Dr. Brent, in his editorial “The Reconstruction of Venus: Following Our Legacy” (Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;121:2170–2171), reflects on the logo of our Journal and our national society. The logo was designed in the mid-1940s, with the hand to reflect our surgical skill, the Venus de Milo to represent art, and the Aesculapian staff to show us as healers. Although a symbol of beauty, the famous statue is armless; her arms were torn off as she was hurriedly dragged across the rocky terrain of the Aegean island of Milos to a ship bound for France. Dr. Brent recommends that we add a second image of the Venus with her arms restored, reflecting the progress and sophistication of our specialty.
Plastic surgery originated in reconstructive surgery. Recently, our specialty's emotional commitment to beauty, our fear of competition, and our apprehension about reduced incomes may have led us to forget our past. As a society, we joined the media frenzy by collaborating with Hollywood television. We have promoted cutting-edge, yet relatively untested, products. We have felt the need to eliminate “reconstructive” from our name, worrying that it would “confuse” our patients?
Updating our logo is only a symbol, but was the reconstructive arm of plastic surgery torn off in a hurried attempt to sail the ship of cosmetic surgery into the “City of Angels” instead of the City of Lights? Are we better off? Would a renewed acknowledgment of our roots repair us? Would a few reconstructive cases help fill the void in this economic recession? Would the distinguishing character of our specialty be restored? Would the public appreciate us more?
Maybe such a change would be only a symbol, nothing more than a Band-Aid. But it might begin the process of healing our wounds and restoring the honor of our past and of our commitment to each other and to society. It is only such a commitment that will ensure our place as a “special” specialty, rather than just another purveyor of goods or the competition down the street.
Frederick J. Menick, M.D.
Department of Plastic Surgery
University of Arizona
1102 North Eldorado Place
Tucson, Ariz. 85715
Letters to the Editor, discussing material recently published in the Journal, are welcome. They will have the best chance of acceptance if they are received within 8 weeks of an article’s publication. Letters to the Editor may be published with a response from the authors of the article being discussed. Discussions beyond the initial letter and response will not be published. Letters submitted pertaining to published Discussions of articles will not be printed. Letters to the Editor are not usually peer reviewed, but the Journal may invite replies from the authors of the original publication. All Letters are published at the discretion of the Editor.
Authors will be listed in the order in which they appear in the submission. Letters should be submitted electronically via PRS’ enkwell, at www.editorialmanager.com/prs/.
We reserve the right to edit Letters to meet requirements of space and format. Any financial interests relevant to the content of the correspondence must be disclosed. Submission of a Letter constitutes permission for the American Society of Plastic Surgeons and its licensees and asignees to publish it in the Journal and in any other form or medium.
The views, opinions, and conclusions expressed in the Letters to the Editor represent the personal opinions of the individual writers and not those of the publisher, the Editorial Board, or the sponsors of the Journal. Any stated views, opinions, and conclusions do not reflect the policy of any of the sponsoring organizations or of the institutions with which the writer is affiliated, and the publisher, the Editorial Board, and the sponsoring organizations assume no responsibility for the content of such correspondence.