What’s in a Word? Parrhesia, Rhetoric, and Discursive Fields of Meaning

Parrhesia arose alongside Athenian democracy within a constellation of related concepts that reflected changing ideologies and political practices of that time and place. Considered a duty of citizenship to speak out for the good of the polis even when doing so was risky, parrhesia was originally the purview of rhetoric and classical parrhesia is often represented by figures such as Pericles and Demosthenes. Classical orators took great risks to speak before potentially volatile audiences, and the duty to speak despite risk is part of what gives parrhesia its unique quality and importance. Over the centuries as ideologies and political practices moved away from citizen participation in government, the meaning of parrhesia became obscured, a process that was further complicated by representations of parrhesia in rhetorical manuals. Despite the difficulty in naming actions as parrhesia, acts of risky truth-telling were often still valorized throughout Western history, which helps elucidate the networked effects of parrhesiastic resistance. Because parrhesia holds the potential to resist and reorganize power relations, it is important to recover, understand, and utilize parrhesia effectively today.