions to be of you. I'm assuming that after a physical and social beating, perhaps with mocking and laughter from his fellow soldiers, Thersites saw himself as reduced to the low rungs of the social ladder, and thus acted as such, no longer speaking against King Agamemnon.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting how the human mind works in this way. The problem is that it is so vulnerable to change. I imagine that this would mean that those who are truly successful are they who can ultimately silence these persuasions of their peers and personally create their own self-perception. If not, even those who are powerful have critics (such as political figures), and would fall victim to becoming who the public portrays them to be.
ReplyDeleteIt's funny how much of our confidence is built on how much we feel that others support us. The ability to knock down someone's support system is to have immense power over their self-confidence and sometimes, ultimately, their life.
ReplyDelete