Copenhagen Documentary: Character and Structure, Book Review Example

This essay is based on identifying a multi linear themes and exploring the temporal shifts in the narratives. There are two stories that begin in time and then move back and forth until the end. So, the essay focuses on these two stories which caters to the experience of the audience, the growth of character, theme development and the historical connections etc. In these two stories, three characters are described. One is Neil Bohr, second is Heisenberg and third is wife of Neil Bohr i.e. Margaret.

First Story of Arcadia

One story is about Margaret and why we need her. There are two reasons for that. Even though Margaret had no scientific training but Bohr discussed all his work with her. At the start, they agreed to make everything clear to Margaret (Pbs.org). So, our representative here is Margaret. The other reason is that Heisenberg was not liked by Margaret but Neil Bohr adored him. In 1941, she had general suspicion on Heisenberg and she always had a negative image of Heisenberg. After the meeting, she said that whatever anybody say but the meeting was a unfriendly one. Margaret’s character portrayed a negative image and a very hostile view in relation to Heisenberg (Frayn).The behavior of Margaret is such a behavior that all the other people in the globe are trying to explain the reason behind this behavior.

The second story is focused on Heisenberg and Bohr. Heisenberg and Bohr met a sort of a need in one another. Bohr was like a father figure to Heisenberg and was way older than him. Bohr was not only respected by Heisenberg but also lot other young scientists admired him. The relation between Heisenberg and Bohr was one of the science’s classical friendship. Most of the original work done by Bohr was in his young age (Frayn).When Bohr reached his middle age he did some of his original work. But the best work of his life was done in collaboration with the young physicist who worked together with him, his name was Copenhagen.  We can see in the play that Bohr was an expert in challenging people to advance in their thinking, what they were saying, thinking about, Heisenberg’s character was opposite to that of Bohr. Heisenberg was someone who was in need of a role model and a father figure (Frayn).

Personal opinion

In the play, we can see that When Heisenberg reached the house of Neil Bohr, the meeting was an embarrassing one. The reason is that in 1941 meeting, Bohr didn’t want a German visitor. Bohr didn’t want to look to be collaborating. In this time, Heisenberg wanted to say plainly to Bohr something which in the meeting, he wouldn’t have insisted. The play initiates with a very awkward communication between Bohr and Heisenberg. After the conversation, they go out for a walk (Frayn).During this time, something goes bad in the conversation which we didn’t discover what happened in the play. We can see that both of them come back to the house where Heisenberg is leaving.  The thing that went wrong in the conversation, the two characters try to reconstruct it which they both never assert icon. They go through their conversation and draft three times as to what happened. After going through three times, they come upon some sort of reason as to what happened wrong (Frayn). We can see that the play’s structure was the same and is called ‘Noises Off’ (Frayn). It is a farce relating to the theatre where we can see the same actor three times over in the same play.

Second Story: The Periodic Table by Primo Levi

In the start of the story, we can see that the periodic table seems to be the checkboard chart of the elements. To initiate, the chemistry student has to learn this chart as this shows the atomic symbols, numbers and weight of the atoms. In the Primo Levi’s initial stage of the play, we can see that the Period Table is the ‘Mendeleevian system’ is a poetry that is it is a bridge between the worlds of worlds of things. Hence, the Periodic Table shows the unexpected means of figuring out ourselves and the universe.

The Italian chemist and Writer, Mr. Levi distills the meanings of Periodic Table in this play. He says that these terms are metaphorical and must link to the correspondence.  Levi seeks to disparate the worlds of human nature and the physical world. There are 21 pieces in the Periodic Table and in these pieces each element is named after another. So, in the Periodic Table, ‘the rigorous confrontations with Matter-Mother’ vividly shows the types of human. That means that there can be imaginative probing of persona, political and social experience. It also shows the rare findings in such a diverse aims in the combination and the rarer still that finds them so successfully integrated with the contemporary literature work. Yet, it has been crafted beautifully, the most recent shows the original of Mr. Levi’s three volumes of the reflection of autobiography.

Primo Levi is one of the American readers and the writer of the book ‘Survival in Auschwitz’. This book portrays the affirmation of human intelligence, lucid in the face of the barbarism of the Nazi’s and is also one of the distinguished works that truly shows the work of Holocaust literature and has somewhat become a classic.

Work Cited

Frayn, Copenhagen, and Inside Web. ‘Free Documentaries Plus More: Copenhagen (Based On The Play By Michael Frayn)’. Documentaries-plus.blogspot.com. N.p., 2013. Web. 17 Mar. 2015.

Pbs.org,. ‘Copenhagen . Director Howard Davies | PBS’. N.p., 2015. Web. 17 Mar. 2015.