sfletcher26's review against another edition
4.0
A complex dark and multilayered play based on the meeting between Bohr and Heisenberg in 1941. A play that needs reading and rereading and probably reading again.
charlibirb's review
4.0
Thanks to Elizabeth for this copy of Copenhagen. Really great play. I love 3 person philosophical plays. Art is an example. Very well-defined characters. I'd love to see this live.
marioncromb's review against another edition
dark
informative
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.25
A good play. Presents various explanations for Heisenberg's wartime meeting with Bohr, and the viewpoints of former colleagues on opposite sides of a war - one side which built an atomic bomb, and the other that didnt.
An interesting look at a period of time where, somewhat incredibly, the outcome of a world war hinged on the work of theoretical physicists in an astoundingly new area of physics - quantum mechanics - which was in itself a complete reframing of our understanding of everything, revealing inherent indeterminacy, which this play is keen to parallel with human memory/intent/understanding.
Incredibly well researched, but loses something being read and not seeing it performed. However the postscript to the play provides a lot more interesting detail and some of the background of choices made in the writing of the play.
An interesting look at a period of time where, somewhat incredibly, the outcome of a world war hinged on the work of theoretical physicists in an astoundingly new area of physics - quantum mechanics - which was in itself a complete reframing of our understanding of everything, revealing inherent indeterminacy, which this play is keen to parallel with human memory/intent/understanding.
Incredibly well researched, but loses something being read and not seeing it performed. However the postscript to the play provides a lot more interesting detail and some of the background of choices made in the writing of the play.
saralehto's review
dark
reflective
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
2.75
thovsepian's review
dark
emotional
reflective
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
nick_jenkins's review
3.0
Oddly, given Frayn's success as a novelist, I found the text rather bloodless on the page; perhaps it performs better than it reads. To me, the most interesting part by far of the book was the Postscript, in which Frayn explains how he researched the play and turned his findings into a (set of) hypotheses about what happened between Bohr and Heisenberg.
emmasophierund's review
5.0
Wow this is a GREAT play. What a powerful exploration of morality in science and the big question of why Heisenberg visited Bohr in Copenhagen in 1941.
storytimed's review
5.0
I read it and I was like, holy shit, I forgot what it was like to read something Good for once
It's a play based on an actual historical event that happened during World War II
So basically the background is that in the 1920s-1930s, Niels Bohr mentored Werner Heisenberg and formed much of the foundation of modern physics (see: Heisenberg's uncertainty principle)
They continued to work on physics and specifically nuclear physics up until the 40s, which. Heisenberg was German and working for the Nazis. Niels Bohr was Danish and half-Jewish
And in 1941, during the height of the war, Heisenberg went to visit Bohr in Copenhagen (title of the play).
AND THE INTERESTING THING IS, both of them (years on) could not agree on what happened during this visit
Bohr maintained that Heisenberg was trying to recruit him for the Nazis (how dare he) and Heisenberg sort of danced around and suggested that maybe he was warning Bohr that the Nazis were trying to develop an atom bomb
The play only has three characters: Heisenberg, Bohr, and Margerethe, Bohr's wife, and it's about the three of them arguing and drafting different explanations and ideas about what might have happened during the visit, using their uncertain memories
I really loved the way Frayn uses reoccurring motifs & worked physics into the text
Like, he uses Heisenberg's uncertainty principle (the impossibility of both knowing where an atom is and how fast it is traveling) as a metaphor for the limits of self-knowledge (the impossibility of both knowing why you're doing something and doing it at the same time)
And just like............ the way they constantly summon up new drafts of their 1941 encounter the same way they continually try to approach a better understanding of physics
Like, at one v important point Margerethe speaks up to say, hey, what the fuck! You keep talking about this like glorious partnership of intellectual collaboration but really you always did your best work while you were apart!
Very good........ I would like to see this performed one day
Also I learned about Niels Bohr's instrumental role of the rescue of like 90% of Jewish Danish people during WWII
It's a play based on an actual historical event that happened during World War II
So basically the background is that in the 1920s-1930s, Niels Bohr mentored Werner Heisenberg and formed much of the foundation of modern physics (see: Heisenberg's uncertainty principle)
They continued to work on physics and specifically nuclear physics up until the 40s, which. Heisenberg was German and working for the Nazis. Niels Bohr was Danish and half-Jewish
And in 1941, during the height of the war, Heisenberg went to visit Bohr in Copenhagen (title of the play).
AND THE INTERESTING THING IS, both of them (years on) could not agree on what happened during this visit
Bohr maintained that Heisenberg was trying to recruit him for the Nazis (how dare he) and Heisenberg sort of danced around and suggested that maybe he was warning Bohr that the Nazis were trying to develop an atom bomb
The play only has three characters: Heisenberg, Bohr, and Margerethe, Bohr's wife, and it's about the three of them arguing and drafting different explanations and ideas about what might have happened during the visit, using their uncertain memories
I really loved the way Frayn uses reoccurring motifs & worked physics into the text
Like, he uses Heisenberg's uncertainty principle (the impossibility of both knowing where an atom is and how fast it is traveling) as a metaphor for the limits of self-knowledge (the impossibility of both knowing why you're doing something and doing it at the same time)
And just like............ the way they constantly summon up new drafts of their 1941 encounter the same way they continually try to approach a better understanding of physics
Like, at one v important point Margerethe speaks up to say, hey, what the fuck! You keep talking about this like glorious partnership of intellectual collaboration but really you always did your best work while you were apart!
Very good........ I would like to see this performed one day
Also I learned about Niels Bohr's instrumental role of the rescue of like 90% of Jewish Danish people during WWII