Thread: Should Garra Have Reformed?

I would have preferred it if he had developed true MPD instead (all separate from the Shukaku personality), only for different plot development though. On a somewhat related note, I'm still waiting for a romantic comedy manga where the protagonist is a serial killer.

What's the point of psychoanalyzing a fictional character?

I say no, he shouldn't have. But that's just because I loved old Gaara. Now he's just too... sissy. Before, when he was all for himself, he was insane (in the good way, of course!). Now he's just the run-of-the-mill foil for the protagonist.

/misses old Gaara.

I do think this can be considered a good topic. It is not about theories without bases, a vs thread, or such. This thread asks for a point of view. If you don't like this thread, you can always keep yourself shut, right? No one said that you're obligated to post in every single thread, isn't it?

Now, back to the point. Rather than bloodlust, I'd say that Gaara was simply twisted by what life had meant to him. If you look at his story, he was a cute and nice little guy. Most likely, the hatred and fear towards him, that he sensed in his childhood, might have been what marked and changed him. Besides that, the only one that was supposed to love him, his aunt, betrayed him, and told him that she always hated him. She intended to kill him, but her intentions got backfired. After killing the one he cared the most, he most likely became that sadistic Gaara that was introduced at first.

Originally Posted by adonai

What's the point of psychoanalyzing a fictional character?

Gaara is indeed a fictional character, but was created by a real person. Since he was created by a real person, Gaara (as a character) was given a personality. The point in this case, is to understand his character development. You try to understand that, to answer to the OP.

during those times before he met naruto, he is fueled by his own twisted reason of living...

but when he met him, he changed. he now knows the real joy/reason of living and becoming strong is finding someone/things that he wants to protect, and that is sunagure(he bis now the kazekage)...

Look if the way the cheracters acted was completly unrealistic we would have no way to identify with them. If, for example, Naruto were to suddenlly give of on both Sasuke and his dream of becoming Hokage and move to his world's version of Las Vegas, and spend all of his days gambling and drinking and partying we would be like WTF?! that it is because it makes no sense for his charcter to do that. IT IS NOT IN HIS NATURE!!! A basic understanding of human nature is necessay for good storytelling, and Psychology is the study of the human mind, which is where human nature is based. I am NOT saying that the PHYSICS are based in this world, I am saying the PSYCHOLOGY is. That is why I think the mistake is due to poor information on Kishimoto-san's part.

Originally Posted by Dante Obscuri

Gaara is indeed a fictional character, but was created by a real person. Since he was created by a real person, Gaara (as a character) was given a personality. The point in this case, is to understand his character development. You try to understand that, to answer to the OP.

Not what I’m saying.

Originally Posted by animalia

I basically chock the reason for this MINOR goof up to a incomplete understanding of psycopathy on Kishimoto-san's part.

Nothing wrong with trying to analyze things including personality when the analysis is internally consistent (contained within the fictional work), contending that what happened isn’t realistic completely kills the discussion. It’s the same as claiming that the Hidan shouldn’t be able to talk when his head isn’t attached to a pair of lungs, we already know that, it was constructed that way for developing the plot in a certain way.

That's different. By then you're talking about his (Hidan's) physical capabilities, which can not be compared to anyone in real life. The question is discussion is about Gaara's behaviour. The question is "Should Gaara have reaofrmed?". The OP posted the reasons why he thought why Gaara shouldn't have reformed, and then backed up his idea with Psychology.

I really don't see the problem. Still, as I already said, if you don't like the topic (not referring directly at you adonai), then just don't post. There are other place to rise your post count. If this is a bad thread, kaom will close it. Since she hasn't, I think this is a good thread.

Anyways, I'm not discussing this any further.

Originally Posted by animalia

Look if the way the cheracters acted was completly unrealistic we would have no way to identify with them. If, for example, Naruto were to suddenlly give of on both Sasuke and his dream of becoming Hokage and move to his world's version of Las Vegas, and spend all of his days gambling and drinking and partying we would be like WTF?! that it is because it makes no sense for his charcter to do that. IT IS NOT IN HIS NATURE!!! A basic understanding of human nature is necessay for good storytelling, and Psychology is the study of the human mind, which is where human nature is based. I am NOT saying that the PHYSICS are based in this world, I am saying the PSYCHOLOGY is. That is why I think the mistake is due to poor information on Kishimoto-san's part.

That's arguable, imitation human minds can appear in any manner that the creator wants it to, if the readers can't identify with that they can't necessarily say that it was the author's fault, it could have been intentional. I think that Gaara was changed to advance the story in a certain direction and what you mentioned was probably of secondary importance (if Kishimoto even considered it at all).

If this is viewed from the perspective of plot development, then to have the fight end in any way except for the death of either Naruto or Gaara would have been impossible, Naruto believes Gaara to be a threat to himself and his friends, and Gaara perceives Naruto as a threat to his existence, or as proof of his status as a non-entity. There's obvious problems with this scenario the way the story is currently constructed (one of the biju would be dead ahead of schedule, a major character would be dead, and the member roster for Akatsuki would be different).


I don't mind this discussion at all (that's why I posted in the first place), I just don't think "realism" is a valid argument, especially in a fantasy manga.

this is like arguing about the physics of Star Wars... its not going to go anywhere, he presented a logical question that has no logical answer, to try to explain why Gaara is now a better person is akin to explaining why lightsaber blades are only three feet long. i just think that this topic was presented incorrectly. if he wanted to discuss why he thinks Gaara was a better character before the removal of Shukaku, that would be a whole nother story, but trying to validate a character profile from a manga using science is a bit nonsensical.

Now, back to the point. Rather than bloodlust, I'd say that Gaara was simply twisted by what life had meant to him. If you look at his story, he was a cute and nice little guy. Most likely, the hatred and fear towards him, that he sensed in his childhood, might have been what marked and changed him. Besides that, the only one that was supposed to love him, his aunt, betrayed him, and told him that she always hated him. She intended to kill him, but her intentions got backfired. After killing the one he cared the most, he most likely became that sadistic Gaara that was introduced at first.

That could be the cause of his psycopathic tendacies. They aren't always born you know.

By the way I originally thoughtabout naming This thread" COULD garra have reformed?" due to it being a way to debate the logical possiblaties of it, but decided not too because I thought it would cause too much confusion.