How to develop political Intrigue? A Plot Development Question here, is there any guide on developing political intrigue? Books like The First Man in Rome by Colleen McCullough or Lord of the Rings J.R.R Tolkien for instance. The Machiavellian style chess moves need to happen in the background while the action unfolds center stage. I don’t want my story to get bogged down with the subtle power plays, but instead create a moveable balance in the story going forward. It’s a very ambiguous question I know, but wanted to know if any resources exist out there. My story explores a sci-fi area but shouldn’t narrow the approach. Any thoughts, most welcome MartinM.
The best advice I can offer would be to consult history books and take notes. Grab a handful of texts on the historical wars, figures, and regime changes that most interest you, and after reading them you’ll likely end up with enough intrigue material to plot through a book series.
The first thing I did was google "political intrigue". Intrigue is the making of secret plans to harm or deceive the people. Political refers to the way power is achieved and used. I am reading 1984 right now, so the first thing that comes to mind, is the control of information available to the people. Then I found this webpage on "Political intrigue in fiction" which confirms my first impressions. https://rmfw.org/2015/03/05/political-intrigue-in-fiction/
I would have the governing body consist of multiple factions, give those factions incentives that are a combination of covert and overt, and add rules of all kinds. Rules are compelling because they have consequences and can be broken, subverted, or interpreted in different ways. Then some catalyst will come along and set things in motion, or a court chess move could be the inciting event itself.
One thing to bear in mind is that political intrigue seldom comes out of nowhere. The shape it takes will be determined by the government and politics of your setting, so it's hard to give specific examples without knowing the background of your setting. So I'd suggest figure out a sketch of your setting, and figure out the big issues, crises and ideologies that political divisions could stem from. For example, the monarch will die soon without a clear heir. This means everyone is aligning themselves with one of the potential heirs that they feel represents their ideology, that they can manipulate or that they are indebted to. The heirs and their factions want to attain enough support that their rivals will back down--or they're getting ready for civil war or a palace coup.
The explosion in the popularity of Game of Thrones (Song of...) can be reduced to two words in my opinion. Peter Dinklage. I did read the books, though memory of them is mixed with the TV show, both of which crafted political tension and intrigue extremely well until they completely lost the plot. The character of Tyrion, finding himself in charge and working his way through the conspiracies, feeding contrasting strategies to different allies so he could discover who was the traitor is particularly engaging. I can't tell you in which of the books you'll find this sequence but would suggest there's merit in checking it out.
Thank-you for all your replies they were most helpful indeed. @Bone2pick Yep, couldn’t agree more reading up on history. Big fan of the Napoleonic era with deep dives. Also, Roman history and of course my very own British Colonial expansion. I struggle with show don’t tell on the Macro picture and for it not to squash the micro story of the tales. I don’t want to write a big picture lecture that drowns the local story told... @Louanne Learning Nice web page, but am sure you’ve already gathered my love of a true master... The Prince - Wikipedia 1984 is a real book that I’ve read and re-read over the years. Funny enough it doesn’t seem to age. @Not the Territory Bingo, this is what I’m trying for. From a Roman setting of Gaul’s occupation, we have the Overlord Power in her Legions. However, it is simply not big enough to control the whole landscape. The assimilation of small tribes that you improve their given life style resulting in them policing and taxing their own people on behalf of Rome. Playing one tribe off against another and forcing them to fight on your behalf against other rebellious non-believers. Here we have domestic treaters seen as villains. The Tribes that bowed to Rome got to keep their religious Gods and rituals. Improved trade connections to a wider market with improved technology that helped farming irrigation and general living standards. Also, didn’t get massacred by the first Super Power of the known world… These are the bad guys more than the Romans. The tribal meetings become a round table of them convincing the others to take the poison pieces of silver, against the others keeping their souls and moral compass intact. @Azuresun One thing to bear in mind is that political intrigue seldom comes out of nowhere. Great point, I don’t want to make factions one dimensional into villains or heroes. But from any point of view, you can see a motivation or apathy in agendas pushed. @B.E. Nugent Game of Thrones completely agree on. Never read the books, but watched the show. The delivery of Peter Dinklage performance working the room to stay alive was brilliant. The play off against each faction with an overhanging much larger threat just over the horizon worked. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, that then changes to come together for the greater good… Please if anyone has any further thoughts let me know. Struggling to find study text like The Seven Basic Plots by Booker or The Emotional Wound Thesaurus series by Ackerman. Is it more World building or Plot Development… I’m trying to Show Don’t Tell from a background that influences the focused story arc if that makes sense? Once again, a big thank-you for all your input it is much appreciated. MartinM.
It really depends on setting and political context. You talking monarchy, oligarchy, parliamentary democracy, military "democracy," American bipolar democracy? Big difference between 3 rich assholes in a room (see Caesar, Pompeii, Crassus) and an American style politician firehosing populism down a social media slip-and-slide to sway 100 potential million voters. As others have said, you definitely want to read about a variety of political systems and the tools their respective leaders used to create influence. I'd recommend a little of everything. Roman emperors and how they survived/failed is a good start. Definitely Latin American strongman and the constant struggle between colonialism and nationalism, democracy vs dictatorship, and how easily the political climate flipped between them (let's elect a president, let's stage a coup, let's try elections again, fuck it gas up the tanks). The interwar rise of mass politics is particularly fascinating... communism, fascism, Nazism, nationalism in the wake of post-imperialism. Honestly, anything between 1918 and 1989 will blow your socks off in the intrigue department.
Read Wikipedia pages on a historic event of your choosing. You'd be surprised at how many materials that will inspire you from it. Art imitates life, after all.
I have, I believe a good knowledge of historical events and some political sci-fi/fantasy works. Even a fan of Machiavellian strategy. The problem comes from telling a tale without hindsight. What does each individual character think, feel, their wants need and expect as an outcome? This could be told from a MCs third person POV, omniscient. However, the MCs prejudices and mis-understandings of others blind the reader. Think Peaky Blinders, why we can never workout Thomas Selby’s plans against impossible odds, we don’t see the whole picture. Or The Godfather I & II or Sherlock Holmes... The idea was to use a Senate with many factions. All have wants and needs in differing amounts. To use Head Hopping to show don’t tell a faction’s perspective. This then evolves into manipulations and bonding factions’ views together to build a bigger say in the Senate. The intrigue that builds makes sense and has a foundation of logic... I-Claudius was an amazing BBC show told from the MC third person omniscient POV. The political intrigue or tension comes from the shear will to hide in the shadows in order to survive. I’m not sure if this is an easier route to take as would cut down on the show don’t tell needed for each faction. The ideal thought is to have a model told from all sides without a standout villain or hero. Through events factions are collapsed into taking sides reluctantly. This could turn into something mind numbingly tedious. Any texted structured works or ideas to point me in the right directions please let me know. Many thanks again for all your responses. MartinM.
Ah, what's the name of it? There's a Kurasawa movie about a murder trial where each eyewitness tells the story as they saw it happen, and each one is very different, because we don't really see things objectively. Let me see if I can find the name of it... OK, it's Rashomon. Sorry, it's a movie, not a book, but might be helpful anyway. Though it would be somewhat booklike if you watch it with subtitles?
In fact trial stories in general would probably come the closest to what you're looking for. Each person has their own agenda and wants to present things in a way that tilts the jury toward their perspective. And the judge is trying to work out the omniscient/objective truth of the event. Or maybe detective stories, especially of the "Nobody leaves this snow-bound mansion until Hercule Poirrot gets to the truth of how Lord Attenborough was murdered!" sort.
Have you read the Cicero trilogy by Robert Harris? Its not got the same perspective as you are going for (the narrator is Cicero's bagman), but it conveys the factions in the Senate brilliantly nonetheless. But I suppose it is of limited use to you because it definitely has the benefit of hindsight. Limited use, but not no use.
