Copenhagen Blog – 23rd November 2010
It’s a funny thing, history. It can precisely inform and skilfully direct your every action, if you let it. Take today for instance. Forty-seven years ago, whilst the world mourned the loss of a leading light of a brave new age[1], a small, low budget children’s programme was broadcast. The show was in the classic studio style; a modest cast, a propensity to let the actors talk through a scene before cutting, and the drama propelled by a mystery of a simple question. And then the science (albeit science fiction) kicked in and a whole new world of discovery and adventure opened up. And it hasn’t (really) stopped blossoming ever since.
Doctor Who has become so ingrained in the collective British psyche that it’s increasingly difficult to find anyone who doesn’t recognise a Dalek, or observe the far rarer Police Call Box dotted about the country (in all their various forms) without thinking “Is it really bigger on the inside?”[2]
But what, I hear you cry, does any of this have to do with Copenhagen? Aside from my obsession with them (one of about seven years, the other for over twenty-nine years), both take the audience into a small room of a question and blow it apart, demonstrating a whole new universe. By the same medium as Doctor Who, I was first made aware of Frayn’s Copenhagen through television. In 2003 an adaptation of the play was on BBC Four, staring Daniel Craig, Stephen Rea and Francesca Annis[3]. Being the geek that I am, the inclusion of physics in a theatrical presentation – physics I had loved since my wonderful A-Level teacher, Mr. John Macrae, had shown me the beauty in its exactness and its playfulness in the ambiguities[4] - thrilled me on so many levels. Here was a play with proper grown up characters – historical characters, even – facing tough ethical and moral problems, and attempting to work a path through them with mathematics and science.
See, educational and entertaining!
Okay, don’t run away. Those last two sentences may have seemed a bit scary, but there is so much more to Copenhagen than physics and number crunching. I won’t lie and say it’s an easy play to watch: it’s not a farce or musical (both of which can be brilliant) that can wash over you as pure entertainment. For this show, as the audience, you need to be involved and engaged with the text to get the finer details. And that’s part of the reason behind these regular missives. With this blog, I hope to show some of the ideas that will influence the direction the Guild’s presentation of Frayn’s work; to help dispel the fog of fear about the physics of the piece; and maybe even learn a bit about why it is such a successful and topical show whenever it is performed[5]. I look forward to discovering this new universe with you.
[1] On 22nd December, 1963 President John F. Kennedy, the 35th President of the United States, was assassinated as his cavalcade progressed through the Dealey Plaza, in Dallas, Texas. There is a good selection of articles from the Times here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/system/topicRoot/Assassination_of_John_F__Kenned/
[2] I could bore you all silly with my love, obsession and devotion to this little British science fiction show, but I won’t. At least not here. Try these sites if you too share a love of all things Timey-whimey:
[3] Available intermittently through Amazon, but save your cash for the full, unabridged version will be performed live in your own, your very own, Guild Theatre in May 2011. Honest. Still, the PBS website is quite good http://www.pbs.org/hollywoodpresents/copenhagen/
[4] He’s already talking in paradox, I hear you mumble (who knew this blog was two way!). But no, as Einstein first explained, all measurements are relative to the measurer, and nothing can be completely precise in its measurement: it’s all to do with the element of error. Is a 10% margin of error acceptable? When measuring the space between planets, probably yes; when working on quantities of anaesthetic, not so much. And so we come to our first bit of show related knowledge. When we measure something, its movement, its position, its speed, we cannot know everything. We have to choose what we are looking for. Here, these guys explain it far better: http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A408638
[5] For a potted history of the show, see the ever reliable (!) Wikipedia entry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_%28play%29
