T o have one’s work become a turning point in the trend of medical history is a priviIege accorded to very few men. Such, however, was the lot of Sir HaroId GiIIies, and it is fitting that in the evening of his Iife fuI1 acknowledgment shouId be made and thanks accorded for his efforts in the deveIopment of pIastic surgery. When Major GiIIies appreciated the necessity for better standards in reconstructive surgery during the first World War, he took up a challenge which had not been accepted for over 300 years. By means of his persona1 efforts and ingenuity, abIy assisted by colleagues from Great Britain and the CommonweaIth, GiIIies initiated a system of surgicaI thought and technical excellence that has made him the father of modern plastic surgery. Like a stone dropped into a stagnant pool, the ripples of his influence continue to extend. The appehation “ maestro,” affectionately given him by his students, was we11 deserved. As one who “sat at his feet” during World War II I am glad to record my own debt to him and to indicate the various ways in which his teaching has influenced my own methods in South Africa, an influence which is obviously only a fraction of his inffuence throughout the EngIish-speaking world. It is natura1 that no two people worthy of their saIt agree on all points, but the fundamenta1 principIes laid down by the GiIIies school have stood the test of time, even though it may appear at times that enthusiasm and ingenuity in detail of appIication had outstripped wisdom in judgment. The methods of dimensional assessment, the correct utilization of IocaI, free or distant grafts, and the meticulous fuhilment of an artistic design have, in the “maestro’s” hands, reached a high standard of excehence. The changes that have been wrought by succeeding generations have been more in the nature of technical detaiI rather than in principIe. Bearing this in mind, I wouId like to describe a few of the methods acquired from Sir Harold and his coheagues, and to indicate the modifications which I have carried out to suit my own hand. AIthough GiIIies’ original cIaim to fame was the deveIopment of the tubed pedicle flap, it was his use of the IocaI ffap that stamped his record for all time with the mark of genius. It is the judicious use of the local Aap that portrays the quahty of the plastic surgeon, and in this regard very IittIe can be added to the method used by GiIIies during WorId War I. The type of faciaI injury that called for Gillies’ ski11 in that conffict was peculiarly suited to IocaI flap surgery, as so many injuries were due to gunshot wounds where local tissue was available and viabIe. In World War II, however, injuries were mainly due to burn or crush, the former destroying large surface areas thus making IocaI flap surgery impossibIe, and the Iatter mainIy causing bony injuries requiring no surface repair at aII. Not everyone agrees with GiIIies’ method of planning in certain cases. It wouId, in fact, be impossibIe for two pIastic surgeons to agree entireIy on the pIanning of every type of case, yet everyone is unanimous in acknowledging GiIIies technicahy as a master of his craft. Those of us who have been fortunate enough to acquire some aspects of his technique in the use of fine sutures correctIy pIaced with instruments of delicate baIance, and particularly with the use of the GiIIies needIe holder, have never entered into any operative procedure without a silent prayer of thanks to the man who initiated a surgica1 disciphne which has brought respect for the handling of tissues to its highest possibIe level. AIthough I often pIace pIastic tape across the wound, even after a11 stitches have been removed, its use is not an aIteration in technique but merely an additional safeguard against Iateral stretch of the scar.