Copenhagen has ratings and reviews. But in his Tony Award- winning play Copenhagen, Michael Frayn shows us that these men were passionate. In Michael Frayn’s Copenhagen, a fictional account of an actual event during World War II, two physicists exchange heated words and profound. Now that Niels Bohr’s famous unsent letter to Werner Heisenberg has finally been published—and for the most part only confirmed.

Author: Dall Mazuru
Country: Australia
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Technology
Published (Last): 14 May 2013
Pages: 480
PDF File Size: 2.33 Mb
ePub File Size: 14.81 Mb
ISBN: 553-4-56215-205-2
Downloads: 22632
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Yogar

This blog began in Because the American case is the anomaly, not the German case. First, they proved to be relatively consistent with Heisenberg’s recollections of the meeting [6] given to Jungk in copenhaggen, meaning that the course of the conversation can now be fairly well established.

The best play I’ve seen. Fraayn might have a point there. Of course, there are limits to this sort of attitude. The question of whether Heisenberg was a saboteur or not is not on that level, even if I think the bulk of the historical profession would not agree with Frayn that it is as likely an explanation for the German failure as any other.


When ski-ing, swerve left, right or think about it and die? However, as a work of literature, as something to read and enjoy it is superb! Views Read Edit View history.

Add to that conditions under which the meeting arose. Benedict Cumberbatch, Greta Scacchi and Simon Russell Drayn star in Michael Frayn’s award-winning play about the controversial coppenhagen between physicists Bohr and Heisenberg, part of a joint Radio 3 and Radio 4 series of three Michael Frayn dramas for radio – including new adaptations of his novels, ‘Skios’ and ‘Headlong’.

This principle is applied to nuclear weaponrysuggesting that nations will act differently when they think that an opponent can produce nuclear arms, whether or not the opponent can. The spirits of Werner Heisenberg, Niels Bohr and Bohr’s wife Margrethe, meet after their deaths to attempt to answer the question that Margrethe poses in the first line of the play, “Why did he [Heisenberg] come to Copenhagen?


Copenhagen review – Michael Frayn’s masterwork still blazes with mystery

Damn, you’re still giving me that look. If your dramatised version of a historical event is less interesting, less juicy, than the actual event, then you’ve completely failed in trying to turn it into art.

I didn’t think he’d be able grayn pull it off, but it worked. It opened on Broadway at the Royale Theatre on 11 April and ran for performances. In a March interview [15] Ivan Supekone of Heisenberg’s students and friends, commented that ” Copenhagen is a bad play” and that “Frayn mixed up some things”.

Copenhagen (play) – Wikipedia

View all 8 comments. I’m a danger to mankind; I’m also your guest. I’m not sure you really understood that bit. Bohr was always sceptical about Heisenberg’s matrix algebra, but Heisenberg’s line was that if it made the right predictions then it doesn’t matter that there’s no intuitive interpretation. 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.

But in his Tony Award-winning play Copenhagen, Michael Frayn shows us that these men were passionate, philosophical, and all too human, even though one of the three historical figures in his drama, Werner Heisenberg, was the head of the Nazis’ effort to develop a nuclear weapon.

I do not know if personally I would have enjoyed this as a play.

One is the uncertainty principle, and the other is my mysterious visit to Niels Bohr in Copenhagen in Thanks for telling us about the problem. 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. Jul 21, Bob Nichols rated it liked it.


There are several instances when the two physicists start speaking too scientifically for many people to understand, and one of them will remark that they must revert to plain language, to explain it in a way that Margrethe will understand. I think the main response from historians that you are likely to get is: It had to make a very strong impression on me that at the very outset you stated that you felt certain that the war, if it lasted sufficiently long, would be decided with atomic weapons.

The best thing about this play is the interaction between past, present and future; the way that quantum physics are shown in the lives and motion of the principal players, and the implications of their lives on history and science.

I have no actual proof of this, just my cynicism coming out about how often people use science wrongly in order to feed their human agendas To Margrethe, Heisenberg was always an untrustworthy student, eager to steal from her husband’s knowledge.

Bohr wrote of this:. Just a moment while we sign you in to your Goodreads account. Its pure genius, one of the best plays i have ever seen I saw the play in in a memorable version that was presented to science students at the University of Buenos Aires, which was followed by intense debate.