<- so over steampunk

A: Hand is inarguably “skeletal” in appearance;

B: English and Continental Victorian-era etiquette emphasised not shocking others;

C: A skeletal hand one is not otherwise accustomed to is likely to cause concern, dismay, shock, fright, and attendant offense;

D: One who is carelessly or purposefully advertising their particular condition to all present is either seeking attention or seeking to cause offense, and either is rude;

E: Such foreseeable concern, dismay, shock, fright, and attendant offense may easily be remedied by the application of a pair of gloves;

F: Anyone who could afford said prosthetic could likely afford a pair of gloves;

G: Ergo, and to wit, the hand of the prosthetic would be covered by a glove.

Anyone who was concerned about the utilitarian capabilities of their prosthetic could have acquired and used the much more recognised and utilised hook — such a device having the connotation of someone who had need of lifting and manipulating things for themselves, rather than having the luxury of having someone else attend to any lifting requiring two hands, implies that the prosthetic above was meant for cosmetic reasons, holding a hand of cards, grasping a beverage, or tucking into a coat breast.

That way, anyone having the sheer temerity to suggest that it was sinister would perish in a searing fireball.

Ah, if only.

If you’re in London, you can go see the arm at the Wellcome Collection (Euston, http://www.wellcomecollection.org/whats-on/exhibitions/medicine-man.aspx ) or find other similar arms in our ‘Science and Art of Medicine’ gallery (South Kensington, http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/visitmuseum/galleries/science_and_art_of_medicine.aspx )

We’re also taking part in ‘Ask A Curator’ day on twitter, so you can ask any questions about it with the hashtag #askacurator or as comments on the blog post.

Your post is rational and I do not question the logic behind your conclusion, but I do question the curator’s place to come to such a conclusion. You, in posting on a forum, are free to say “This would probably be worn with a glove!” because such is likely true, but a curator only as a matter of their job should not qualify “may have disguised it with a glove” with “[t]he rather sinister appearance of the hand”, no matter how likely. Keep in mind that Victorians were individuals, and it is just as fallacious to say “English and Continental Victorian-era etiquette emphasised not shocking others” as it is to say that modern etiquette emphasises not participating in internet flame wars (an example, not an accusation). Both statements are true, but the various Victorian-era memoirs, legal records, and other primary sources I’ve studied suggest that like most temporal norms, Victorian etiquette went mostly ignored, especially among men of sufficient means to afford an item such as this prosthetic arm. A significant number of upper-class Victorian men, at least in the sample afforded by my studies, took great steps to flaunt their status by purposefully and publicly ignoring social custom by such means as swearing, fighting, participating in non-conventional sexual activities (with multiple simultaneous partners), and wearing outlandish and modern fashions and accessories.

I would have to make assumptions on the character of the prosthetic’s owner to determine whether or not he would have worn it with a glove. My point is that a respectable historian should not make the claim that “[t]he rather sinister appearance of the hand suggests the wearer may have disguised it with a glove” without a shred of evidence indicating that such was the case.

If I sound like a pretentious undergraduate student who feels entitled to define the world after a few years of study, maybe it will help my case (or at least your perception of me) to say that my studies included producing research in Victorian history, not just a bachelor’s degree. I mean to say not that you should believe me because of my degrees but rather that you should believe my assertion that the curator does not well represent my field (which is presumably why he is a curator and not a historian/researcher).

Anyways, i was going to say that i’m fairly impressed over how modern this mechanical arm looks in it’s different parts. Would love to see a recreation of this and having a video featuring how it’d work on someone with a missing arm.