Why Can't We All Get Along?

The Conley Readings helped me immensely in concern to the early Greeks and their respective approached to Rhetoric. (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle & Isocrates) This cogent overview prepped me for the detailed excerpts that followed in the joining reading assignment for Matsen. I was surprised to view the Gorgianic approach to rhetoric, as its characteristics are is found in Julius Ceasar during the funeral speeches delivered by Marc Antony and Brutus. Gorgianic view, is “rhetoric is a unilateral transaction between an active speaker and a passive audience” (6) When I teach persuasion in my class, we go over rational and emotional appeals as well as rhetorical devices to deconstruct these speeches. This form of “flattery” that is often associated with the Gorgianic approach is prevalent in Marc Antony’s speech when he appeals to the audiences emotions and weaknesses, rather than facts and logic. (which Brutus utilize in his funeral speech) He uses theatrics, abrupt transitions and loaded language to sway the fickle audience to his side—a strategy that Plato did not agree upon due to its manipulative nature. On the other hand, Brutus uses an angle of Gorgian approach concerning his speech structure (introduction, narration, proof & conclusion) and utilizes the logical approach presenting facts and reasons to the mob. If this forum was meant to be more political, Brutus might have prevailed; however, due to the topic, Marc Antony chooses the more effective approach of the two.

Regardless of the type of rhetoric that these characters in this drama decided to use, they each utilize specific rhetorical devices to accomplish their goal: repetition (“Believe me for mine honor, and have respect to mine honor, that you may believe “ this is also an aretē introduction) Parallelism (As Cesar loved me, I weep for him; as he was fortunate, I rejoice at it; as he was valiant, I honor him, but—as he was ambitious, I slew him”) and Rhetorical Questions (Had you rather Caesar were living, and die all slaves, than that Caesar were dead, to live all freeman?)

A skilled orator should be proficient at all modes of persuasion and rhetoric. Choosing the right approach is a form of differentiation for the audience: what type would work best under a particular set of circumstances is what should be evaluated. A speaker should be able to improvise, a characteristic of speech that Alcidamas stresses: “improvised speech is effective because it speaks to the opportunity or the right moment in time (kairos)” (Matsen 31). This allows flexibility to the content as well as the audience. A speaker should also be linear in a degree, like Aristotle “two parts are necessary; an introductory statement and the argument proper” (Conley 16). This allows a logical structure for the audience to follow. Finally, a speaker should be able to present facts in a credible way, but shouldn’t risk morality as a result—Isocrates idea that orators should be “good men skilled in speaking” and not simply gild a case by “making the worse case appear the better” (Conley 18)