Seems to be being confused for Villain Protagonist: Byronic Hero

Part of the problem is the laconic entry. Currently, it says " An unique type of brooding, romantic, tragic, charming, very flawed (but still sympathetic), and hard to summarize villain Protagonist". Tropers are reading 'tragic' as something akin to Draco in Leather Pants, and 'flawed' as Good Is Not Nice.

Figure out a good laconic, and you and expand from there.

edited 13th Aug '11 5:18:25 PM by crazysamaritan

For four months (until this March), the Laconic read "This hero has a lot of flaws." Before that it read "If he weren't The Hero by Word of God, you'd think he's the villain."

edited 13th Aug '11 5:30:32 PM by troacctid

That second laconic you mentioned sounds almost like what either Villain Protagonist or Anti-Hero Type V is.

Both of those are technically correct, but they don't capture the essence of what a Byronic Hero really is. How's this for a laconic:

"A troubled, brooding character whose passion causes A LOT of drama, some good, the rest... not so much."

We can go into details in the trope description.

edited 13th Aug '11 6:00:24 PM by tropetown

That works for me. But I'm a long number of years past my last English class, so I can't speak to how accurate it is.

edited 13th Aug '11 6:00:44 PM by Madrugada

Changed. Now if only reworking the description was that easy...

Speaking of the description, someone changed the first line to remove "Anti-Hero" from it, thus now making Byronic Hero appear to be a Villain-only trope.

I fixed it.

This is like the Magnificent Bastard; the Byronic Hero trope is morally neutral, but it works out better for Anti Heroes and villains, in this case because it creates more drama to see just how far a Byronic Hero is willing to go. I think we should add that to the description as well.

edited 13th Aug '11 7:24:03 PM by tropetown

I already knew that. In fact, if I understand it correctly, a Byronic Hero by his very nature cannot be a straight-up Hero at all, being at best a morally-ambiguous Anti-Hero.

Yes and no at the time this arch type was created moral ambiguity included sexual practices, illegal gambling or legally gamble and not paying debts (as Lord Byron himself did), ectra.

A Byronic hero could easily be straight-up moral hero and still be unbelievably flawed ethically/emotionally speaking. Ethics seems to be more where the Byronic heroes difference is than morality, at least back in those times.

If it's made so that a Byronic hero must be morally ambiguous by modern standards we lose many of the classical examples who are merely emotionally flawed and unethical.

edited 14th Aug '11 2:05:22 PM by Vyctorian

I personally think that the description of the Byronic Hero is, for the most part, fine the way it is; we don't need an overhaul of the description of the character. The main article explains the character well enough, and after some editing we have established that the Byronic Hero is not specific to a hero or a villain.

The main thing people need to bare in mind with this trope is that it doesn't measure the morality of the character; the Byronic Hero can be anywhere between The Messiah and a Complete Monster morally. It's more of a measure of personality than anything else.

The Byronic Hero is like a personality disorder. And the traits are all "symptoms" of the disorder.

And I think there's nothing wrong with saying that they can be a Type III on the Sliding Scale Of Anti Heroes; just look at Severus Snape or Batman. I feel that should be included, but people keep editing it out because they think the trope only applies to bad people, not troubled people.

edited 14th Aug '11 5:00:42 PM by CrazyDawg

This sums it up pretty well.

Yeah exactly, except I'd add that a Byronic Hero can't be a Complete Monster, since on some level, the audience is meant to sympathize with the former, and the latter is meant to be despised. That's not to say they can't cross the Moral Event Horizon, it's just that constantly brooding over what they've done would make it impossible for one to qualify for Complete Monster status.

EDIT: I still think we need to make the description clearer, though; it's too hard to understand exactly what the page is supposed to be describing, and it's missing certain key elements.

edited 14th Aug '11 7:52:48 PM by tropetown

That does not address the problem that the average reader - with me as an example - can't quite get what the trope is supposed to be about from the first or second read-through. I, for one, did not know about the moral/ethical specifics of the trope - and wasn't aware that morality did not equal ethics (What's the difference, anyway?).

You have a point. Mind you, Heathcliff is something of a Complete Monster, but then again he's more of a deconstruction of a Byronic Hero.

edited 14th Aug '11 6:36:49 PM by CrazyDawg

You can't be "something of a Complete Monster"; you either fit or do not fit the specific criteria of a Complete Monster.

That's why I said someone who's actually studied Byronic Heroes should redo the page, because it's hard to know what the description is getting at unless you really understand the concept. All it's doing right now is listing surface qualities, not actually describing what it means for a character to be a Byronic Hero.

I advocate condensing the summery into a bulleted "check-list" so anyone who looks at the page can zero in on exactly what their example has to have to qualify at a glance.

Actually I advocate that on all complicated trope archetypes. it makes things infinitely easier and simpler to figure out instead of reading through walls of text trying to find the definition.

edited 14th Aug '11 6:21:29 PM by NoirGrimoir

Maybe we should do what The Other Wiki did with their description of the Byronic Hero?

@Marq: You were wondering what the difference between morals and ethics was? Well, the Character Alignment is a good place to look, although I personally don't think it should be used to classify characters.

edited 14th Aug '11 6:28:25 PM by CrazyDawg

I like this idea. It would make the description a lot more orderly, and we could even go more in-depth within each quality's description. That would make it much easier for anyone reading to understand the trope.

edited 14th Aug '11 8:03:14 PM by tropetown

That sort of bulleted list has helped on some of the more contentious, complicated tropes. It cut down on the battles over Complete Monster (it didn't stop them completely, but nothing sort of nuking the page and all its wicks will manage that.) It helped Cosmic Horror Story enormously when we listed the criteria it had to have, and the criteria it could have.

edited 14th Aug '11 7:53:48 PM by Madrugada

This is sort of what I have so far as a "Condensed version". It needs, more, just wanted to see if you guys agree with my bullet points.

The Byronic Hero is a type of Anti-Hero popularized by the works of Lord Byron, whose protagonists often embodied this archetype, which was eventually named after him. Byronic Heroes are charismatic characters with strong passions and ideals, but who are none the less deeply flawed individuals that act in ways which are socially reprehensible, and whose internal conflicts are heavily romanticized.

The following traits are very characteristic of Byronic Heroes and may be helpful in identifying them:

• Are usually male and considered very attractive physically, as well as possessing a great deal of charisma, sophistication and intelligence, as well as emotional sensitivity.
• Is intensely introspective and may be described as dark and brooding. He dwells on the pains or perceived injustices of his life, often to the point of over-indulgence. May muse philosophically on the circumstances that brought him to this point, including personal failings.
• Is cynical and jaded, often due to a mysterious past, which if uncovered will reveal a significant loss, or a crime or mistake committed which still haunts him.
• He is extremely passionate, with strong personal beliefs which are usually in conflict with the values of the status quo. He sees his own values and passions as above or better than those of others, manifesting as arrogance or a martyr-like attitude.
• His intense drive and determination to live out his philosophy at the cost of others', produces conflict and may result in a tragic end, should he fail. This rebellion against the rules or values of the society he finds himself in, often leads to social isolation, rejection or exile.

edited 14th Aug '11 8:14:07 PM by NoirGrimoir

Seconded. :)

Yeah, sounds good. I'd add a bit about sacrifices too; the darker examples tend to sacrifice things that are important to them to their passions (ie: family, wealth, happiness). Lelouch is a good example: he sacrificed literally everything that he valued (his relationship with his friends, his relationship with his sister, and his life.) in the end to his final goal (avoids being a Downer Ending because the end result was Just as Planned).

edited 14th Aug '11 8:52:14 PM by tropetown