On top of aspects of Freudian theory, I’m also of the
mindset that Hima has incorporated aspects of attachment theory. The dialogue
at one point directly makes reference to it, as I’ll soon reveal.

What this post will explore is how Romano’s inconsistent upbringing
caused him to develop hostile feelings and a distrust of others when he was a
young child.

What is Attachment Theory?:

Attachment theory focuses on the relationship between a
child and their caregiver. Central to the theory is the concept of needs. A
child relies on their caregiver to protect them, provide for them, and care for
them. If all these needs are consistently met, the child develops a healthy attachment
to their parents. This healthy attachment style positively affects both the
child’s personality and their capability to establish and maintain healthy
relationships as they grow older.

However, if needs are not met at all, or are sometimes met
and at other times are not, this inconsistency causes the child to develop
unhealthy attachment styles. As such, they develop unhealthy personalities and
form unhealthy relationships with others.

The Ainsworth experiment was where this theory originated.
To test the attachment styles between toddlers and their caregivers, they would
put them in a room together at first. After a while, the parent would leave and
the child would be left on their own. Then, a stranger would be introduced to the
room and leave after the toddler had a chance to react. The last part of the
experiment analyzed the toddler’s reaction once they were reunited with their
parents again.

Being in a “strange situation” – a foreign room, absence of a parent, and meeting a stranger [danger] –
created a lot of stress in the child. Since children seek protection from their
caregivers, this stress and fear would typically cause the child to become
upset and seek reassurance from their caregiver. It’s a survival instinct that
innately kicks in.

Those with a secure [healthy] attachment style would cry or
be upset for a bit but would be easily calmed once their caregiver soothed
them. The healthiness of this attachment style means that the child knows that
the parent is there for them – they can be relied on to satisfy their needs.

While there are several different unhealthy attachment
styles, only one is important for this post. An insecure ambivalent/
preoccupied attachment style is seen where the caregiver returns but is unable
to sooth the child. The child often responds with anger, and sometimes they can
even become aggressive.

The unhealthiness of this attachment style means that the
parent inconsistently meets the needs of the child. In other words, their care
for the child is inconsistent. They’re either overbearing when they meet the
child’s needs, or they’re completely unavailable and don’t meet them.  

This inconsistency causes a sense of hostility and distrust
to develop in the child. They don’t want to rely on their parent, but know that
they have to if they want to survive… a love-hate relationship if you will. The
anger and aggression are symptoms of this contradiction.

Let’s tie this back to the strips.

What’s Romano’s attachment style?

What you’ll see with Romano is that he has an ambivalent/
preoccupied attachment style stemming from two parental relationships. His needs
were not consistently met since Ancient Rome spent most of his time rearing Veneziano.
The unavailability of care.

Then, Romano falls under Spain’s rule, someone who goes out
of his way to care and provide for Romano. The
overbearingness of care.

Romano’s Hostility:

As stated above, children who don’t have their needs met
consistently react hostilely to their parents. This is especially the case when
the inconsistent parent attempts to provide or care for the child – the child
doesn’t receive it well.

Ancient Rome’s parenting style left a mark on Romano. He
developed a hostility towards parental figures. This is why I believe he
reacted to Spain so harshly at first.

Spain babied Romano. He cleaned for him, cooked for him, and
clothed him. Romano wasn’t used to having these needs being met and responded
with anger because it was the only feelings he had to express. It was likely
the first time he had received affection and care on a consistent basis.

This would explain what happened when Spain went out of his
way to buy Romano new clothes. He blushes, unsure of how to process this
foreign experience, and simultaneously insults Spain.

Why is it that Romano doesn’t clean and Veneziano does? It’s
the constant presence of a parental figure that I believe accounts for their
differences. Veneziano had someone to care for him more often, and as such, he
adopted the modelled behaviours that he was exposed to. Meanwhile, Romano doesn’t
know how to take care of himself because he wasn’t cared for.

[This doesn’t mean to say that Rome didn’t love Romano. Not at all.]

Spain changed that. He became Romano’s protector and
caregiver. Romano, while still possessing feelings of hostility, grew to accept
this given that, like a young child, he sought out protection in Spain during
the uncertain and dangerous circumstances of war.

This consistency in care eventually results in Romano
learning to trust Spain. The problem is that Spain was initially oblivious to
this. He refers to Romano’s outbursts as “uncute” and expresses confusion
over why Romano acts out like this.

More importantly, he questions why Romano isn’t attached to him.

What Spain grows to learn is that Romano’s anger is how he
expresses affection – his reciprocal need
for care and affection.

For example, when Spain meets with German soldiers, Romano
perceives them as the enemy and begins to attack them. He tells Spain to run
and ‘sacrifices’ himself. In his mind, he was returning the favor by assuming
the role of the protector.

When Spain reprimands Romano for this, the consistency in
care is broken.

Spain doesn’t recognize this right away, but Romano helps him
by expressing his frustration at having Spain getting angry with him.

This was a big step in Romano’s perspective. You have to
step into his mindset, childish as it is. He was putting Spain first by ‘sacrificing’
himself to the soldiers, only for Spain to criticize him for it. Of course, he’s
going to get upset.

What’s sad is that Romano doesn’t know how to process these
conflictual feelings. He feels both affection and hostility for Spain. Once
again, it’s the inconsistency of care in the relationship that’s causing this.

The beautiful part of this strip [x] is that Spain finally
enters Romano’s world and understands that Romano’s “uncute” behaviour is
actually how he expresses his affection.

Hence the teasing strip title of “Boss Spain Doesn’t
Understand.”

This understanding, where Spain apologizes for criticizing Romano’s
‘sacrifice’ allows the two to reconcile and meet each other half-way.

In sum, Romano’s hostility toward Spain was not him being an
ungrateful and spoiled brat. If anything, this behaviour stems from a child who
had nothing, only to receive everything and being confused as to how to react
to it.

Up next: How some of Romano’s childhood hostility and attachment
style still resides in his adulthood.