The last decades have witnessed a radical change in our views on central
nervous system damage and repair. This change is not only due to the
emergence of new powerful tools for the analysis of the brain and its
reactions to insults, but it also reflects a conceptual change in the
way we approach these problems. As an illustration to this development,
it is instructive to go back to the proceedings of a meeting at the NIH
in 1955 edited by William F. Windle, which summarizes the disillusioned
and pessimistic view on CNS regeneration prevailing at the time. While
this generation of researchers were well aware of the issues at stake,
they felt they had reached the end of the road; the approaches they had
pursued had got stuck and the tools available could not take them any
further. I can very well imagine that the participants, most of them
leaders in the field, left that conference feeling they had heard their
field being sentenced to death.