Interesting comparision of Mike and Vito as dons. Would you agree that part of the way they conducted business was due to the time they were don. In other ways, as you stated, and I agree, Vito started out doing what he had to do for survivial, and Mike to acquire more wealth and power.
I think both of the factors you cited are right, Johnny. Their perspective on themselves is a product of both factors. Sicilian-born Vito still had that "grantor of justice" side that was valued in the old country, and useful in cementing support among his constituents in New York. Michael was a national, later global, figure. For him, as you say, the figure of merit was acquiring more wealth and power. But toward what end? Vito never lusted for "legitimacy"
per se. Per the novel, he saw himself as doing a better job of running his world than did the political pezzanovanti. He was "legitimate" in the eyes of his fellow Sicilian immigrants, and respected and feared among his peers in the Mafia. Michael was obsessed with "legitimacy." A big part of the troubles he inflicted on himself and his family was his inability to accept what he really was--a problem Vito didn't have.
