Plato writes narrated (as distinct from dramatic) dialogues in his ‘middle’ period. Some are narrated throughout, others are introduced and sometimes interrupted by a dramatic frame dialogue, highlighting the fictiveness of the conversation being represented. In one group, Socrates himself narrates conversations he had with boys or teenagers or young men: Charmides, Lysis, Euthydemus. Here Plato pursues themes appropriate to the genre of ‘erotic’ dialogue, where narration can exhibit the comedy of interactions between his characters. Sometimes another speaker recounts a conversation in which Socrates participated: Phaedo, Symposium, Parmenides (Theaetetus is an abortive further example; Protagoras, narrated by Socrates himself, has many affinities with Symposium). These three dialogues employ distancing mechanisms coupled with ostentatious but self-defeating claims of veracity and reliability, indicating remoteness from what Socrates himself in fact taught. Finally, I take up the suggestion that Plato sticks with the mode of narrated dialogue in Republic because he has by now developed theoretical scruples about the ethical propriety of direct dramatic representation.

The theory of obligation addresses the central ethical question of what we ought to do. The theory of moral creditworthiness concerns motivation appropriate to fulfilling obligation. The theory of manners of actions concerns how they are performed. The triple-barreled theory of moral conduct the book develops integrates these dimensions of behavior. The theory covers obligatory deeds – the types of things we ought to do – the vehicles of conduct: concrete doings that are right or wrong in virtue of their type, morally or non-morally motivated by intentions that explain them, and morally appropriate or inappropriate in manner in virtue of how they are performed. Among the central moral principles examined are those of justice and harm-avoidance, veracity and fidelity, beneficence and self-improvement, and reparation and gratitude. How are these to be understood? Are some reducible to others? This chapter clarifies these principles through both narrative examples and conceptual exploration.

Chapter 1 sets the scene for contemporary slave narratives, including comparisons to historic slave narratives. The chapter argues that a failure to look at the lessons of the past in the gathering and representation of narratives has limited the capacity for narratives to be employed effectively today. In this chapter, it is argued that different approaches to interview methods and narrative representation are an important step in reconfiguring the way narratives are gathered for the purposes of abolition and survivor growth. The chapter explores the means by which contemporary narratives are gathered and presented, the roles and responsibilities of the interviewer and listener, and examine present challenges to the credibility of survivor accounts. It moves on to explore the power that narratives have for survivors and the value of adopting interview methods that enable rich testimony, to inform policy, and which allow for the intellectual and emotional growth of survivors.

If the written word is to be our principal source in this study, in which historical accounts are used to shed light on the institutions that gave rise to them, then we need a fairly comprehensive sense of what that source represents. Accordingly, this chapter is concerned with the epistemological status of writing as a “window” on the past and, more specifically, the viability of using it to understand long-extinct political systems.