The women I have discussed in these case studies are exceptional in that they have decided to re-appropriate and subvert their prosthesis into fashionable, sexy, interesting and desirable objects. Thinking back to the themes I used in my work, I had idealised what it was medical equipment and prosthetics looked like, however it appears that wearers of this type of equipment are keen to bring the element of hand crafting and customisation back to the discreet, apologetic and uniform prosthetic. It is a way of showing the different facets of their identity and saying no to hiding their disability.
By comparison, vintage medical equipment was very well crafted. It was decorated and personalised for the user. Take, for example, amputation saws used by doctors in the 1700s [fig 1]. Each surgeon would have their own, especially hand engraved saw; brutal objects, but beautiful nonetheless. The prosthetic hand shown below [fig 2] is also an interesting object in its own right. As a craftsperson, I look at how well made and considered it is as an object. Therefore its meaning, a replacement hand for an amputee, comes second. In this prosthetic hand, the aesthetics have been considered just as much as the function.
[figures: 1 & 2 Amputation saws, late 1700s. Articulated prosthetic limb. Both in the Wellcome Collection // source: photograph taken from my own collection]
Why has this changed in modern prosthetic design? Graham Pullin argues that this is because modern medical design tries to “compensate for disability as discreetly as possible”1 as though imitation and hiding disability is necessary. He continues to question whether “flesh coloured prosthesis and minaturised hearing aids send out tacit signals that impairment is something to hide”2. Perhaps it also has links with the way that disability is perceived in society.
When looking up the word ‘disabled’ in a thesaurus, Aimee Mullins discovered that the synonyms were: “crippled, helpless, useless, wrecked, stalled, maimed, wounded, mangled, lame, mutilated, rundown, worn-out, weakened, impotent, castrated, paralyzed, handicapped, senile, decrepit, laid-up, done-up, done-for, done-in cracked-up, counted-out; see also hurt, useless and weak. Antonyms, healthy, strong, capable.”3
If the word ‘disabled’ is defined in current thesaurus’s in this way, then surely the negative connotations seep into public consciousness? And if society views disability or prosthetics like this, then how must disabled people view themselves and their prosthesis? Seemingly, Pullin was correct in thinking that the reason for discreet rather than flamboyant design is that society is embarrassed of disability.
There is hope for this field of design, though. With designers and craftspeople such as Teresa Milheiro and Jeremy Scott borrowing heavily from medical aesthetics to inform their work, it goes towards popularising the idea that disability and illness is not something to be ashamed of, or something to hide. By designing jewellery and footwear that uses recognisably ‘medical’ imagery (figs 3 & 4), Milheiro and Scott are fetishising and making disability hip, fashionable even. If medical aesthetics are flowing freely into the worlds of craft and design, then surely craft and design can make their way back into medical design?
[figure 3 left: “Survival Kit”, silver, catheters, rubber. Teresa Milheiro 2005. Source: Book “New Directions in Jewellery” Black Dog Publishing]
[figure 4 right: “Body Modification” show. Jeremy Scott 1996. Source: Book “Extreme Beauty” Yale University Press]
Graham Pullin sums it up succinctly by suggesting that “a richer balance between problem solving and more playful exploration could open up valuable new directions”4. Indeed it appears that this is beginning to happen now, but more needs to be done to bring the worlds of art/design together with medicine. “It seems important to continually challenge existing approaches, just as this is the way in which every other area of design, art and science progresses. All too often attitudes are spoken of as if homogeneous. ‘Amputees want discretion’. Well, not everyone. Not always”5. This is interesting as it goes back to a point that Aimee Mullins was discussing in her TED talk – she is talking about encouraging amputees to be “the architects of their own identities… by designing their bodies from a place of empowerment”6, so perhaps a unified approach and a dialogue between amputee, designer, artist and scientist is what is needed to improve the design of modern prosthetics?
Hanna Mawbey - Creative Enquiry 