1 Michael Rifenburg Honors Composition II 15 March 2012 Half Voice: The False Representations of Female Rhetoric in Ancient Greece

The suppression of the female voice in Ancient Western society demonstrated a cultural bias based on physiological differences and assumptions of disposition based on gender. Women were trapped in the private, domestic sphere with limited access to education and the public realm of speeches, politics, and the collaborative development of academia. Centuries later, however, scholars have uncovered the histories of multiple women who shaped their societies despite disrespect and ridicule. Whether they were foreigners or bold citizens, these women fought for a voice amongst proud, oppressive men of their time. As a result of unrelenting prejudice, however, most womens contributions exist within the intellectual products and judgments of famous male figures. In excerpts from her text, Rhetoric Retold: Regendering the Tradition from Antiquity through the Renaissance, Cheryl Glenn examines the power of the women Aspasia of Miletus and the poet Sappho of Lesbos. Aspasia is known for her sexual relations with Pericles, but responsible for contributions to rhetorical argument through speech-writing and open conversations amongst men. Sappho, while recognized for her descriptive, unique poetry, harbors the identity of a mystical or magical figure, which downplays the development of her literary potential through practice and education. In representation of the realm of the average female citizens of Ancient Greece, Sue Blundell explores the hidden power within the domestic sphere in an excerpt from her text, Women in Ancient Greece. Women often arranged financial matters and argued

2 them in private courts, but still lacked the right to participate in public affairs. Although women of Ancient Greece communicated their ideas and skills through men, or despite the prejudices of men, and receive some degree of credit in modern feminist academia, they were robbed of their voice in the interpretation of their contributions and therefore are victims of a male-controlled, inaccurate representation that has persisted through centuries of history. Aspasia of Miletus, though powerful in her cultivated education and inventive writing, is reduced historically as a sexual acquaintance and a persistent voice in the ears of Pericles and Socrates. She utilized her power as a foreign woman to ignore the limits of Athenian society, but she could not fully bridge the gender gap of opportunity. Cheryl Glenn asserts that: Platos Socrates reveals Aspasia to be the author of Pericless funeral oration. Hence Aspasia surely must have influenced Pericles in the composition of those speeches that both established him as a persuasive speaker and informed him as the most respected citizen-orator of the age (39). Aspasia crafted the language of the successful speech, but it was Periclesnot Aspasiawho delivered the funeral oration. (41) Aspasias voice is limited to assisting Pericles; when Pericles delivers her speech, he gains respect as a leader. Despite the fairly common knowledge among his intellectual peers of Aspasias influence, Pericles still remains a prominent, eminent figurehead of Western rhetoric, while Aspasia is, if acknowledged at all, discussed as his sexual, intellectual benefactor. While Aspasias success through Pericles might seem fortuitous in the midst of silenced Athenian women, she was reduced to words without a

3 corresponding face. She was like the modern day speechwriter for a politician, the prominent difference being a restriction based on the perception of her sex rather than the parameters of an occupation. Whether or not Aspasia was content in this position is irrelevant because of the distinction Pericles received in reputational and intellectual credit for speaking her words. While she is remembered as a morally insufficient foreign mistress, Pericles retains an identity as a charismatic and influential figure. Aspasia received no compensation or recognition for her contribution in the public sphere other than, perhaps, a sense of satisfaction in her connection to male power; more importantly, she lost the opportunity to independently transform her creation into a historical memory, and by extension solidify the legitimacy of her aptitude and power. The Ancient Greek wife managed the domestic domain of her familys life but received only satirical acknowledgments of her identity. By overseeing and participating in household tasks, wool working, or managing family wealth, women laid the foundation for the comfort, reputation, and financial well being of their husbands and families. To prove women had power through their domestic knowledge, Sue Blundell states, Evidence is provided by some law-court speeches. In onea mother, in a very competent and forceful manner, tackles her sons guardian (her own father) about his mismanagement of the estate, at the same time demonstrating her sound knowledge of the family finances (143). Law records, though arguably unbiased because they demonstrate the womans legal dominance over her father in this highly patriarchal time period, fail to capture the perception of women that circulated in the public sphere. Blundell explains: Aristophanes comedies are a rich source of information on similar female strategies we hear about infertile women who sneak babies into the

4 house. On the basis of the Lysistrata we can surmise that withholding sex may have been another female ploy for gaining control over her spouseMethods such as these were viewed with disfavour by meninside some houses at least the public face of family life disappeared, and the obedient wife of male discourse was transformed into a genuinely powerful one. (143-44) Blundell seems to find comfort in the satire of the time period, as if a depiction of power laced with mockery compensates for a lack of recognition for the womens genuine work and knowledge. While this satire may hold some truth and does depict females employing rebellious power, each voice Blundell cites is male. Furthermore, the suggestion that certain men disproved of this humor might indicate that few women actually participated in this behavior; it seems likely a writer in a patriarchal society would harp on a womans farcical methods for his own well being, regardless of the truth of the behavior, if simultaneously encouraging the men to laugh at themselves. To assume this portrayal of female behavior is accurate requires trust in male biases and societal perspective with no female voice to agree our counteract them. Moreover, to qualify this part of the female identity as genuine power overlooks their ultimate suppression from the public sphere, despite their propensity to participate. To be remembered for wit or private nonconformity and to be remembered for accomplishment promote different kinds of respect, and these women had the merit, but not the opportunity, to receive both. Despite Sapphos extensive compositions of lyrical poetry, her reputation is overwhelmed by the cultural reluctance in Ancient Greece to acknowledge feminine

5 accomplishment and the obsession with her sexuality amid modern scholars. Glenn explores both the backhanded praise of Sapphos fellow male rhetors and the insulting focus of contemporary academics. She explains that: Plato invokes Sappho as the tenth Muse; Aristotle honors her as a wise woman; and Strabo calls her the marvel among womenall because they were unaccustomed to supreme lyric talent in women. Sappho is extraordinary by any standard. She wrote nine books of lyric poems. Whether a poet of such stature was also a figure of female homoerotic desire was the critical question for scholars. (21) Plato and Aristotles apparent compliments for Sapphos achievements and character ultimately belittle her efforts. Glenns inclusion of the male philosophers judgments suggests the importance of their justification to societal opinion. While the comments seem positive, they accredit her success to an inherited mystical property or a pre-determined state of wisdom, therefore keeping her separate from the perceived natural, limited abilities of women. Their disbelief in her capacity to extend purposeful human effort into her extensive works proves the depth of their sexism. Instead of conceding to Sapphos proof of female potential, Plato and Aristotle choose to politely put her in her place as a rare exception to female talent. Modern scholars accept Sapphos work as a product of conscientious effort and human excellence, but they focus their explorative energy on the argument over her supposed homosexuality. While many of Sapphos poems reflect romantic themes, the technicalities of form, word choice, or rhythm should take precedence over the subject of affection when analyzed scholastically. Despite the acceptance for homosexuality of male philosophers and

6 rhetors at this time, Sapphos implied homosexuality dominates the integrity of her reputation, and, therefore, limits societys dedication to the study of her poetry itself. Sapphos works are explored largely for her sexuality as opposed to their technical or literary value; therefore her triumph over patriarchal boundaries is overshadowed by questions of individual morality. Despite the bit of affirmation given to Sappho by Western cultures male philosophical heroes, the academic sphere remains incapable of overlooking a womans role as a sexual being for her skills as a writer or performer. The likelihood of discussing male rhetors of Ancient Greece without mention of their sexual behavior is much higher than for Sappho, leaving her poetry and her message of female competence farther outside the circle of common education, and therefore stuck in the male-dominated past. The treatment of women in Ancient Greece is fixed in the past, but modern society has control over the current and future representation of prominent female rhetors of the past and present. Feminist scholars expose their audiences to historical evidence that proves female contributions, typically hidden among the prioritized arguments of male philosophers and politicians, but these sources are not extensive enough to convey the literary power of rhetors like Aspasia or Sappho, or to understand the daily astuteness exhibited by ordinary women. Feminist scholars, readers, and researchers must use a critical eye when studying the limited, predominantly male interpretations of events that have been catalogued for the discernment of present and future generations. If society orients its opinion of rhetorics foremothers in terms of sexuality and domestic behavior, then Sapphos intricate poetry, Aspasias influential speeches, and the legal proficiency of Athenian women are wasted on minds that still doubt and limit female integrity. These

7 themes of sexuality and domesticity embed themselves in perceptions of current female figures; the public dissects womens roles as mothers, wives, and models of feminine appearance rather than their feats of political, literary, or corporate ingenuity. Women have not yet lost their ambition to contribute meaningfully to the world, despite a lack of respectful, professional recognition, but the most significant outcome of the sexist injustice is the limited public exposure to the ideas and innovations of half of the human population.

Works Cited Blundell, Sue. "The Lives of Women in Classical Athens." Women in Ancient Greece.

8 Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1995. Print. Glenn, Cheryl. "Classical Rhetoric Conceptualized, or Vocal Men and Muted Women." Rhetoric Retold: Regendering the Tradition from Antiquity through the Renaissance. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1997. Print.