LIVING WITH YOUR OWN IDEAS

Prostheses are tools used to compensate something that was not working at all or not working well, a crutch to so-called „normal“ functioning of the body and its parts. Yet normality itself is a fragile fiction. It implies a single, standard body against which all others are measured. Once we question that standard, the prosthesis transforms from a crutch into a means of exploration.

This becomes visible in design experiments that confront the inherent fear of being human, as Thomas Thwaites did in his project GoatMan. With various tools he tried to escape or rather achieve an experience that would otherwise have passed without being noticed. Here, the prosthesis ceases to restore and begins to translate, mediating between human and animal perception.In this line of thought protheses expand from a tool to compensate to an instrument that expands, connects, and is able to translate into different spaces and realities.

Do prostheses really help you to become something else? Do they help you to become the best version of yourself? Are prostheses about changing being or showing being?

The saying of new hair, new me, for instance, is a soulless expression, yet a familiar one. Protheses in the sense of changing the hair color, getting a nose job, having a donut implant on your forehead, tattoos, etc. are tools to explore and expand alternative looks and with it perspectives and external reactions and perceptions is a temporary curation that is performed without changing and becoming something else completely. Rather, it is another layer that is added but does not cover or rule over what has already been, this layer is explored and may be adapted into the bigger construct of self and identity or might as well be rejected after a certain amount of time and changed to something else. The body a prothesis for identity, becomes a steward of what wants to be expressed for a certain amount of time.

Is Identity shaped through external validation, perceived and convey through the materialization of the body? Or is there such a thing as a self image, a self constructed identity that is independent of external validation?

This notion of identity then circles back to prostheses really becoming a crutch as identity in this sense is mediated, reflected and projected. Parts are lost in translation. Control and power of perception is externalized as the curated identity is extended through materiality. Something that can be replicated, staged or even stolen. When identity is materialized, it also becomes public, subject to interpretation, validation and replication. In this sense protheses are never private. It becomes interesting to investigate what is biologically visible or invisible for human capabilities to perceive, exploring the thought of protheses that are not directed at the bodies function but the minds. If a prosthesis is understood as a tool that extends our capacity to experience, then the mind itself can host prosthetic instruments. Drugs, books, ideas, stories, sleep - all enable one to tap into different realities, spaces and dreams. In this sense a prothesis of the mind is to indulge into different dimensions and identities, to loose oneself in them for a while, only to return and perceive ones own being, the self newly formed.

In this regard the construct of time and temporality is an essential trigger. A prothesis in its common understanding, is something you can put on and off. It is adjustable and finite regarding the time of usage, duration and time of support. As with protheses, identity too is temporary, adjustable and dependent on context.

Where does the body perform and move and identity takes form? Is your face, the shape of your nose connected to identity?

How deeply identity is rooted in the body can be debated endlessly, and there will likely never be a final verdict to this philosophical question. What I want to ask in the realms of this exploration is what does it mean to be identified? Is it discovering the presence of a body, a certain face and specific fragrance? To hide the body, yourself, one can easily become the most identifiable person in the room. Is the person with the hidden face more likely to be identified than someone whose face is fully recognizable? This is dependent on the context, the situation, the surroundings. What is noticeable is clearer to identify. It becomes a matter of attention (attention economy/ people perform themselves for visibility). We tend to notice the things that fall out of the ordinary, out of „the norm“. A paradox in the concept of (identity) protheses becomes apparent: protheses are both compensatory and conspicuous. As a tool they function to compensate and adapt to what is considered normal functioning and with this it becomes the thing that people notice, that people will recognize and identify. Hence, visibility defines identity under current social regimes.

Continuously we see people deeply sunken into phones and digital worlds. This for me is an anti prosthesis, forgetting the body, being completely out of the body, and distracting the mind. The digital screen is not an extension but a separation, a false prothesis so to say that replaces contact with simulation. So it becomes a matter of presence. Not to invent and curate the body but to recognize identity. The construct of authenticity, stripping away the ego and external validation. Then identity is not us, not something that belongs to us but that comes through us, not from us. To see prostheses as a medium to step into contact with the world, to communicate, to elaborate, and to expand. Ultimately to notice, to perceive and to be present. To translate what wants to be expressed. Everyone is a prothesis on their own, like antennas capable of picking up certain frequencies through openness, attention and presence.

The Mediated Self

If I can only perceive myself through mirrors and media, then my “best version” is always a mediated construct. How can the self be understood if it is always projected, filtered, delayed, or distorted?

„To become the best version of yourself“ is a contemporary mantra of self-optimization, visibility and curated identity. There are several predetermined assumptions behind this phrase: // That there is such a thing as the „best“ version, a stable ideal self. // One can achieve this through control, improvement and enhancement. // This self is always reflected, on screens, in mirrors, in others’ validation This prosthesis explores how self-perception is inherently mediated through technologies of reflection such as mirrors, cameras, screens and others. In a culture obsessed with “becoming the best version of yourself,” the mirror becomes a site of both aspiration and distortion. The interactive reflection reveals a fragmented, delayed, or multiplied image of the self, exposing how our pursuit of perfection depends on external mediation. The prosthesis invites viewers to confront not their “best” self, but the distance between who they are and how they appear.

A lightweight head-mounted foil arm holds a circular mirror at variable distance, creating an off-axis, delayed reflection that shifts with posture and movement. The device foregrounds mediation—how seeing oneself is always filtered through tools, frames and angles.

POV Visions Eyedrops

What if becoming something else isn’t about control, but about letting go? What if we could experience other species and non-living beings through vision, instead of just imagine it?

POV Vision Eyedrops are speculative prostheses that allow a human to perceive the world through the eyes of another species, a fish, a sheep, a raindrop, a piece of dust. Each drop alters your perceptual system, shifting your visual, emotional, and spatial understanding for a brief period of time. You cannot choose whose eyes you’ll borrow; the selection emerges from your geographical, cultural, and ecological proximity. A person living near the sea might see through a jellyfish, while someone in a dense urban fabric might see as a pigeon or a rat. The transformation is unpredictable but contextually grounded.