Seems to be being confused for Villain Protagonist: Byronic Hero

Looking over the examples list, it appears that this trope is being confused at times for Villain Protagonist, since more than a few examples (e.g. Light Yagami) actually fit the latter rather than this. It's been noted at least twice in the trope's discussion page, and despite an apparent attempt to fix it back in November (according to the last item in the discussion page, at least), it didn't stick; several examples don't fit the "brooding, melancholic, Dark and Troubled Past" description.

In fact, I'm not sure what Byronic Hero is exactly supposed to be about; there's a note in the discussion page that the laconic is not accurate, so that's out.

edited 2nd Aug '11 7:42:09 AM by MarqFJA

It's worth mentioning that if you back a ways into fiction, to be a "hero" you didn't have to be in any way good. It just meant you were a larger than life dramatic figure. If you back far enough, there is literally no differentiation between Hero and Villain Protagonist, because a protagonist was by definition hero because people told stories about him, even if he was a Complete Monster.

The issue, I think, is that Byronic Hero gets interpreted in a number of different ways with-in this wiki itself: For some it's an Anti-Hero who possesses certain types of traits, for some it's someone who possesses those traits regardless of if they are a hero or villain.

The Other Wiki's page may help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byronic_hero

(On the other hand, it may not; it's a bit vague too.)

edited 2nd Aug '11 4:10:48 AM by Xtifr

Don't Byronic Hero and Villain Protagonist overlap?

edited 2nd Aug '11 5:08:16 AM by Sackett

They can. A villain protagonist can be a Byronic hero, but not all Byronic heroes are Villain protagonists.

This. I should also note that according to the Archived Discussion, Light Yagami is Villain Protagonist but not Byronic Hero; and yet it seems someone added him back after it was removed on that grounds. We need to summarize the definition of the trope within the first or second paragraph; speaking from firsthand experience, the long description gets more and more confusing the farther you're into it.

edited 2nd Aug '11 7:45:26 AM by MarqFJA

Yeah.. Light isn't really a Byronic Hero, however Lelouch is.

The issue, I think, is that Byronic Hero gets interpreted in a number of different ways with-in this wiki itself: For some it's an Anti-Hero who possesses certain types of traits, for some it's someone who possesses those traits regardless of if they are a hero or villain.

I thought Byronic Hero was an deeply flawed type of Anti-Hero.

Or an Anti-Hero that is highly idealized.

I always thought this was an anti hero who believes he is doing it (whatever that puts him in Anti-Hero) for the right reasons.

There's an essentially identical thread here.

IMO, Byronic heroes are more distinguished by style- they are generally Tall, Dark, and Snarky, and one of the big things is that they have noble ideals at some level, and while they act in ignoble ways, they suffer almost as much as their victims do.

One thing that I should mention is that at least with a lot of the Russian ones, they can be more than a little ineffectual and butt-monkeyish- think of a Woody Allen character, but with less sense of humor *

That one is a more general, this one is about determining how to fix the current Trope Decay.

That is a lot like how I thought of it.

The typical Byronic hero is prideful, cynical, brooding, self-destructive, but also usually attractive, witty, commanding and philosophical. Basically on a certain level this character knows he has problems, but he's sort of flip flops between being in denial about them and brooding on them. Despite those problems and flaws he tries to present himself as an admirable person, and often fails tragically because of his inability to completely face himself, accept his issues, and move on.

Or that has always been my thought on what an ACTUAL Byronic Hero is. I don't know anything about Lelouch (I can't get passed those terrible, huge-eyed and pinched character designs to decide whether the show is as good as suggested by others), so I don't know if he counts.

Raito I don't think counts because he's too outright villainous, and because he never has those brooding, questioning of himself moments that are completely necessary to the trope. Raito never shows that kind of vulnerability.

I think the main draw of this character is you see this really cool guy and think look how awesome he is, he's done everything, he doesn't have to give a crap about anyone, on the outside at least, and then you see his intense guilt, dark moments of insecurity and how he's really not enjoying himself and you realize this is someone to be pitied.

edited 3rd Aug '11 5:58:59 PM by NoirGrimoir

"prideful, cynical, brooding, self-destructive, but also usually attractive, witty, commanding and philosophical. Basically on a certain level this character knows he has problems, but he's sort of flip flops between being in denial about them and brooding on them. Despite those problems and flaws he tries to present himself as an admirable person, and often fails tragically because of his inability to completely face himself, accept his issues, and move on. " = Lelouch.

Which is why I don't like him or his show. (Unrepentant Byronic Heroes don't usually appeal to me).

As for how to help the Trope Decay, I think perhaps we need to look at the Other Wiki article on Byronic Heroes and highlight better the specific characteristics listed there. In our article they're buried inside a dense paragraph.

edited 3rd Aug '11 6:07:05 PM by Sackett

From what I can tell, some people seem to be getting caught up on the "Amoral" part and disregard the "brooding and insecure" part.

One common Byronic character trait — enough that I wonder if it's actually a requirement, seeking clarification on that point by the way — is the fact that this brooding, acerbic jerk used to be a much nicer person than he is now, and part of why we sympathize with him is that he's outsmarting or getting revenge on total bastards who don't share his few admirable traits, and doing it with style. The Count of Monte Cristo might be the finest example of a Byronic hero I know. In order to fit this trope, is it a prerequisite that the character has suffered or been wronged in the past, resulting in his current flaws?

Hmm, that actually is very likely true. As you say, it is true of Dantes/The Count, and thinking about it, it's true of every other example I listed.

I think that yes, a Byronic Hero does almost always have an aspect of "he's been emotionally damaged, and that's why he's not a nice guy" that makes him more sympathetic (or even attractive) to the audience than a similar jerk with excuse would be. A pre-Freudian precursor to Freudian Excuse, if you will.

edited 5th Aug '11 11:35:46 AM by Madrugada

I don't think it's necessarily the "he was a nice guy once" bit (although that's the easiest way of accomplishing it). I think it's the fact that a Byronic Hero is self-aware of his flaws and struggles with them.

Though his evil tendencies might win out in the end, the fact that he is troubled emotionally by doing the bad things makes him seem more redeemable.

Byronic heroes are very much related to the Magnificent Bastard, I believe.

Not "was a nice guy once" necessarily, and if that's what I implied, I was unclear. More "Has a reason to not be a nice guy", although the part about being aware of his flaws and struggles with them is at least equally important.

I don't think Byronic heroes even have to be nice to fit the trope.

Byronic Hero has to be one of the two I'm most well versed in. Having read various essay's on the Byronic Hero, Lord Byron's works, and his biography.

Byronic Heroes aren't always Villain Protagonists; Bruce Wayne and Severus Snape are two notably heroic examples. The emphasis on the description should be put on the brooding nature, the Dark and Troubled Past, and the cynicism inherent in this type of character, rather than any moral ambiguity many Byronic Heroes have. Also, a Byronic Hero is known for being a passionate character; the darkness of this passion is what determines the darkness of the character. For example, Snape's great passion was Lily; because of this, he was driven to stop Voldemort, her killer, and protect Harry, her son, and is a heroic example. On the flipside, you have Adolf Hitler, a Real Life Byronic Hero, whose great passion was Germany: this ultimately led him to stop at nothing, not even at the most reprehensible actions to create a Germany that was a beacon for the values he wanted to impose on the rest of the world. Ultimately, he ended up consumed by his larger than life flaws, and died having achieved nothing but the destruction of that which he valued more than anything else, and is an example of the darker end of this trope (definitely a Villain Protagonist, if a story were ever to be written from his perspective). I could go further, but the point is that passion is probably one of the most defining characteristics of a Byronic Hero, and it should have some focus on the main page.

EDIT: Sorry for invoking Godwin's Law, but I think Hitler is a remarkable example of just how dark this trope can get. Byronic Hero doesn't necessarily mean hero, after all.

edited 11th Aug '11 12:44:07 PM by tropetown

I mostly agree with this.

We should probably sandbox a new write up.

edited 12th Aug '11 8:33:37 PM by NoirGrimoir

Maybe someone who's majored in English should redo the page. I have a good idea of what a Byronic Hero is, and it's certainly one of my favorite tropes, but I don't want to miss anything crucial, and this is a pretty advanced concept.

edited 13th Aug '11 4:55:06 PM by tropetown