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.

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 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.

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 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.

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.

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"]

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.

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.

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?

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?

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?

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.