Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.

Start by marking “Copenhagen” as Want to Read:

Other editions

Enlarge cover

Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Open Preview

Copenhagen

Michael Frayn

4.01 · Rating details · 4,536 ratings · 307 reviews

For most people, the principles of nuclear physics are not only incomprehensible but inhuman. 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. But in his Tony Award-winning play Copenhagen, Michael Frayn shows us that these men were passionate, p ...more

Get A Copy

Paperback, 132 pages

Published August 8th 2000 by Anchor Books (first published 1998)

More Details... Edit Details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about Copenhagen, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about Copenhagen

Lists with This Book

The Importance of Being Earnest by Oscar Wilde

Best Plays Ever

787 books — 1,173 voters

The House on the Strand by Daphne du Maurier

Moderately Underrated Books (1,000 - 10,000 ratings)

1,986 books — 574 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

Showing 1-30

Average rating 4.01 ·

Rating details

· 4,536 ratings · 307 reviews

More filters

Sort order

Start your review of Copenhagen

Jun 18, 2019 BlackOxford rated it it was amazing

Shelves: british, sociology, science, philosophy-theology

Quantum Ethics

Intentions maketh the man - in love, life, and war. Well perhaps not. Who knows anyone’s genuine motives, especially one’s own. Our reasons for acting the way we do involve telling a story. Stories justify intentions as rational, beneficial, necessary, or just plain good. But whose story? All stories are arbitrary, or at least incomplete. And they’re all told after the fact. Stories require a point of view which can only be adopted after the consequences of action have emerged. So Quantum Ethics

Intentions maketh the man - in love, life, and war. Well perhaps not. Who knows anyone’s genuine motives, especially one’s own. Our reasons for acting the way we do involve telling a story. Stories justify intentions as rational, beneficial, necessary, or just plain good. But whose story? All stories are arbitrary, or at least incomplete. And they’re all told after the fact. Stories require a point of view which can only be adopted after the consequences of action have emerged. So how compelling are these stories about intentions?

Sometimes, as in Quantum Physics, different, fundamentally incompatible, stories appear necessary to account for what happens - Wave vs. Particle stories for example. Quantum physics raises the question of what is real in the physical world. Analogously, Copenhagen, raises the same issue of reality in the moral world. Frayn uses multiple fictional dialogues between Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg in 1941, with Bohr’s wife in a role of moderator, as a way to investigate this reality.

Formerly intimate friends, Bohr and Heisenberg found themselves mortal enemies after Germany invaded Denmark in 1940. Both had been instrumental in the discovery of the possibility of nuclear fission, and therefore the the atomic bomb. The purpose of their meeting, initiated by Heisenberg, has always been somewhat mysterious. Frayn uses the confusions of memory and possible misinterpretations of both men to invent his own story about the meeting.

Scientists like Bohr and Heisenberg tend to tell their stories about the physical world in multiple drafts that are then critiqued by their colleagues. So Frayn has them do this dramatically about their own intentions. The first draft is purely professional, all about scientific necessity and the analytic challenges of quantum theory. Intellectual importance, the interests of science, the dignity of humankind are the sorts of motives at hand. Pragmatics, in other words - the theory was useful; it worked. But do these motives work to explain the phenomena of their own behaviour?

The second draft opens the possibility of personal ambition. This version involves a considerable degree of self-rationalisation and putting the best possible gloss on matters of faded memory. Personal reputation, fears, jealousies, and antipathies emerge as things far more important than science or the advance of knowledge. But who can be sure of the combined effects of these hidden emotions. Many of these emotions may be unconsciously harboured and never reach the level of articulate thought. A principle of moral uncertainty emerges: Can we be aware of these motives and act on them at the same time?

The third draft includes the ‘bigger picture’, like involvement in non-scientific ethics - other things that were done, or prevented from being done during the war, that point to justification of one’s actions. Influence rather than direct undertaking is what’s relevant here. Therefore actions are more difficult to pin down as the origin of a chain of events, a chain reaction, indicating an overall programme. Intention becomes murky; and its justification even murkier. Can moral reality be described as a sort of quantum entanglement among events or is it a profoundly artificial abstraction of a sociological system?

It is clear that Copenhagen highlights the issue of scientific ethics. What isn’t clear is what contribution it makes to either the debate or the moral thinking of individual scientists. Heisenberg worked to help a homicidal maniac. Bohr worked to stop that maniac and participated in killing several hundred thousand Japanese as a result. Both men enabled a global reign of terror that persists. Is there an ethic in this story which makes sense?

So, uncertainty rules everywhere. However it is Margarethe, Bohr’s wife, who sees through the male logic and understands the central moral import of the situation. “If it’s Heisenberg at the centre of the universe,” she says, “then the one bit of the universe that he can’t see is Heisenberg.” Ethics come from elsewhere; we can’t trust ourselves with the burden. Who else to trust, therefore, is the critical question. ...more

flag 72 likes · Like · see review

Jun 26, 2015 Manuel Antão rated it really liked it

Shelves: 2015

If you're into stuff like this, you can read the full review.

Theatre and Physics: "Copenhagen" by Michael Frayn

Why do I go to the theatre? The question bears the same gravitas as the one regarding books. Much like books, the theatre allows me to experience something different. Not like books or movies though, the theatre often feels more real since I share the same space as the actors. While books can help me enter the world of the story, and temporarily leave my own life, being a theatre buff c ...more

flag 39 likes · Like · see review

May 10, 2011 Manny rated it really liked it

Shelves: story-review, george-and-his-girlfriend, science, history-and-biography

- So what did you think?

- I liked it! A lot of really interesting historical stuff about the Bohr/Heisenberg/Schrödinger triangle. And I just had no idea about Heisenberg's involvement in the Nazi nuclear project. Fascinating. Can't imagine how I missed reading about that earlier.

- Ah, come on George, surely you got more out of it than that?

- Well, okay, okay, it was technically pretty impressive too. The way he uses quantum mechanics as a sustained metaphor throughout. I didn't think he'd be a ...more

flag 36 likes · Like · see review

Jan 15, 2013 Bettie rated it really liked it

Recommended to Bettie by: Laura

Shelves: fradio, historical-fiction, radio-3, summer-2015, re-visit-2015, sciences, winter-20122013, play-dramatisation, published-1998

(view spoiler)

Revisit 2015 comes from watching 'Saboteurs 2015', which is a modern telling of the Telemark/heavy water nail-biting incident.

This TV film of Frayn's play stars Daniel Craig, Francesca Anis, Stephen Rea, superbly done, and fully recommended.

["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]> ...more

flag 20 likes · Like · see review

Jun 19, 2010 Michael rated it it was amazing

Shelves: aa-europelit, all-five-star, read-twice-or-more, pomo, xshort-less-200, aaa-favoritefiction, aa-englandlit, plays, zz1998, frayn-michael

201209 third reading: my father (physical chemist) died 2 March and since then i keep discovering things i would talk to him about, this play is an example. i read it yet again, want to see production sometime, and remember how generally dismissive he usually was about artistic 'takes' on complex physics/chemistry etc though i do not know if i talked to him about this play. his Alzheimer's is fairly degenerate by the time i read it and intellectual abstractions are becoming lost by then. and on 201209 third reading: my father (physical chemist) died 2 March and since then i keep discovering things i would talk to him about, this play is an example. i read it yet again, want to see production sometime, and remember how generally dismissive he usually was about artistic 'takes' on complex physics/chemistry etc though i do not know if i talked to him about this play. his Alzheimer's is fairly degenerate by the time i read it and intellectual abstractions are becoming lost by then. and on the other, my knowledge even of undergrad chemistry is nowhere. on the other other, i have always been curious about, willing to understand, reading some science, listening to some sources, but the key is always to me how the project of science is honourable and durable and never as contingent as my arts...

or so i tell myself. because, of course, science is essentially a human project, with all the usual human qualities and failings, but for me there is always something beautiful that pure ideas- theoretical, disinterested, abstract- can be so fascinating for all one's life. my father always mentioned that the true great innovations leading to Nobels etc came to younger physicists, and he felt he is just never up to that, never as dedicated, so i think of him, when pressed on his career, suggesting i think i proved some things...' which may be all enough any scientist can reasonably ask for...

in this play, on the other, the characters investigated are famous and revered physicists, and maybe this is all that artists can do to represent science- as no less than magic, as personalities rather than ideas, as interpersonal conflicts, even with buried generational conflicts between the protagonists (the wife is sort of a chorus)... but reading the notes at the end of the play, extensive, intriguing: does make me wonder more and more how the author is able to even fashion this concise, fascinating, beautiful play...

240318: much later addition: i read this again with somewhat more educated stance, at least in philosophy, and i am again so impressed. this is a memory play, the characters heisenberg, bohr, bohr's wife margarethe, as if recounting this true incident as ghosts, forever trying to understand the other, in thoughts, in acts, but best resolved in metaphoric terms of the 'copenhagen interpretation' of quantum physics and the uncertainty principle and relativity... i have grown up and seen my scientist father and colleagues endeavour to communicate, share, dispute, abstruse physics and can easily imagine these characters doing exactly as they are portrayed. for me this play ranks with 'waiting for godot'...

??? 2000s. first review: now i want to see it produced: tv movie dvd where are you...

second review: i read a critical complaint that the character of heisenberg, musing on the horrors of war inflicted on germany, was rationally convincing himself that this was reason enough to help the nazis and build an atom bomb- and the reviewer was outraged this was not balanced by the horrors the nazis were responsible for, and she castigated the writer frayn for this! but i would argue, this would have been entirely consistent for heisenberg, this could have been his thoughts, which are not those of the writer. this suggests how real the characters become in this excellent play... ...more

flag 13 likes · Like · see review

Oct 22, 2008 Jenny (Reading Envy) rated it liked it

Shelves: read08

I wish this had come with stage directions, because it was difficult to understand some of the dialogue without knowing how they were interacting (or not) on stage. Interesting subject, first act was much better than the second, I thought the author was trying too hard to make quantum mechanics match the possibilities of what happened at Bohr's home. ...more

flag 13 likes · Like · see review

Oct 29, 2017 Laura L. Van Dam rated it it was amazing

Shelves: science, theatre, history-and-philosophy-of-science

I saw the play in 2003 in a memorable version that was presented to science students at the University of Buenos Aires, which was followed by intense debate. Also, I´ve watched the play/movie version with Stephen Rea and Daniel Craig several times since i use the movie for teaching. I read the play this week to extract quotes for further work with my students. It´s pure genius, one of the best plays i have ever seen

flag 9 likes · Like · see review

Sep 19, 2009 notgettingenough rated it it was amazing

Shelves: modern-lit

What a play. As I watched it I knew I had to see it again but wouldn't be able to as the season was booked out. As it was, the night we went our seats were on the stage. A peculiar experience.

Still, it meant I bought the book the next day. Gleefully grabbed by one of the people I went with before I could blink, so I hope that gives you an idea of how dense and yet magnetic this play is.

...more

flag 8 likes · Like · see review

Aug 18, 2012 Milica Chotra rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

I thoroughly enjoyed this book. If you're interested in history of science and WW2, especially physics and atomic bomb, I can't recommend it highly enough. Of course, this is a work of fiction and Frayn knows nothing about quantum mechanics, but still... it's interesting, informative and cleverly written.
_________________________________

Why did Heisenberg go to Copenhagen in 1941?

The Idea. "The idea for Copenhagen came to me out of my interest in philosophy. It was when I read a remarkable book ...more

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Nov 01, 2018 Aj Sterkel rated it did not like it

Shelves: play

Likes: I don’t read many stage plays because watching them is always more fun than reading them, but I thought I’d give Copenhagen a shot. It has amazing reviews and has been nominated for many, many awards. What could go wrong?

I enjoyed the historical aspect of the play. It’s based on a real meeting that occurred in 1941 between physicists Werner Heisenberg and Niels Bohr. They were both working on secret government weapons projects, and they found themselves working for opposite alliances duri ...more

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Oct 29, 2016 Sookie rated it really liked it

Shelves: plays

Copenhagen explores the "secret" meeting that took place between Heisenberg and Neils Bohr, two Nobel laureates, discussing atom bombs. This incident took place in 1941 and history asserts this specific meeting. Frayn provides a fictional account of this meeting.

Heisenberg, once Bohr's protege, remains with Germany during World War II. This puts him and Bohr on the opposite sides of the war. With scientific minds scattered across Europe and the United States, scientific and technological progres ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Nov 05, 2016 Uttara Srinivasan rated it really liked it

Almost 4.5 stars

At one point in the play Bohr says to Heisenberg- and I paraphrase - don't assume that because my country is a smaller piece of land compared to yours, that i don't feel the same sense of patriotism to it that you do. To this Heisenberg replies later in the same conversation - don't assume my need to defend my country is any weaker just because I know it is in the wrong.

This is the essence of the conflict that two eminent scientists with giant leap contributions to modern physic ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Jan 13, 2013 Laura rated it really liked it

Recommends it for: Bettie, Carey

Shelves: non-fiction, audio-books, read-2013, physics-history-science

Drama on 3:
Benedict Cumberbatch, Greta Scacchi and Simon Russell Beale star in Michael Frayn's award-winning play about the controversial 1941 meeting 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'.

Being a physicist myself, this dialog between Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg was widely discussed during my graduation studies.

For further information, please ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Feb 18, 2017 Gumble's Yard rated it really liked it

Shelves: 2010

Excellent and thought provoking play about the meeting between Bohr and Heisenberg during the war – the slightly pretentious commentary doesn’t add much but does place the play in the context of the themes Frayn pursues in his wider work especially about the impossibility of understanding one’s own motivations let alone another’s and how a novel rather than play can imply greater comprehension than possible; and while Frayn’s own postscript gives too much of the latest analysis by historians of ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Jun 02, 2019 Jonfaith rated it really liked it

Shelves: the_plays_the_thing

You live and breathe paradox and contradiction, but you can no more see the beauty of them than the fish can see the beauty of the water

It was provocative to read this when midway through S3 of True Detective. Both entities plumb the nebulous foundation of memory. Both resound with a perhaps amateur understanding of the Uncertainty Principle. (Frayn explores the translation of term in his lengthy afterward) Alas, Copenhagen features physicists Bohr and Heisenberg and the artistry of this represe ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Dec 24, 2012 Mitchell Hahn-Branson rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

In 1941, German physicist Werner Heisenberg made a clandestine trip to have dinner with his friend, Danish physicist Niels Bohr, and his wife, Margrethe. They were two of the absolute best scientists in their field—this was the same Heisenberg who had formulated the Uncertainty Principle—and they had challenged each other to do some of their very best work. But Heisenberg was a patriotic German who was now working, probably with some reluctance, under the Nazis; Bohr, who was half-Jewish, would In 1941, German physicist Werner Heisenberg made a clandestine trip to have dinner with his friend, Danish physicist Niels Bohr, and his wife, Margrethe. They were two of the absolute best scientists in their field—this was the same Heisenberg who had formulated the Uncertainty Principle—and they had challenged each other to do some of their very best work. But Heisenberg was a patriotic German who was now working, probably with some reluctance, under the Nazis; Bohr, who was half-Jewish, would soon be forced to flee Denmark. After dinner, the two of them went for a walk and had a conversation about the point of Heisenberg's visit. At the end of that conversation, their friendship was over and Heisenberg returned to Germany.

These are the agreed-upon facts of that evening, but no one can seem to agree on exactly what was said during that conversation: not the two scientists themselves in the aftermath of World War II, and certainly not the historians who have tried to piece it together since then. There's some consensus that one of the main topics must have been nuclear research and the question of whether Germany or the Allies had the resources or knowledge to develop nuclear weapons, but even that is hazy if you just look at the strict historical record. 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.

Starting with several conflicting (but sometimes co-existent) historical accounts, Frayn creates fictionalized versions of these three figures and sets them talking. They talk about the exhilaration of being on the cutting edge of physics in the 1920s, 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. The story largely belongs to Heisenberg, who was almost undoubtedly smart enough to solve the same equations that allowed his counterparts in Los Alamos to create a bomb. Did he consciously prevent the initiation of a Nazi nuclear program? Or was he simply unable to do the right calculations in time, despite his genius? 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. ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Sep 04, 2013 Nicki rated it liked it

Shelves: tony

There are plenty of living room dramas in the world, so I certainly can't begrudge this play being something entirely different / but that also doesn't change the fact that 70% of this play felt like attending a quantum mechanics lecture. I couldn't help but picture Frayn poring over physics books and quantum theory papers, which is not something I really want to imagine when I'm reading/viewing a play. I actually actively hate when I can see a playwright in the writing of play, however unfair t ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Feb 05, 2011 Connie Kuntz rated it it was amazing

For Valentine's Day, Jesse gave me an uninterrupted hour to read Copenhagen and write the review. I'm running out of time, so this will be quick, which, coincidentally, is one of the major themes of the play. Anyway, here goes:

Copenhagen is a delightful play about physics. It is fun to think about and gratifying to imagine. I'm confident it would be an honor to stage this play and I am confident I would be thrilled to serve as the dramaturg on such a production. All that said, I (for once) have ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Jul 28, 2017 Jill rated it really liked it · review of another edition

An impressively compact play that details a whole bunch of things, including:
- a strange meeting between Niels Bohr & Werner Heisenberg in 1941
- the development of quantum physics leading up to World War II
- the atomic bomb projects, or lack thereof, in the Allies vs. Germany
- Heisenberg's uncertainty principle & its relationship to his personal life
- the fallibility of memory
- the limits of interpretation
- the darkness of human psychology; the defense mechanisms we put in place
- questions of mo ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Sep 11, 2016 Paul Ataua rated it really liked it

I have been listening to 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 et ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Jun 15, 2020 Gabrielle Grosbety rated it really liked it

Shelves: fiction

The mentalities of the characters in Copenhagen are based on the idea of the nuclear family, the importance of interpersonal relationships, and space of the home as a safe, secure sphere to interact within. This longing for security becomes contradictory to the underlying, inevitable uncertainty society impresses upon individuals in Copenhagen, which comes to exist at the core of everything Copenhagen’s characters do, manifesting itself in their intentions, morals, and loyalties, and The mentalities of the characters in Copenhagen are based on the idea of the nuclear family, the importance of interpersonal relationships, and space of the home as a safe, secure sphere to interact within. This longing for security becomes contradictory to the underlying, inevitable uncertainty society impresses upon individuals in Copenhagen, which comes to exist at the core of everything Copenhagen’s characters do, manifesting itself in their intentions, morals, and loyalties, and being most authentically explained through Werner Heisenberg and Niels Bohr’s scientific principles of uncertainty and complementarity, respectively.

How individuals reacted to coming out of conflict appear in this insecure, uncertain world of Copenhagen and are examined from the afterlife in the relationship dynamics between Danish physicist Niels Bohr, Margrethe, and German theoretical physicist Werner Heisenberg, during and post-WWII, and are modeled cleverly on the structure of an atom, with each character an electron orbiting around a nucleus of uncertainty, and constantly reorganizing depending on circumstance.

Security and relationships are tenuous and complex in wartime and it becomes difficult to delineate between what people say, mean, do, and actually feel, as well as then how to process and remember interactions, which becomes the predominant crisis for each of the characters in Copenhagen.

Copenhagen is ultimately a memory play, which draws upon Heisenberg, Bohr, and Margrethe’s memory to come up with why Heisenberg, as a German, came to visit Bohr, a half-Jewish citizen living in occupied Denmark, in Copenhagen in 1941. Throughout Copenhagen, the unpredictability and unfathomability of our humanness is explained metaphorically through the aforementioned scientific phenomena of Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle and Bohr’s complementarity principle.

Memory is fundamentally flawed and subjective as each time we go to access a stored memory it becomes more and more corrupted from how the original moment in time happened and that only is exacerbated by the trauma and multi-layered motives and morality of war. That's what makes memory so fascinating to work with in this context as we, as readers, can never truly know anything, which simultaneously unhinges and terrifies us and betrays our need for the comfort of certainty.

There is a fundamental uncertainty that characterizes life, especially during and after WWII and the Cold War, that cannot ever be redressed by family life or material ideals since it is a quality that innately exists within us and society. Society is only a malleable, adaptable product of how humans of that time period have decided to structure their reality, but the fact that uncertainty and insecurity remain inevitable parts of human existence and life only can lead us to accepting that we will never completely know ourselves or the people and world around us and that can be the only certainty and this play really caused me to ponder all of these questions, but there are moments where it stalls a bit and loses momentum, hence the four stars. Other than that it is an interesting, multi-layered read with many thought-provoking moments to consider! ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

May 11, 2011 Cassandra Kay Silva rated it it was amazing

Shelves: theatre, science

Heisenbergs line sums this the essence of the work up brilliantly:

Complementarity, once again. I'm your enemy; I'm also your friend. I'm a danger to mankind; I'm also your guest. I'm a particle; I'm also a wave. We have one set of obligations to the world in general, and we have other sets, never to be reconciled to our fellow countrymen... All we can do is to look afterwards, and see what happened.

This is I feel the premise and emotion garnered from this work. I do not know if personally I wou ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Jan 30, 2010 R rated it really liked it

Shelves: fiction, stage-and-screen, rpf

I'm kind of fascinated by the history of science, in particular by the lives of the various actors involved. You know, those whose significance in the grand scheme of things (as far as most are concerned) is exclusively defined by the work they have done. They were brilliant minds, lofty and untouchable to the likes of me. But above all they were human, with all the requisite failings and ambiguities, and when considered as such they become so much more fascinating -- which is why I picked up Co ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Nov 27, 2018 John A Raju rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: memoirs-biographies-autobiographies

A brilliant five star read that I happened to stumble upon. I hadn't known that there was a Neils Bohr- Heisenberg meeting in Copenhagen in 1942, the minutiae of which is still under speculation. The two had a father-son relationship before German tanks took over Bohrs' Danish towns. Despite the exile of several scientists from Germany (Einstein, Pauli, Wolfgang), Heisenberg stays on and leads the German science program. This book is in fact a speculative play where the ghosts of Heisenberg, Boh ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Aug 16, 2011 Jason Furman rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: fiction, play

I didn't love this as much as I wanted to. This play centers around two meetings between Bohr and Heisenberg in Copenhagen. The first in 1941, during the war, where the play conveys the 'uncertainty' (get it...) about what Heisenberg's intentions were, what happened at ...the meeting -- was Heisenberg warning Bohr about the German bomb project, deliberately sabotaging it, seeking help on it, looking for someone to spy on the Americans, etc. The second is in 1947 in which they try, unsuccessfully ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

May 02, 2011 pax rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: own-english, modern, favs-and-recs, plays, meta, lit-uk-ireland, 2011, elinas-projects, seen-on-stage

I'll come back and write a proper review for the book once I manage to disentangle my thoughts on it. For the moment the only coherent thing I can say is: read it! The play and then - and this is an imperative to really "get" it - the two postscripts. Just read it.

[eda Oct 2015:] And now that I have finally seen it on stage I can only repeat what I said before: read it. ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Dec 22, 2013 Nooilforpacifists rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: music-art-entertainment, math-science

The best play I've seen. After hearing the reviews from England, was fortunate enough to catch it at Broadway about a month after it first opened. And the screenplay includes an excellent 40-page non-fiction history of quantum mechanics and Heisenberg. ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Jul 31, 2010 Aaron rated it it was ok

For a Tony Award winning work (Best Play, 2000) Copenhagen didn't really impress me. The story seemed interesting enough; there isn't much action, which is ok for a play, and the stakes are rather high. I was distracted early on, however, by the encumbering use of breaking the 4th wall. This is a useful device, but in the beginning of the play the action seemingly flits back and forth without warning. Those who regularly read plays would be easily confused by this random shifting, to say nothing ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Oct 18, 2010 Natalie rated it really liked it

Shelves: plays, have-to-think-books, historical

I really enjoyed this book. It's a play that is based on an event that occured in Copenhagen in 1941. It was a meeting between physicists Bohr and Heisenberg. Nobody knows exactly what was said or what transpired in that meeting. Bohr stormed away from whatever Heisenberg was trying to tell him and nobody knows exactly what Heisenberg was trying to say, or what Bohr thought he was saying.

Heisenberg insisted that he was telling Bohr that he had moral objections to building a bomb for Germany and ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Feb 21, 2016 Philippe rated it liked it

Shelves: history, biography, innovation, militaria, plays

I snapped up this celebrated play by Michael Frayn to relax from the more strenuous books I'm working through. His A Landing on the Sun was one of the highlights of past reading year. Copenhagen zooms in on the mysterious wartime encounter between nuclear physicist Werner Heisenberg and his former colleague and mentor Niels Bohr. About the motives behind Heisenberg's decision to travel to Denmark there remains a lot of speculation. Frayn brings the event tentatively into relief as one of those k ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Recommend It | Stats | Recent Status Updates

Readers also enjoyed

See similar books…

Genres

Plays

340 users

Drama

123 users

Science

86 users

History

49 users

Plays > Theatre

39 users

Literature

24 users

Historical

20 users

Science > Physics

19 users

Philosophy

17 users

War

13 users

See top shelves…

About Michael Frayn

Michael Frayn

191 followers

Michael Frayn is an English playwright and novelist. He is best known as the author of the farce Noises Off and the dramas Copenhagen and Democracy. His novels, such as Towards the End of the Morning, Headlong and Spies, have also been critical and commercial successes, making him one of the handful of writers in the English language to succeed in both drama and prose fiction. His works often rais ...more