All right, yeah. While this isn’t a novel theory or anything, I still think it’s important to point out that very few nations actually hate each other. Yes, there are periods where they do, but it’s not a deep-set hatred. I can only think of one example where it’s true hatred, and it’s only one-sided.
This isn’t strictly intended for ships, but it can certainly be used as a reference if you want to prove that the relationship dynamic is possible. I’ll touch on this later, but I want to reiterate again that the nations are cultural, not political representations.
Post coming up tonight.
England hands down. He has the immune system of a fruit fly.
Before I start, it’s important to go over and situate a few
things. The nations’ immortality is more of a curse than it is a blessing.
They’ve experienced countless wars, plagues, political strife, and have even
died, only to be regenerated.
Now, unlike humans who have been blindsided with the rough
backhand of fate, the nations are forced to relive these pains over and over
again. It would be enough to drive a normal person mad.
In other words, their immortality was a prison that kept them
locked into a systemic cycle of bloodshed. What adds to this prison imagery is
that they’re obligated to listen to their bosses and fight in wars that they don’t
necessarily want to participate in.
Nowadays, this prison more has to do with loneliness. They
still follow their bosses’ orders, but the restrictions on their freedom are
not nearly as pervasive.
Ex: England’s sweet and alcohol intake is regulated by his
boss.
Regardless, Germania and Ancient Rome best exemplify how
their freedom was gained not by their immortality, but rather, the loss of it.
They were “liberated” from their bosses and war upon dying.
France is another good example of this. He gives better
insight into how heartless history can be in tossing peoples’ lives around. When
he first sees Lisa, Jeanne d’Arc’s reincarnate, he believed that God was
playing a cruel trick on him. On its own, this already proves how betrayed and
hurt France felt after her death.
Nonetheless, France still keeps his faith and believes that
humans who have had rough past lives will be reborn into happier ones. He
doesn’t have this privilege.
The purpose of this post will be to illustrate how the
nations’ immortality has historically caused them to live through many
traumatic events. It would follow, then, that being reared in such unhealthy
environments would cause some of them to develop PTSD.
In fact, there is a mounting pile of canon evidence that
depicts the nations having discomforting flashbacks, severe anxiety, and
nightmares. That said, let’s go over some examples.
America:
When his settlers moved inland, America didn’t have many
belongings to his name. England ponders why America produces things in mass and
comes to the realization that America’s overconsumption of goods likely stems
from this impoverished period of his life.
Note the use of the word traumatized.
Lithuania:
Lithuania has a flashback to when he and the other Baltic
States declared their independence from the USSR. He then experiences another
flashback, where Russia squeezes his shoulder – it’s used as a metaphor to
represent political repression.
Lithuania is so immersed in this second flashback that he
begins squeezing Estonia’s and Latvia’s shoulders without realizing it.
One of his character notes also mentions that he’s been rebilitating after his time spent in the USSR.
England:
England doubts his capacity to care for young America. The
stress of this new responsibility causes him to have a flashback of his older
brothers sending him hexes.
It’s noted that England once suffered from 100 years of heartbreak, presumably a reference to the American Revolution.
This is a theory of mine, as it isn’t confirmed in canon, but given that England coughs up blood and gets ill on the fourth of July, I think that it is meant to symbolize how he still hasn’t recovered emotionally from America’s independence. In other words, each year, England’s heart is both literally and figuratively ripped open on the inside.
Japan:
While this example is a more subtle depiction of trauma, it’s
not surprising.
Although this isn’t covered in the strips, following WW2, Japan
would have become America’s underling. As such, the atrocities committed by the
atomic bombs would have made him visibly more compliant to America’s demands,
regardless if he agreed or not.
This is seen in a world meeting where Japan unanimously agrees
with America’s ridiculous global warming plan. Switzerland even calls out Japan
for not voicing his true opinion.
Switzerland:
Switzerland’s mercenary past still haunts him. Lichtenstein
perceptively reads into this as she asks him why they’re working to boost her income through tourism.
Italy:
Italy’s perhaps one of the most anxiety-ridden characters in
the series.
Ex: He worries that Germany hates him and has nightmares
about this. His greatest fear is being left behind to fend for himself.
This insecurity leads him to make Germany reaffirm to him several times that he’s not actually hated.
Ex: Italy has nightmares where a childhood version of himself
presses to be acknowledged.
The dream ends with Italy screaming and refusing to
acknowledge the child. To me, and as I’ve theorized in the past, I read this as
Italy repressing parts of his childhood to minimize and forget about the trauma
that he experienced. The child is merely a representation of his unconscious
mind.
Germany:
Germany also has a childhood version of himself pressing to
be acknowledged. Of course, this is running on the assumption that he’s
actually Holy Rome and has forgotten about his childhood.
Similarly, he’s once depicted to be holding Chibitalia,
looking visibly confused.
“It’s me.”
Again, how I see this is that perhaps Germany is repressing
aspects of his childhood. In that case, Chibitalia is an unconscious
representation of these memories attempting to pierce through to his conscious
mind.
All in all, given how long the nations have lived, it’s not
novel to assume that they’re still traumatized by things that have happened to
them in the past.
*is swamped in work*
Parent: No excuses. You’re going to have to make time for it.
That’s the point, though! A lot of serial killers’ motives aren’t irrational if you step outside of conventional morals. They’ve either had a misjustice done to them or they believe that they’re above justice (i.e. narcissism and a lack of empathy).
Not all of the characters in the AU will be like that, but their motives for killing will always have reason to it.
Note: This
theory will make use of Freudian theory. While I recognize that Freud’s ideas
do not bear much contemporary relevance, that shouldn’t take away from the fact
that many of his concepts (e.g., erogenous zones, childhood memory repression,
catharsis) are nonetheless employed by Hima in the series. The purpose of this
post is to give some insight into the psychologies of the characters.
Terminology I’ll go over: Psychosexual stages,
causality, regression, fixation.
Yes, that’s right. Freud’s ideas are very much prevalent in the
series. A big area of his work was analyzing the impact of childhood on
personality development. Freud believed in causality, meaning that who you are as
an adult can be directly traced back to your childhood.
How you’re parented and brought
up is the most crucial factor. I don’t need to go into this in too much detail,
but basically, we go through five stages of development titled: Oral, anal,
phallic, latency, and genital.
For this specific post, we
only need to focus on the early stages of development, which focus on sensual
(sensory) pleasure and stimulation, often for the purposes of soothing and
experiencing relief.
Each stage has corresponding needs. If these needs are not met (under-gratification) or
if they are too easily met (over-gratification), then the person develops a
fixation.
A fixation essentially means that the person is
stuck at that level of development, which causes them to develop a problematic and
unhealthy personality type.
However, it’s only when that individual is met with confrontation
or a stressful situation that they regress back to the stage in which they developed
this fixation. The stress causes them to revert back to the age where their
needs weren’t met, and as such, they engage in childish behaviours.
For example, if you get into an argument with someone and they
start behaving selfishly, like a toddler, then you have every right to poke fun
at them for having Daddy or Mommy issues. Or, there are those who bite their
nails and pick at their lips, something akin to the soothing acquired from
sucking one’s thumb as a child.
Where America Fits Into This:
America’s tricky in that he’s fixated at two stages of
development. I’ll go over each of them separately.
Oral Fixation:
The oral stages revolves around gratification through the mouth
and lips. Tension and stress in an infant is reduced as they feed from their
mother. It soothes them.
Over-gratification, as in the infant is fed too much or too
easily, results in an oral-incorporative
personality. In this case, it would apply not to how America was parented,
as England wasn’t present in his life for long periods of his childhood, but
rather the time that he spent in isolation.
In isolation, America only looked after himself. That’s why when
he emerged from this isolation he came across as selfish and egocentric to the
other nations. He had gotten so used to satisfying his own needs that he had
trouble putting others first. [Please note that this is not the case in modern
strips.]
Now, consider how much responsibility America
had when he became a major manufacturing power in the years leading up to WW1.
Then, consider how he evolved to the status of a superpower
following WW2. That’s a lot of responsibility for one nation to take, and as
such, you would think that it would have caused America a lot of stress.
Well, it did.
Ex: He’s visibly distressed and disappointed in himself when
the Stock Market crashes in 1939. He assumes all the blame given that it was
his economy that had propped up the global market at the time.
While he doesn’t always show it, a lot of America’s habits
help reduce this tension and stress. Not only that, but it helps him cope with
the loneliness and lingering effects of isolation that he still feels when
interacting with other nations.
Oral-incorporative personalities reduce tension through oral
activities (duh). This would include things like smoking, drinking a lot,
chewing gum, eating excessively, and being overly talkative. Hmmmm.
Doesn’t America overeat?
Isn’t America an overly-talkative person that just so
happens to get on a lot of the other nations’ nerves?
Notwithstanding that America is completely aware of the fact
that he’s not well-received in the international community?
This brings me to my next point. An oral-incorporative
personality-type also possesses a high degree of gullibility. Following Freud’s
allegory, they swallow everything they’re told.
With America, this gullibility of not being able to read the
atmosphere is an act.
It’s nothing more than a running gag and shouldn’t be taken seriously, especially if you look closely at his interactions with the other nations.
It’s a stress-reducing mechanism that allows him to avoid
confronting reality, given how stressful his position as a superpower must have
been. Point is, he’s more than capable of reading the atmosphere as seen in the
example above. He simply chooses not to.
Similarly, America also embodies aspects of an oral-sadistic personality type. Under-gratification,
as in the infant is not fed enough, results in this personality type. It means
that they were weaned off early from their mother.
These people tend to be verbally abusive, or, in less
serious cases they use “biting” sarcasm. Note again the use of an allegorical reference to infancy.
That said, we know that the nations often get frustrated
with America for making reckless mistakes. More importantly, these mistakes are attributed to his youth and inexperience.
In that case, America being
weaned off from England too early and not learning the proper ropes of how to
conduct himself in accordance to tradition would be what is most
relevant here…
Not many people know this, but America can be verbally abrasive (it’s not quite abusive) and sarcastic.
The whole arc covering his and Canada’s childhoods are full of heated arguments
between the two of them.
Ex: America gets frustrated with Canada when the latter
refuses to let him see England following the Revolution.
The argument ends when Canada slams the front door on
America.
Ex: America explodes
at Canada upon hearing that the latter intends to gain his independence by being
on good terms with England.
It’s the softness of the approach that doesn’t sit well with
America. Canada is still fairly sheltered at this point, and hadn’t experienced/
travelled the world like America had. Put another way, Canada comes
across as too idealistic to him.
“Is your head a field of flowers?!”
Ex: Russia gives
America a ticket to Siberia for his birthday. America blows his nose with it.
Anal Fixation:
[Yes, laugh. I didn’t come up with these terms.]
This stage of development centers around potty training. As
toddlers gain control, autonomy, over
their bodily functions, the authority that their parents assert over them
regarding how they regulate these functions is met with hostility. They want to
enjoy their newly-acquired independence and go whenever they want. The parents
are the only barrier to that. Essentially, this stage is a battle of wills between
the stubbornness of the toddler and their parents.
Sound familiar? Does the American Revolution ring a bell?
As America became increasingly sufficient, he realized that
England’s authority was too imposing; it restricted his growth and freedom as a
nation. He therefore pushed back and fought for his independence, his autonomy.
America fits best with an anal-retentive personality type. Similar
to how a toddler will sometimes refuse to relieve themselves, these individuals
tend to withhold their emotions and hoard their belongings. This also ties in
nicely with how America pretends not to read the atmosphere.
Ex: America’s been shown on a few occasions to hold his
tongue and not say what he really thinks.
Ex: He has a
problem with over-manufacturing [hoarding].
Ex: While this doesn’t apply in the present, when he first
came out of isolation, America would only do favors if it served to his own
benefit.
Notice how similar that
is to the behavior of a toddler. They lack the intellectual capacity to think
of anyone but themselves.
Lastly, in terms of stress, you’ll also notice that America
is often equated with child-like imagery.
This is especially the case when his ideas are challenged.
The stress of it causes him to revert back to childish behaviour.
Ex: When proposing a world defense plan, he crushes bundled spoons
to intimidate other nations into agreeing with him.
England berates him for this childishness too.
In sum, America’s childish behaviour is often an unconscious
reaction to stress than it is arising from selfishness. Not only that, but a
lot of his ‘obnoxious’ habits (e.g., eating excessively) can be attributed to
him relieving his stress through them.
Absolutely! It’s a bit more complicated than that, as they
still bicker frequently.
The difference today is that this bickering is
playful. They’re able to joke and poke fun at each other.
They also hang out
frequently…
They’ve spent New Years’ together.
They make it a point to visit each other.
They phone/ prank call each other too.
As rocky and unhealthy as their relationship used to be, it’s progressed beautifully over time.
Oh, this one is certainly tricky! America’s personality
primarily borrows from two stages of development. Still, it’s striking how
consistent his characterization is with Freudian theory.
I’ll also have to create a separate post analyzing how
England passed on his mental health issues/ inferiorities [in psychology we
call these neuroses] to America. But, that’s for another time.
Post on America’s personality coming up soon!
I want to begin by pointing out that I’m simply presenting
canon information. That is, what we’ve seen about religion in the strips.
Just because one nation follows the dominant religion of their
people doesn’t necessarily mean that they don’t hold their own beliefs or can’t
engage in the religious practices of other groups amongst their citizenry – all
I’m saying is that the latter point hasn’t been demonstrated in the series.
It’s also important to mention that the nations are
stereotypical personifications – they’re not characterized for specificity.
With all that in mind, religion in Hetalia encompasses a
generalized population rule. Similar to how they’re affected by the demographic
statistics of their citizens (e.g., their weight, income, behavioural habits),
the nations have also historically abided by the most dominant religion in
their country.
The Clergy as a ‘Boss’:
Since the Church used to be the Head of State, they would
have also been the respective personification’s boss.
Ex: We saw this with England, who spent some time on the run
from a Bishop who ordered him to cut his hair.
The Personification as a Religious Entity:
Ex: Prussia first emerged as a Catholic religious order.
As a reflection of his people and their beliefs, he was
therefore extremely religious.
Ex: There’s also Knights Templar, who likewise represented
a Catholic religious order.
War:
The Polish-Swedish wars are a good example of how the
different religious orientations of the two countries are reflected in their personifications.
Conversion:
As mentioned above, the nations only follow a religion if it’s
prevalent within their population.
Ex: During the year 1000 [the Christian Millennium Apocalypse),
France and England truly believed that the world was going to end.
France feared going to hell. Because he thought they were both
going to die anyway, England fulfilled France’s last wish and pretended to be
conquered by him (ironic, considering that the Norman Conquest wasn’t that far
in the future).
Meanwhile, Hungary who had just converted to Christianity
that year, hadn’t yet acquired the religious beliefs that would have also made
her fearful of the so-called apocalypse.
Ex: There’s also this beautiful gem of a scene where Iceland’s
converted to Christianity. Note again how this happens only because his people
are being converted.
There is a Real God in Canon Verse:
Ex: Despite being a secular state in modern times, France
still believes in God. This is seen in his encounter with Lisa, Jeanne d’Arc’s
reincarnate.
Ex: Ancient Rome ties up God so that he’s able to leave Heaven and visit Veneziano.
Ex: God visits Hungary in her dreams and orders her to hit
France with her frying pan.
Ex: God visits Estonia in his dreams and fulfills his
fantasy to be surrounded by girls.
Of course, this wouldn’t be a religion-based post without mentioning the Vatican. While he doesn’t have an official design and appearance, Hima does say what his personality would be like should he ever become canon.
Interestingly, in the original webcomic, the UK actually had its own design, but
this was eventually scrapped.
As you mentioned, England later assumed the embodiment of the UK, with each
member state still possessing its own respective personification. It’s the same
thing that happened with Russia, who had also stood in to represent the Soviet Union.
We only have a personification for the UN thus
far. But, considering how old this strip is, I’m not sure if Hima intends to do
anything with him considering that he hasn’t popped up again.
Ellawritesficssometimes 