Two Midterm Essays

Essay Question 3:
Homer was not a rhetorician, nor are his works The Iliad and The Odyssey rhetorical treatises; however, his writings help to illustrate the power and importance of rhetorical techniques. In particular, the topics of invention we have discussed in class are central to the dialogue of the characters in the epic The Iliad. I will discuss the implementation of two in Book 2: similarity/difference and authorities, while identifying other rhetorical techniques Homer uses.

When Thersites, the ugly and unpopular soldier in The Iliad, attempts to persuade the other men to follow his counsel, no one stirs or makes any motion to obey him. Despite the fact that the contents of his speech was similar to what King Agamemnon had just said, the difference was both the way he was perceived by the others and his lack of rhetorical technique. Thersites is described in Book 2 as "a man of many words, and those unseemly ... who cared not what he said." This strange soldier delivered a message that mirrored the King's, yet he presented it so poorly that no one could get behind him. We learn from Homer that even if the content is sound, the presentation and perception of the speaker does make a critical difference in audience reception.

Using the same example mentioned above, Thersites is also described as "a railer against all who were in authority." In his less-than riveting speech, he criticizes the conduct of King Agamemnon through antirrhesis, the rejection of the opinion or authority of someone. Thersites' rejecting of the King's conduct does not help his argument, but instead has the opposite effect. This interaction from speaker to speaker illustrates the topic of invention of authority and one of the canons of rhetoric, arrangement. Thersites' speech is sandwiched between three other men that possess great authority: the King, Ulysses and Nestor. Homer places Thersites speech in the middle to illustrate the importance of authority in addition to the presentation and content. This ties to the idea of perception and ethos; Thersites has no authority, while the other men are trusted leaders who have earned their position of respect. As a result, or cause and effect, the men listen to the compelling words of Ulysses and Homer, spurring off to battle. For these reasons Homer's writings are so very significant to the history of rhetoric.

Essay Question #5
Every four years we hold the Presidential elections, involving a compilation of speeches and debates which each candidate must participate in to gain the support needed to take the presidency. Viewers tune in to be persuaded one of two things: either he/she is the right candidate or he/she isn't. This tradition of rhetoric and politics dates back to ancient Greece. The Greeks followed a similar process when selecting who would be the next influential political figure. Each speech or argument given by the Greeks required the proper "recipe" or combination of the persuasive appeals logos, pathos and ethos. If one was left untouched, the speech would be incomplete. A political leader needs to have an authoritative background (ethos), be a logical and intellectual thinker (logos) with a balanced measure of emotion (pathos).

In The Republic Plato undertakes the immense task of taking his philosophy and beliefs into a real political utopia. While the political system had developed tremendously up to Plato's day, his work illustrates that he saw many inconsistencies and flaws in the system they employed at the time. One positive element of politics and rhetoric is that rhetoric was considered a civic art. Through its proper use it was able shape communities and mold the characters of citizens for the better. Politicians spoke using the third branch of oratory, deliberative oratory, to communicate future actions that would improve the community and citizens' lives in order to gain support. Promises made in speech, as we have learned in our modern political campaigns, are not always fulfilled.

The eloquence of politicians in ancient Greece also wielded a great potential for the worst. As mentioned by Nathan, the example of Scipio Africanus demonstrates that political prowess and authority can be used to determine outcomes rather than following the proper political processes. Opinion of the masses could be swayed one way or the other with relative ease. While I agree that it was important for each person to be able to communicate well, not everyone in ancient Greece were successful rhetoricians. Just as in our society, there were farmers, blacksmiths, tailors, stonemasons, etc. The uneducated masses would turn to their political leaders who were selected based on their rhetorical appeal.