The Rhetorical Paradox of Socrates and The Wrestler

Disclaimer: If you have never seen "The Wrestler" directed by Darren Aronofsky, move away from this blog, watch the film and then read this post.

Really, nearly any of Aronofsky's films can be applied to Socrates and Plato's Gorgias. However, there is this level of purpose and intention in Socrates' actions and speech that are reminiscent of "The Wrestler." Specifically, it is how Socrates speaks of rhetoric and his death that are so closely related to the film.



This approach is going to break the rules in a way. Instead of only examining the text, this analysis plays with actual history accounts of the life of Socrates and Gorgias. It is a "just" approach because of the editor's, James H. Nichols Jr., constant use of footnotes including historical notes of the life and death of Socrates.

The best way to start is to set the analogy that wrestling to the main character in "The Wrestler" is the same as rhetoric to Socrates. This is not a perfect analogy, however in Gorgias Socrates is clearly devoted to or obsessed with the art or the "experience" of rhetoric and it is his very speech and choice of words that leads to his death. Just as in "The Wrestler," it is the wrestler's devotion to wrestling and his choice to wrestle and continue to wrestle while he is having a heart attack that leads to his death.

While there are a multitude of theories on why Socrates said what he did in his defense against being charged with corruption of young minds, it is hard to argue with Nichols' statement that, "If we held political rhetoric to be the capacity to persuade a political multitude to acquit one of a charge we should have to say that Socrates possessed that rhetorical capacity but chose not to use it" (13). One could go further to argue that Socrates not only chose not to use rhetoric to acquit himself but instead chose to use rhetoric to persuade the judges to find him guilty.

As evidenced by "Gorgias," Socrates placed a very high level of importance on justice. In his discussion with Polus, Socrates states that the unjust, "Do everything so as not to pay the just penalty or be released from the greatest evil, preparing for themselves possessions and friends and that they themselves should be as persuasive as possible in speaking" (68). Whereas the just man would confess of his evil act immediately to rid his conscience of the act, like someone that is sick must immediately see a doctor to prevent the sickness from festering and getting worse (69).

As Socrates states, "For him who isn't going to do injustice, there doesn't seem to me to be any great use for it [rhetoric]" (70). It would appear that Socrates believes that rhetoric is only necessary for the unjust to remain unpunished. Therefor Socrates may have chosen not to use rhetoric in his own defense because he believed he was a just man. However, it is also quite clear that Socrates placed a great level of value on rhetoric and its usefulness. Then it would seem that Socrates, with his strong feelings toward rightful justice, purposely used rhetoric to persuade the judges to execute him, possibly because he felt he deserved to be executed.

How does this still relate to "The Wrestler" film? The wrestler chose to wrestle knowing he was going to die. He chose to die by wrestling as Socrates chose to die by speech and rhetoric.