Page eighty-eight of Michael Frayn’s play, Copenhagen, serves as the climax point of both plot and thematic relevance in the piece. Frayn illustrates the function of the passage by employing a metaphor of the collision of two particles. The passage itself can be divided into three sub-passages.
The first of these sub-passages is referred to as “meeting”. One of the main questions constantly under investigation by the characters of Frayn’s play is, why did Heisenberg come to Copenhagen? “Why did I come to Copenhagen? Yes, why did I come…?” (Frayn 86) In order for this central question to be answered, the characters replay the events of Heisenberg’s visit, recreating the exact event in which Heisenberg reveals his motivation. As Heisenberg and Bohr venture on their walk, the meeting sub-passage begins. “Now there’s no one in the world except Bohr and the invisible other. Who is he, this all-enveloping presence in the darkness?” (88) The author draws an immediate dichotomy by separating the subjects, “he”, and “presence”, with a comma. The comma provides significance by its function as a pausing mechanism. In this way, the subjects are not completely separated, indicating that they retain common characteristics; the comma also details that these subjects are certainly not one and the same. This line mirrors Bohr’s line, “Particles are things, complete in themselves. Waves are disturbances in something else” (69). The passages parallel subjects. “He” is a parallel for the “particle”, “complete in [itself]”, while the “presence in the darkness” clearly represents the “disturbance in something else.” Margrethe’s line, which immediately proceeds, greatly evidences the perceived metaphor, “The flying particle wanders the darkness, no one knows where” (88). The words “darkness” and “no one knows” allude to the uncertainty principle of particles, and the “particle” in this passage more specifically adumbrates Heisenberg’s motivations, goals, and identity, while the “waves” represent the extent of his choices in the “disturbance” of the universe.
The second sub-passage on page eighty-eight is referred to as “the collision”. The precise catalyst of this collision in the text appears as Heisenberg’s question to Bohr, “Does one as a physicist have the moral right to work on the practical exploitation of atomic energy?” (88) Bohr’s line follows, “I stop. He stops…” (88). The ellipsis in this passage is the exact climax of the play. In order to understand why the climax occurs in this location it is essential to first understand the concept of “moment.” The basics of uncertainty apply to a broader spectrum of physical phenomena than particles alone. For example, precisely define a moment in time or a point in space. Both prove impossible tasks due to the fact that as the limit of precision approaches most precise, it becomes increasingly difficult to identify the moment in time or the point in space. Heisenberg echoes this truth, “All we possess is the present, and the present endlessly dissolves into the past” (86). The ellipsis represents an undefined unit of time. It is in this unit of time that Bohr and Heisenberg collide, and the observation that the ellipsis hides information from the audience garners meaning when it is revealed that while the audience can no longer perceive absolute reality, the characters can. “Now at last he knows where he is and what he’s doing” (88). The word “now” expresses the momentous and undefined quality of the event, while the phrases “where he is” and “what he’s doing” serve as allegories to the aforementioned particles and waves respectively. The audience cannot fully grasp what occurs at the exact climax of the play, but Bohr, the first “he”, is notable the only character who does understand.
The final sub-passage of this page is labeled “the dispersal.” Margrethe incisively comments, “And even as the moment of collision begins it’s over” (88). With the collapse of the event comes the collapse of knowledge about that event whether in the form of subjectivity of time, memory, or observer, “And everything about him becomes as uncertain as before” (88). The phrase “uncertain as before” denotes that the moment is only observable as it exists. Finally, Margrethe’s line ties together one of the central truths of Frayn’s piece, “That was the last and greatest demand that Heisenberg made on his friendship with you. To be understood when he couldn’t understand himself. And that was the last and greatest act of friendship for Heisenberg that you performed in return. To leave him misunderstood” (89). The word “understood” carries a great significance with it. To relate, when the “Adam” manifestations: Oedipus, Heisenberg, Vladimir, and Estragon, seek knowledge of the self or anything relating to what governs the self from “God” adumbrations: oracles, Bohr, and those they come into contact with, the “Adam” characters risk losing the self in whole or aspect because of this thirst for knowledge.
No comments:
Post a Comment