It has been remarked by individuals that believe of themselves to be quite observant - such as - that a prosthetic hook is, culturally, referencing "Captain Hook", such as Geoffrey Ling, and although we cannot think greatly of people that spit on established, proven and functioning prosthetic devices, we can try to see where they come from. What they do is look at popular culture to shape their unreflected but acid critique.
Their problem is only, that they do not keep looking at popular culture. They just go half way to name Captain Hook (if they go that far at all) in talking bad about hook devices, when really they do not consider popular culture all the way. If at all, they should do that with heart and with focus. How can I believe any researchers that talks down to me, as a hook user, by referring to terms such as "arcane" and "Captain Hook", when they are culturally unaware? Because when they are sloppy with their pop culture, what tells me they are not totally sloppy with their "technical" work? Alright, one glance at the edgy iLimb hand and torn up gloves and we know that answer. After all, if one is to look at pop culture, it is not just about extending research programs for preconceived ideas that end up without accessible devices on a small market, is it. It is not just about trying to sell "bionic" hands that may be just about as useful as a bugger in the nose (but cost more). It is about actually trying to understand what that popular culture can tell us were one to go that way, all the way.
And Captain Hook is the earliest pop culture "cyborg" in that he, in some way, integrates human body and technology under a new umbrella identity, that of "Captain Hook". As a famous tweet proposed: if he was given a prosthetic hand, he'd be "Captain Hand". Would have been quite a game changer, that.
Analysis of popular culture imagery and their significance for amputees
The way a damaged body is visualized both when in despair, when suffering damage or disintegration or loss, and when it is at ease, repaired, is present throughout our cultures.
So we can not only look at what the non-disabled public believes in when portraying damage or loss. We can also have a close look at visual elements of recovered, re-established people, and here, people that are "bound" to repair type technology.