Who is more interesting? Nagato or Kakashi?

[AlphaScythian]

Both are fine to me.

 

[shelke]

I was more or less hoping to be more of an observing and having limited participation in any conversation. I don't exactly have time on my side to begin to write too much.

But, to be short and post some points I'd say that Kakashi's character is pretty well done based on the prior experiences he had faced (The death of practically his whole team) and how we can see that being a driving factor, even before learning of this. In Part 1 we can see the influences that Obito's death had on Kakashi.

I would only expound upon a few points and keep them to the point.

Firstly, Kakashi's past may have been a decent anchor for a well-crafted character, but like many things in this manga - sadly - in mostly went askew. Kakashi's first reasoning was based on his father's decision to commit suicide from the shame it had caused him to aid his comrades in their time of need.

Now character development as per rules established by Aristotle - albeit they were drama rules, but they still apply to development in all forms of story tell, if not strictly, but loosely - is determined by Action. Given Action has a wide connotation within Aristotelian Poetics and even Platonist concepts, but it generally deals with Nature - as in Nature of the surrounds which the individual mimics - and thus in turn all that the ethos of the society where he lives in.

Now, the society Kakashi lived in is a dictatorial set-up and the factors he considered in his development were the opposite of his fathers - to strictly adhere to the rules. The mimicry has occurred. To deconstruct this would require quite a bit of development in the opposite direction or feelings of opposition in regards to the system. This all happened far too quickly, and in a single incident of his team members dying. Kakashi discarded the mimicry he had taken unto himself in a single moment of weakness?

Second we have the opposite development. Mind you, Kakashi has discarded the mimicry of the establishment here and decided to bend the rules to his will - he believed in striding over the bounds of Will of Fire that is nothing more than a sham for Konoha's stringent or should I venture, rather disgusting political rules. When situations arose, he chose to adhere to will of fire. He attempted to kill Sasuke, knowing and acknowledging that he was a victim of the era, he supported Naruto in clinging onto the Will of Fire Dogma, which he himself didn't believe in no longer.

Now what you have here, is a character, caught in the middle claiming to discard his mimicry, yet doing the exact opposite with little or no logic to back up his odd behaviour. The fact he is still a Ninja of the Leaf, when he claimed that his father shamed him by discarding the rules developed by the same leaf system, and then he abandoned those same rules and associated himself with all this anyway ... it's just a conundrum and makes no sense.

Anyhow, this is all I can state. I dislike characters who flip flop and Kakashi is a clear testament to this.

 

[Ovan]

Kakashi in my eyes. His unseen face is interesting enough.

 

[Bronze]

Nagato, being a villain would be interesting to learn about his background and his reasons. The word ''Pain'' he uses often, draws the audience deep down inside of him, to learn about him. Though Kakashi is still interesting, but Nagato overall would be my answer.

 

[Tendou00]

Kakashi is more interesting, despite that he's a main character we still have a lot to know about him.Despite his young age he has had a lot of experience and never give up despite loosing all his familly and friends. Nagato lost hope and went dark, this character would not be as interresting as Kakashi in long term.

 

[startup97]

IMO, Kakashi's is more interesting.