THE MISUNDERSTOOD PROTAGONIST OF HAZBIN HOTEL
Oh, Charlie, sweet baby girl. They will never make me hate you.
Anyway, this is going to be a LOOOOONG post, so let’s get started.
After Season 2 dropped, we saw a huge wave of hate toward Charlie’s character. Honestly, I think there are a lot of problems with those criticisms. A lot of people either completely mischaracterized Charlie or were being pretty disingenuous when talking about her. So let’s go through it.
The first thing I want to address is probably the criticism that surprised me the most. People keep saying that Charlie constantly does the same thing over and over again, expecting different results, while putting the people around her in danger. Apparently this shocked a lot of people.
But… hasn’t she always been like that?
This has been one of Charlie’s defining character traits since the very beginning. She’s incredibly persistent. She keeps trying because she genuinely believes that if she changes one small thing, maybe this time it’ll work. Sometimes that persistence creates difficult situations for the people around her.
Just look at the entire premise of the Hazbin Hotel. Everyone laughed at her. Everyone told her it would never work. Practically nobody supported her except Vaggie. Yet Charlie kept pushing forward over and over again.
And what happened? Her persistence was rewarded.
Because she refused to give up, she ended up catching the attention of people like Alastor. The hotel gained staff members and eventually clients like Angel Dust and Sir Pentious. Her strategy of trying again and again actually worked.
The same thing happened with Heaven.
In Episode 1 of Season 1, Charlie tried talking to Heaven. It failed completely. So what did she do? She tried again in Episode 6. Her thought process was basically, “Maybe Adam was the problem. Maybe if I talk to someone else, it’ll work.”
That’s exactly what she does again in Season 2.
She tries talking to Vox in Episode 3. That doesn’t work either, so she tries again in Episode 4 with a slightly different approach, hoping that changing one variable will change the outcome.
This isn’t new behavior. It’s literally how Charlie has always approached problems.
The other criticism is that she puts people in danger.
Again… she already did that in Season 1.
Remember Episode 6? Where Angel Dust was essentially being judged will they were spying him with the other members of the cast ? By exposing the hotel to the angels, she unintentionally made everyone a target.
Adam already hated her ideals. He was the leader of the Exorcists and a complete asshole. Charlie’s decision ultimately led to Adam specifically targeting the hotel, putting all of her friends in danger.
So no, this isn’t something that suddenly started happening in Season 2.
The difference is that in Season 1, other characters cleaned up the mess for her.
Rosie helped.
Carmilla Carmine helped.
Alastor helped.
Those characters stepped in and solved the hardest parts of the problems before Charlie really had to deal with the consequences of her own actions.
Season 2 is different because those safety nets aren’t there anymore.
For the first time, Charlie actually has to face the consequences of her own character flaws.
And because she never really faced consequences before, she never had a reason to grow.
That’s the entire point of her arc.
By the end of the season, Charlie realizes that constantly pushing forward isn’t always the right answer. She learns that sometimes she needs to step back and listen to the people around her.
That’s literally why she gives Vaggie control of the hotel as head manager.
That moment isn’t Charlie giving up.
It’s Charlie growing.
She’s finally recognizing that she doesn’t always know best and that trusting the people around her can be the better choice. The first person she truly learns to listen to is Vaggie, her girlfriend.
This character arc didn’t come out of nowhere.
It has been built up since the beginning.
The only difference is that Season 2 finally forces Charlie to deal with real consequences instead of letting someone else fix everything.
She doesn’t really begin questioning herself until Episode 6, when she’s on the verge of losing everything.
Her father is gone.
Most of her friends are gone.
The only person left by her side is Vaggie, and even their relationship is strained at that point.
Only after reaching rock bottom does Charlie finally realize how much damage she’s caused by constantly pushing forward without stopping to reflect.
She admits that she’s been hypocritical.
She realizes that her methods have been putting everyone she cares about in danger.
It takes nearly losing everything for her to finally understand that sometimes she needs to stop, listen, and rethink her approach.
Interestingly, I think this creates a nice parallel with Vox.
Vox is also consumed by something he refuses to let go of. In his case, it’s his obsession with defeating Alastor. He keeps pushing forward over and over until he’s on the verge of destroying everything around him because he can’t take a step back.
Charlie starts from a very similar place. She’s so obsessed with making her dream work that she keeps pushing despite the consequences.
The difference is that Charlie eventually learns.
Vox doesn’t.
They’re two sides of the same coin. Both are driven by obsession and refuse to stop. But while Vox lets that obsession consume him, Charlie finally learns to step back, reflect, and grow.
And seriously, I need people to understand something.
We do not have to agree with the main character all the time.
It’s honestly surprising that I even have to say this. A main character is simply the character we follow throughout the story. They are not someone we’re supposed to agree with every single episode.
If Charlie makes bad decisions, if the audience disagrees with the way she acts, that’s completely fine. Especially when she’s intentionally written as a flawed character and both the narrative and the other characters repeatedly point out those flaws.
So… what are we even talking about here?
I’ve seen so many people say it’s bad writing because we don’t support Charlie’s actions. But why? Why would that automatically be a problem?
That’s literally the point of her character arc.
Charlie is supposed to grow. She’s supposed to learn how to step back, listen to other people, think things through, and become someone worthy of inheriting Hell’s throne. She has to learn how to lead her people instead of simply acting on hope alone.
She’s a character who’s constantly developing.
So of course we’re not going to agree with every decision she makes.
Of course she’s going to make terrible mistakes.
That’s exactly how character development works.
Another thing I find strange is how much harder people are on Charlie than they are on other characters. For some reason, people are willing to excuse similar actions from everyone else while acting like Charlie is uniquely terrible.
Take Lucifer, for example.
When he threatens Vox because he’s trying to protect Charlie, everyone says, “Well, he had good intentions.”
Yeah… and?
His actions still had terrible consequences.
He and Vaggie didn’t directly start the conflict, but their actions absolutely helped push Vox’s narrative. They gave him more ammunition to convince people that his war was justified.
Their intentions were good.
The consequences were awful.
That’s exactly the same criticism people throw at Charlie.
Yet I barely see anyone saying Lucifer was wrong.
In fact, I’ve seen people argue that Charlie had no right to be upset with him because “he did nothing wrong.”
…He did what?
Did we watch the same show?
Charlie also tries to do good things. She also acts with good intentions. The problem is that her actions end up making things worse.
Lucifer literally does the same thing.
So why is Charlie judged so much more harshly?
And no, I’m not saying Charlie was right to transform into her demon form or completely lose control.
But let’s stop pretending her anger came out of nowhere.
Look at the situation from her perspective.
Her father went behind her back and threatened someone who was already painting her family as tyrants. Vox then used that incident as one of his strongest arguments to gain public support and push Hell toward war.
Of course she’d be furious.
Now, here’s the last thing I want to mention, although honestly I could keep talking about this for hours.
Why are so many people completely ignoring Charlie’s mental state throughout Season 2?
Seriously.
Do people realize that Season 2 takes place over an incredibly short period of time?
Think about everything Charlie has to go through.
She finds out that a friend she had been mourning is actually alive in Heaven.
She discovers that the dream she’s dedicated years of her life to is actually possible.
And absolutely nobody believes her.
Imagine spending years being mocked as the naive princess who believes in impossible fairy tales, only to find out you were right the entire time, and your own kingdom still refuses to believe you.
That alone would be mentally exhausting.
Then, on top of all of that, she has to stop someone from starting a war between two entire realms.
Can we please acknowledge the amount of pressure she’s under?
Of course she’s stressed.
Of course she’s going to make worse decisions.
You could argue that some of her actions are more reckless than they were in Season 1, but that’s exactly what happens when someone is under an unbelievable amount of stress.
Season 2 doesn’t even span more than a month.
In that tiny amount of time, Charlie learns that her friend is alive, discovers her dream is real, watches everyone reject that truth anyway, and then sees Vox weaponize everything she’s worked for to justify a war against the very realm she’s been trying to build peace with, a realm where one of her closest friends is living.
That’s an insane amount for one person to deal with.
When she says, “This time I can prove it,” with tears in her eyes during Episode 8, you can genuinely feel how emotionally exhausted she is.
So can we please stop acting like her mental state isn’t affecting the way she behaves?
And finally, I know another major criticism is that Charlie “doesn’t do much” during Season 2.
Personally, I think that’s missing the point.
She actually does a lot.
The problem is that most of what she does either has unintended negative consequences or isn’t the kind of leadership the situation requires.
That’s why her arc is about learning to step back.
It’s about realizing that she doesn’t have to carry everything herself and that sometimes letting other people take the lead is the right decision.
That doesn’t mean she was useless.
She helps come up with the plan to stop Vox.
She fights alongside everyone else.
She and Emily are the first ones trying to stop the superweapon before it wipes out everyone nearby.
So no, Charlie wasn’t useless.
She was simply learning that being a good leader doesn’t always mean being the one who does everything yourself.
I also know that some people argue Charlie is way too naive for someone who was born in Hell. But I think that argument ignores a huge part of who Charlie actually is.
Yes, she was born in Hell. But her father is literally an angel.
Even though Charlie has demonic powers, her personality clearly comes from her angelic roots. She has the same bubbly, optimistic, energetic, and goofy personality that we’ve seen from angels like Emily, Lucifer, and even Saint Peter.
Being born in Hell doesn’t automatically mean someone has to act like everyone else in Hell.
Charlie grew up surrounded by Hell, sure, but she also inherited the nature of someone who comes from Heaven. She has both worlds inside of her.
She never became cynical or cruel. Instead, she grew up believing that the people around her could become better. She genuinely wants to help them because that’s simply who she is.
And where does that come from?
Her mother, Lilith, was the person Charlie looked up to the most. Lilith believed sinners deserved better and could become more than what they were.
Her father, Lucifer, is an angel and, above all else, a dreamer.
Charlie inherited both of those ideals.
From Lilith, she inherited the belief that sinners deserve another chance.
From Lucifer, she inherited that hopeful, idealistic mindset that refuses to give up on impossible dreams.
The only difference is that Charlie’s version of “becoming more” means becoming a better person and eventually earning redemption.
That’s the philosophy she grew up with, and that’s the dream she’s willing to fight for.
Another criticism that genuinely confuses me is when people call Charlie selfish or claim she doesn’t care about her father.
What?
She literally walks into Vox’s party knowing it’s a trap because the moment Vox mentions Lucifer, she’s willing to risk herself to save him.
Think about that.
She knowingly lets herself fall into an obvious trap because her father is in danger.
How is that someone who doesn’t care about her dad?
I’ve even seen people argue that she barely reacted when Lucifer came out of the machine.
No.
She was shocked because she had no idea what Vox had actually done to him.
And the very next thing we see is Charlie running over to help Lucifer after he collapses.
People conveniently ignore that scene.
Then, in the following scene during Sir Pentious’ video call, Lucifer no longer has blood on his clothes, and his injuries are gone.
That clearly implies Charlie and the others helped him after everything was over.
So where exactly is this idea that she doesn’t care about her father coming from?
Another argument that really doesn’t make sense to me is when people say Charlie choosing to call her mother instead of talking to Lucifer somehow proves she’s a bad daughter or that she doesn’t care about her father.
But… as far as we know, that’s completely consistent with her upbringing.
The flashbacks make it pretty clear that Charlie was always much closer to Lilith than she was to Lucifer.
When she was very young, she seemed to have a decent relationship with her father. But as time went on, Lilith was the one who was actually there for her and she was separated from her father.
People also forget that Charlie isn’t twenty years old.
She’s over a hundred.
She has lived for centuries.
Yes, Lilith has been gone for seven years. But before that, she spent decades raising Charlie. For most of Charlie’s life, Lilith was the parent she relied on. She was her role model, her biggest source of admiration, and the person she was emotionally closest to.
Meanwhile, Lucifer spent a large part of that time emotionally distant from her. We literally know that he struggled with depression and withdrew from both Charlie and the rest of Hell.
So when Charlie is in an emotional crisis, why wouldn’t her first instinct be to reach out to the parent who had been there for her for decades?
That’s just how people work.
Yes, Lucifer is her father.
But Lilith was the parental figure Charlie consistently leaned on throughout most of her life.
So after only seven years apart, it makes complete sense that Charlie’s first reflex would still be to call her mother.
That doesn’t mean she doesn’t love Lucifer.
It doesn’t mean she’s a bad daughter.
It simply reflects the relationship she had with each of her parents growing up.
Their relationship is healing, but it’s still some work to do. You can’t expect decades of emotional distance to disappear overnight.
Trust takes time to rebuild.
Charlie loving her mother and instinctively turning to her first doesn’t invalidate the progress she’s making with Lucifer. It just shows that family dynamics are complicated, and that the people who raise us inevitably shape who we turn to when everything falls apart.
Finally, I really don’t understand how anyone can genuinely call Charlie selfish.
Charlie is immortal.
She knows she’s putting herself in danger every single time she stands up for sinners.
Everything she does, from trying to negotiate with Heaven to risking herself during the conflict, is for people who aren’t even guaranteed to appreciate her sacrifices.
Adam literally points this out himself.
He tells her she’s risking her immortality for sinners.
So… are we really going to call someone selfish when they’re willing to risk everything they have for people they’ve never stopped believing in?
Because that doesn’t sound selfish to me.
OVERALL
I don’t think Charlie is a bad character.
I don’t think she’s badly written.
In fact, I’d argue the exact opposite.
I honestly think Charlie is one of the most interesting characters I’ve come across in the last few years. She’s layered, she’s flawed, she’s emotionally complex, and most importantly, she’s allowed to make mistakes and grow from them.Her flaws aren’t signs of bad writing. They’re the foundation of her character arc.
She isn’t meant to be perfect. She’s meant to learn.And that’s exactly what makes her compelling.
So, for me, Charlie is not only one of the best-written characters in Hazbin Hotel, but also one of the most genuinely misunderstood. A lot of the criticism directed at her comes from treating her flaws as writing mistakes instead of recognizing that those flaws are intentional parts of her journey.
You don’t have to like Charlie.You don’t have to agree with every decision she makes.
But I do think it’s important to judge her for the character the story is actually trying to tell, not for the character people expected or wanted her to be.