Copenhagen [Michael Frayn] on *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. The Tony Award—winning play that soars at the intersection of science and. The Tony Award—winning play that soars at the intersection of science and art, Copenhagen is an explosive re-imagining of the mysterious wartime. 26 Feb What does Frayn’s famous play get wrong, and what does it get right?.

Author: Yozshukazahn Tojat
Country: Italy
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Personal Growth
Published (Last): 26 September 2004
Pages: 412
PDF File Size: 16.60 Mb
ePub File Size: 17.26 Mb
ISBN: 364-9-63593-714-7
Downloads: 49946
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Maugore

A collection of historical essays provoked by the play was published in English in I’m a danger to mankind; I’m also your guest.

This is an interesting play. Two hours well spent. I read the play this week to extract quotes for further work with my students.

Is Michael Frayn’s Copenhagen the best play about science ever written?

Heisenberg’s letters to his wife and later to Jungk place his conversation with Bohr on Wednesday evening. Want to Read saving….

Many of them are referenced in the context of their work with either Bohr or Heisenberg. The amount of vitriol was impressive.

Nov 01, Aj Sterkel rated it did not like it Shelves: Tony Award for Best Play. It was directed by Michael Blakemore. You can unsubscribe anytime. I loved the entire premise of the play: Did Heisenberg try to sabotage the German bomb project?

Copenhagen (play) – Wikipedia

We can [in theory] never know everything about human thinking. Maybe the play shows me a different perspective of the world that I did not notice before. These drafts proved to be significant in several respects.

Often, plays give me that something extra, be it the love, the strength, or the determination that I need to move forward in my life. Inthe German scientist visited Bohr, his old mentor and long-time friend, in Copenhagen. Coopenhagen is most nearly a “drama,” but works ckpenhagen many ways as an expository piece in the manner it presents information to the audience.

Plain language and scientific language both operate in this play. They talk about the exhilaration of being on the cutting edge of physics in the s, the death of one of the Bohrs’ sons in a boating accident, the encroachment of the Nazis on Germany’s brilliant, promising scientific community, and, yes, the manipulation of uranium to create nuclear fission.


Margrethe is there in the way that all the other people in the world are attempting to explain his behavior”, says Frayn. These are all traits of the artistic style known as Expressionism.

If anything, Copenhagen really does hammer home the idea of the inseparability of the natural world from the personal, of theoretical physics from metaphysics. Cosa si dissero i due mostri sacri della fisica?

They discuss the idea of nuclear power and its control, the rationale behind building or not building an atomic bombthe uncertainty of the past and the inevitability of the future as embodiments of themselves acting as particles drifting through the atom that is Copenhagen.

During the later parts of the war, they suffered from supply setbacks due to their being targets of bombing and sabotage raids. At the end of that conversation, their friendship was over and Heisenberg returned to Germany. The answer almost certainly lies in the gray area between those possibilities, and it’s that ambiguity in Heisenberg’s mind and character that Frayn so eloquently explores, both in his play and in a long, expansive bibliographical essay that lays out many of the uncertainties in Heisenberg’s motivations and the factors that led him to seek out Bohr for that last disastrous conversation that might have had such a tremendous impact on world history.

Heisenberg repeated his convictions on the technical feasibility of building nuclear weapons.

Historical thoughts on Michael Frayn’s Copenhagen | Restricted Data

Jun 19, the gift rated it it was amazing Shelves: What about Schrodinger’s cat? Bohr and Heisenberg agree that Heisenberg started the visit by stating to Bohr that nuclear weapons were now conceivable.

Nov 05, Uttara Srinivasan rated it really liked it. No one understands my trip to Copenhagen. And memories are, of course, rfayn things, as any psychologist will tell you. The story focuses on physics and the atomic bomb, but most of all on relationships and et I have been listening to few old plays this weekend and this one really touched me.


To interrogators and intelligence officers, to journalists and historians. These are the agreed-upon facts of that evening, but no one frayyn seem to agree on exactly what was said during that conversation: It was jarring at first. The popular image of the men who made the bomb is of dispassionate intellects who number-crunched their way towards a weapon whose devastating power they could not even imagine.

Copenhagen cannot be labelled simply as a comedy or tragedy ; the lack of a protagonist and direct conflict prevents this in large part.


If the Germans had someone more muchael Fermi on their team, one can imagine them getting a pile working by the end of the war.

Helpmann Award for Best Play. In most dramatic works where the characters are based on real people, there is a point at which the character deviates from the real person.

The Bohr letters released in are an example of this. Archived from the original on 22 February Bohr wrote of this:. The play could be boiled copenhayen to this one statement from Heisenberg, speaking of the post Hiroshima-Nagasaki world: It leaves up in the air whether Heisenberg was trying to sabotage consciously or notmaking it seem that this is as equally plausible an interpretation as any other. MIchael Frayn’s play doesn’t presume to try to figure out, definitively, what was said that night; in fact, it argues that Heisenberg, Bohr, and Margrethe Bohr are still trying themselves to agree on what happened, even years after they’ve all died.

Author: admin