Scan barcode
melanie_page's review against another edition
2.0
I couldn't keep my eyes from crossing while reading this script, and I didn't finish. I made it just past the first act. A Danish scientist and his wife question why a German scientist shows up to their home in occupied Denmark in 1941. The play starts with all three of them dead, so now they hope they can get everything out in the open. Except they just go over what they remember from that day. All three were present. What is it they do not know? Unless the German scientist never actually said why he came. Going over the day won't change that for the Danish scientist and his wife; we would basically need a confession from the German scientist. Then again, it all feels obvious because readers know what happens: an atomic bomb is built and dropped. The German scientist likely has info about atomic bombs. So what is the mystery? The script is based on historical events: Bohr and Heisenberg actually had a meeting in 1941 in Copenhagen, but no one knows what they discussed.
The script is oddly written: there are no stage directions, so sometimes it seems like the wife is speaking as an aside, and other times it seems like she's speaking an aside and is answered by the German scientist. What is the action in this play? I almost picture the three actors standing in their own spotlights and just talking. I'm not sure how thrilling this would be to watch.
I wonder if the play would have been better as a one-act show with just Heisenberg going over what he was feeling and thinking that day -- and then revealing what he wanted to talk about. Build some tension, you know?
The script is oddly written: there are no stage directions, so sometimes it seems like the wife is speaking as an aside, and other times it seems like she's speaking an aside and is answered by the German scientist. What is the action in this play? I almost picture the three actors standing in their own spotlights and just talking. I'm not sure how thrilling this would be to watch.
I wonder if the play would have been better as a one-act show with just Heisenberg going over what he was feeling and thinking that day -- and then revealing what he wanted to talk about. Build some tension, you know?
piccoline's review against another edition
4.0
Nice weaving of history and uncertainty. I don't love the opening, seems a little too self-consciously "Play!" But once we get into the issues, and the concepts, it starts to roll, and I love how it forces you to engage with the challenges of being a citizen of a nation and a citizen of the world. And what if your scientific knowledge were to suddenly become the key to killing millions of people? What then?
Worth a look.
Worth a look.
avianautumnus's review against another edition
I have a weakness for science-literature crossovers. Clara, you need to read this.
torts's review against another edition
4.0
It's a little science-heavy, and Margrethe came off as a little annoying sometimes, but it gets quite good near the end. I'm not sure if it merits five stars or four. The ending's really good, though. I'm a little put off by the postscript. I started it, but really I think the review should be based on the play itself and not the playwright's reflections on the play. I probably won't even finish the postscript.
oldpondnewfrog's review against another edition
3.0
Love this kind of look into history. The play was good, and an absorbing read, but especially interesting insofar as it opened a window into what really happened with Bohr and Heisenberg, the moral dilemmas of their research, learning about the Hiroshima bomb, their characters. I might look into the Powell book recommended in the "further reading" section.
cha's review against another edition
dark
emotional
mysterious
reflective
tense
fast-paced
4.0
I really think this book did the best it could with the canon material it had. It's essentially a fanfiction in play format, and it's a good one, too. It was also a really fast read, and super digestible. I read this as part of a physics class about the topics discussed, so I don't know how challenging the more scientific material might be for someone who didn't learn the things I did this past semester, but I like to think they really do explain it all in "plain words," as they kept reiterating in the play. It's not something I would've read on my own, but it's not bad at all. (I didn't really read the notes after the play, so I really only consumed the two acts of the play itself; I can't speak on that section of the book.)