Writing a traitor

[Timben]

My story is set in 1896 Egypt. My main character suspects his employer's father is going to betray them. But he needs proof. Now my question is how do you write a traitor and what could his betrayal be? I hope I am making sense.

 

[JS Wiig]

It’s your story, what do you think the betrayal should be?

 

[alexvss]

It should come as a surprise, but it also can't be deus ex machina. For that, you need to plant some clues first.

Which leads me to a question: is it omniscient, third-person limited, what? If the reader also doesn't know that, you need to surprise him; if the reader knows, you have to make the characters seem surprised, and that surprise has to be believable.

 

[Wayne Mack]

Be sure to give the traitor a plausible reason for betrayal. Give the employer's father a logical reason why betraying the character is the right course of action.

As for what the betrayal might be, I suggest reading up on Egyptian history at that time and find a cultural divide. Also, the father doesn't necessarily need to represent the old school of thought -- the father might adopt the newer belief system.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Make us empathise with him. Make us hope he does the right thing whilst fearing he won’t

 

[Flaviosky]

Also, hopefully the betrayal is not something merely practical (to reach a certain goal), but emotional as well, so the reader asks himself "BUT WHY?!" despite the motivation being already clear and logical.

 

[Susan Boulton]

Take a look at well known real life, "traitors," especially those during the so called, "cold war". They honestly believed what they were doing was right, for the right reasons. Don't think of the James Bond type, think of the "Bridge of spies" type, the author, John La Carre's, "Smiley's People," kind.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I wish I could remember the name of a series I would recommend you look at it. It was several years ago. A group of the main characters were convinced that the leader of their family was planning actions that would destroy their way of life and for the sake of the family they felt he had to be killed. And they were determined that they should be the ones to do it because they loved and revered him the best. Which made for a lot of angst amongst the conspirators, especially those closest to him. From their viewpoint, of course, he was the betrayer by following a course which they were convinced threatened the welfare of their large extended family, but they also felt very keenly the personal betrayal that they were planning. So I remember feeling very sympathetic to their intended victim (because he was an idealist and what he planned didn't sound one bit wrong to me), but also to those who plotted against him, there was so much anguish about what they felt they had to do. The tension had me pretty much tied up in knots. After the first book, when the plot went awry, and some of the conspirators were on the run, it was still pretty angsty, but not to the same extent

Dang! I wish I remembered the title. There was a river and a lot of chapters devoted to travelling on boats.

Anyway, the point is, that it is possible to have "betrayal" going both ways when people have different ideas about what is the right thing to do.

But if you want a more traditional bad guy type traitor, historically the motive usually is money, power, or revenge. Money and power/position are the most convincing motivations, since revenge, though certainly no less realistic, can veer, if a writer isn't careful, too far toward melodrama. If the traitor is being offered a chance at all three, of course, he will be very strongly motivated.

 

[Kerrybuchanan]

I wish I could remember the name of a series I would recommend you look at it. It was several years ago. A group of the main characters were convinced that the leader of their family was planning actions that would destroy their way of life and for the sake of the family they felt he had to be killed. And they were determined that they should be the ones to do it because they loved and revered him the best. Which made for a lot of angst amongst the conspirators, especially those closest to him. From their viewpoint, of course, he was the betrayer by following a course which they were convinced threatened the welfare of their large extended family, but they also felt very keenly the personal betrayal that they were planning. So I remember feeling very sympathetic to their intended victim (because he was an idealist and what he planned didn't sound one bit wrong to me), but also to those who plotted against him, there was so much anguish about what they felt they had to do. The tension had me pretty much tied up in knots. After the first book, when the plot went awry, and some of the conspirators were on the run, it was still pretty angsty, but not to the same extent

Dang! I wish I remembered the title. There was a river and a lot of chapters devoted to travelling on boats.

Anyway, the point is, that it is possible to have "betrayal" going both ways when people have different ideas about what is the right thing to do.

But if you want a more traditional bad guy type traitor, historically the motive usually is money, power, or revenge. Money and power/position are the most convincing motivations, since revenge, though certainly no less realistic, can veer, if a writer isn't careful, too far toward melodrama. If the traitor is being offered a chance at all three, of course, he will be very strongly motivated.

I know that series, and now I’m going mad trying to remember the name. Something to do with swans?

Edit: the Swan’s War trilogy by Sean Russell. Loved it. Now I’m going to need to reread it again.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Yes! Thank you, Kerry! I would never have thought of the title, but that is indeed it.