Scan barcode
thovsepian's review against another edition
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 against another edition
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 against another edition
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.
mashedpotato's review against another edition
challenging
dark
Great play to read as a precursor to watching Oppenheimer.
storytimed's review against another edition
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
gnoelproduction's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
informative
mysterious
reflective
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
paulataua's review against another edition
4.0
I have been listening to a few old plays this weekend and this one really touched me. It’s the story of German physicist Werner Heisenberg’s visit to Danish physicist Niels Bohr in Copenhagen in 1941. The two had worked on quantum mechanics and revolutionized atomic physics in the past, but now the world had changed and the two men were on opposite sides in a world war and Denmark was under German occupation. The story focuses on physics and the atomic bomb, but most of all on relationships and ethics. Two hours well spent.
katholtz's review against another edition
3.0
3.5
school read book
good writing + plot, not interested in content
school read book
good writing + plot, not interested in content
britt_muse's review against another edition
2.0
I really wanted to like this, but it just didn't work for me. Plays usually cause me a bit of trouble anyways, but the lack of stage directions in this script made it all the more difficult to follow along and picture what was happening.
I'm still very interested in the story as a whole though, so I might give it another try after finding a recorded performance.
I'm still very interested in the story as a whole though, so I might give it another try after finding a recorded performance.