The situation is this. For various reasons, he's enlisted the help of a woman who he's just met, and they're essentially introducing each other. He used to hunt dragons for a living, and when he tells her about that she makes an offhand remark about dragons being mindless beasts. Now in the first novel, (long story short) he befriended a dragon who ends up dying to protect him / "the heros" / save the world / etc.
So he *really* doenst like this offhand comment, and he tells the woman that if she ever calls dragons mindless beasts again, she'll regret it. Just because of the kind of spitfire personality she is, she says it again, just to see what he'll do. My initial reaction into his character as a kind of reluctant hero - rough around the edges guy, is that he would slap her, hard enough to knock her to the ground (or something similar) and repeat his warning, more firmly this time.
My problem is this, this is a "good guy" who is just very touchy about the general idea that dragons = evil, and who lost the best friend he ever had (the dragon) for a good cause. And he DOES do alot of morally grey-area things. But I'm worried that a physically (and magically) stronger man slapping down a woman for "talking back" will immediately make too many readers not sympathize with him anymore. While I think it's true to his character to do so (and maybe half-heartedly apologize / explain why he overrated to her later, tell her the story about his friend, the dragon) I don't want readers to just stop caring about him.
If he apologizes, or does anything else that would indicate that he doesn't feel really strongly about this, then you've lost me. If he felt strongly enough about it to hit her, then he's not going to apologize anytime soon if ever, nor is he going to have much interest in having anything more to do with her. If he doesn't feel that strongly about it, then he mostly hit her because he likes to hit women.
If he stands his ground and makes her apologize (or get out of his sight), then I'll buy that it was really that important to him. But that's just me, I think that having strong convictions is important to a hero. In any case, if his feelings are so easily suppressed that he can turn around and apologize for them, then I'm inclined to think he could easily have restrained himself from hitting her if he'd been so inclined.
If he has magical ability, can he do something unpleasant (giving her a giant case of the itches is something that comes to mind) as a warning before reverting to hitting?
Does he have to work with her because she has some knowledge or skill that he needs? If not, why would he continue to work with her if she'd just called his best friend a mindless slobbering brute?
Note: Did he indicate that she would regret it immediately?
Most warriors aim to cultivate a sense of detachment, an kind of emptiness, when they go into battle. For her to see him enter such a state toward her may do more convincing than a slap and an apology and it leaves him whole. Has she dealt with warriors and slayers before?
Another thing about being a successful heroic character is being able to pick which battles to fight. He may very well enter this battle-ready frame of mind and exit it almost immediately knowing that she is not a worthy fight. Most comments like the one she made are born out of either ignorance or stupidity and your hero would see that.
[This message has been edited by hoptoad (edited November 02, 2006).]
You see, this doesn't just show he cares about dragons. It shows that he's willing to threaten someone over what's essentially an 8-year-old's dispute: your dog's stupid. No, he's not, you're the one that's stupid. 8-year-olds sometimes hit each other for this sort of thing, but not adult men that we can admire.
As far as survivor's comment about apologizing, it's not that he would apologize right away. But when they eventually get where they're going, she tells the story to one of his friend there, and that friend talks to him privately and tells him he should apologize, but he refuses. What he does conceed is that he should tell her the story about his dragon friend so she understands his reasoning. (The details are still sketchy in my mind cuz I haven't gotten that far yet, other than outline form)
The reader should know by this point (if past actions matter) about several incidents in which the protagonist has risked his life to save strangers who are in lethal trouble, so he's a "good guy" in general, but he kinda acts instinctively, with a warrior's instincts.
If it's that much of an impact to have him actually slap her, I can always rewrite it so that she can tell by the deadly look on his face how serious he is about badmouthing dragons, and have her take back her remark, but it's more in her character to prod him with another remark.
If he's the kind of guy that would explain eventually, it might be good to have him do it right then, so the reader is brought up to speed on the truth about dragons and the fact that not everyone knows that truth.
If he's not the kind of guy that would explain eventually, you could just have him pin her down and tell her that she doesn't know what she's talking about, that this isn't some kind of game. So you hint to her and the reader about the truth, but you don't tell it right then, you just let him be very grumpy about having to tolerate her idiocy.
Let her be the one the reader considers unsympathetic because she eggs him on, but he's strong enough to not let her get to him.
Take the Wizard's First Rule. Actually, ignore the awful writing of that book, and the unbearable cheesiness, and the fingernails-on-chalkboard dialogue, and the straight-from-harlequin romance, and concentrate on some of the surprisingly well-done plot devices. At one point towards the beginning of the book, a character "Zed" (who the reader is hinted to suspect is an incredibly powerful wizard) finds himself in a similar situation with a woman of inferior power. Instead of smacking her, he puts his finger under her chin and delivers an unmistakable threat. It's pretty effective, and it doesn't make the reader like the character any less. If anything, it makes him more interesting.
Lynda
The problem is your scene is really early in the book. There is no time to really put the MC in a sympathetic light. I think a simple intimidating gesture with a "you know nothing of dragons". You are already hamstrung by the fact that he is kidnapping this woman.
Poorly written example:
"Dragons are evil," she said.
He raised his hand with such fluid speed that she leapt backwards, as if to avoid a blow. His finger uncurled, pointing at her. "You speak in ignorance. You won't do it again. First and last warning."
[Edited to replace "rand" with "hand"]
[This message has been edited by J (edited November 03, 2006).]
If he's already kidnapping her, then I have no bones with him knocking her down just to point out that she's not in a position to be needling him. The consideration that he grants her in allowing her to accompany him under her own power is plenty of demonstration that he isn't into abusing her for fun. To allow her defiance is merely showing off, or perhaps a dishonest portrayal of his motives.
As for apologizing, if he does all this, he should only "apologize" in the sense of stating that what he did was wrong. And the only reason for him to do that would be if she were trying to make out that it weren't. So, technically not an apology.
But make no mistake, the kidnapping itself is a sufficient act of violence that hitting her for explicitly disobeying him is almost negligible in comparison.
In this case, you have to start with him seeming like a bad guy, then do the work of convincing us that he's a good guy. The alternative is to have him persuade her to accompany him voluntarily by explaining the reason from the outset.
On further consideration though, I don't think he would actually hit her, not to the kind of comment she would make. He might use some magic to dangle her helplessly in the air, or pin her against a tree and explain coldly and harshly that it's not a joke, but he wouldn't just smack her in response. It's too brutish, even for him.
I'm not as up-in-arms about a man smacking a woman that is being a B---h. I sort of like the idea that if he does knock her down, he would stand over her, maybe clenching his fists for a moment before making himself calm down. Then he can admit that maybe he shouldn't have done that, with out actually apologizing.
Personally, I think that if you feel that he would do that, then that is what he would do. I would only change it if it comes off with a different feel than you intended it to.
Did that last bit make any sense? I know what I mean to say, but does anyone else? LOL
I'm reminded of the character Ethan Edwards (John Wayne) in the movie The Searchers. His actions fit the definitions of "heroic," but his motivations certainly didn't seem so. He spends years in a quest to find his lost niece, held captive by Indians...but only so he can kill her because she's been somehow "contaminated" by living with the Indians. Hardly the picture of "hero" here...
It's weird, I can see both sides of the story, not the plot story or devices but the result and the slap actually happening. Maybe it's because I have an open mind on such things.
in other words — emotionally weak and self-righteous
oddly enough, that is a common combination of traits
In this situation, she is trying to get a reaction and succeeds.
BOOOOOM! balance shifts in her favour
She now knows how to get at him — stupid man loses
question: how would he react if she slapped him back?
Have you really explored all the 'so whats' and what ifs' in this scene?
[This message has been edited by hoptoad (edited November 05, 2006).]
If he simply decides to tie her up and gag her, I'm okay with that too. That does involve a bit more inconvenience for him, and it would probably involve at least some pain for her, but it's not acting in denial of the basic realities of the situation.
quote:
we've already established that she is accompanying him based on the threat of force.
I don't think that is established. Astrostewart, why is she accompanying him? She is barely resisting. Why? When it comes down to it, why is she going? At some level does she believe its the right thing to do? Was the threat of force his first choice? I doubt it, unless he is shallow and as thoughtless as she is supposed to be. Surely he explained the situation first in the hope she would come willingly?
That is the perspective from which I am making my comments.
Also, he may be 'kidnapping' her BUT he has to protect her too. She must know that, mustn't she?
[This message has been edited by hoptoad (edited November 07, 2006).]
quote:
Just wanted to clarify to all these great suggestions and feedback, that this is not early on in the book. I'm not sure where some of you got that idea.
I can see how you mistook my intention in writing "immediately unsympathetic." I didn't mean that this is our first look at the protagonist, and I don't what to make him unsympathetic. Essentially what my question is, is if we have a protagonist that may otherwise seem like a good guy, would a scene like this immediatly make him unsympathetic to a large portion of readers?
I still haven't decided exactly what kind of comment she will make, nor the specifics of his reaction to it. I just wanted to get some feedback beforehand if him hitting her to the ground is something I should specifically try to avoid.
Example: If Pippin and Merry had physically threatened someone for verbally insulting Frodo at the beginning of the Fellowship of the Ring, they would not have been very likeable. When they do exactly that at the end of the Return of the King, it only makes me like them more.
Example 2: If someone punches their adult son in the face for being "disrespectful," I would tend not to like that character. If that someone is John Wayne, I think it's hilarious and it makes me like the character more (this works without reference to a particular movie because Rooster Cogburn, Marshall Cahill, J.B. Booker, G.W. McClintock, Hondo, Big Jake McCandles, and most other John Wayne characters are identical in essence, and differ only in details. You know what "character" you are dealing with once you know that John Wayne is playing him).
If he expressed his regret at the imposition represented by the kidnapping, that covers everything which is pursuant to the kidnapping, so there is no need for a separate apology.