|
COPENHAGEN, ACTOR'S SUMMIT,
NEIL THACKABERRY, Director, Scene Design; Maryjo Alexander Costumes ...even
in the second week of January, it's a snap to predict that it will be one of the
year's best.
I remember thinking
to myself as I walked up the aisle after seeing this one on Broadway with my son,
"Wow, what a monster that one would be to memorize...but what a great play!"
My son Jamin, then a newly minted high school graduate, had said to me as we rose
to leave the theatre, "That's the sort of play, I'd like to do someday."
Little did I suspect then that the opportunity to play Heisenberg would present
itself barely four years later. And what a joy to get to play a serious part wtih
not a hint of the clown I am so often called on to display these days. Neil
(surely one of the brainiest and gifted actor/directors on the planet) chose to
stage this one in the round and devised a set that strongly suggested the structure
of an atom and every so subtly managed to create blocking that mimicked the movement
of sub-atomic particles, a touch that was probably lost on the vast majority of
the audience, but which tickled my own esoteric leanings. Heisenberg
proved to be an emotional and challenging role on many grounds. I remember that
on Broadway Philip Bosco had so dominated the proceedings that I
had regarded the piece as being Bohr's, but as we worked on the piece, I came
to realize the real ethical conundrum was Heisenberg's. The remarkable speech
recounting the desstruction of Dresden was intensely affecting on a human level.
One came to realize what his (apparent) foot-dragging has cost him. It was in
that place in the season where the company does one for themselves and turned
into the surpise hit, drawing packed houses including lots of scientists and students
who would never have considered setting foot in a theatre for a different play.
The critical reception was enthusiastic: REVIEWS: Actors
meet challenges of complex 'Copenhagen' 01/14/04, Linda Eisenstein, Special
to The Plain Dealer On a bare stage, two men and a woman warily circle each
other and occasionally collide like atomic particles. Michael Frayn's remarkable
drama "Copenhagen" is a bracing exploration of history, physics, ethics,
politics, friendship and the elusive meaning of memory.
| As Heisenberg, Wayne Turney
gives a prodigious performance. Hands nervously wringing behind his back, teasing
names from his memory, mind racing, Turney paints a portrait of a brilliant, conflicted
man with the desperate need to be understood. |
It's a formidable play: complex, deep, with a torrent
of difficult material to be mastered. So it's a pleasure to report that Actors'
Summit is entirely up to the challenge. The theater's excellent production, with
fine direction and memorable performances, is of such a caliber that even in the
second week of January, it's a snap to predict that it will be one of the year's
best. "Copenhagen" explores an enigmatic meeting that took
place between two theoretical physicists on opposite sides of World War II. In
1941, Werner Heisenberg returns to the Danish home of his former teacher and mentor,
Niels Bohr. It's a highly charged visit. Denmark has been occupied by the Nazis,
Bohr is half-Jewish, Heisenberg is working for the Germans, and both men are being
watched. "I carry around my surveillance like an infectious disease,"
Heisenberg says. After some hot sparring that leads to a nostalgic thaw,
their meeting suddenly turns icy cold, and ends abruptly. For Heisenberg is now
the head of Germany's atomic project, and has asked his mentor two thorny questions:
What are the moral implications of a scientist working on weapons of mass destruction?
And do you love your country less when it is wrong? Frayn adds Bohr's
wife, Margrethe, to the mix. She's part narrator/observer, part sounding board
- the scientists must express themselves so as to be understandable to her (and
us). He also sets his play in a chilly afterlife, where the trio can replay the
meeting, trying to parse all its meanings. As Heisenberg, Wayne Turney gives
a prodigious performance. Hands nervously wringing behind his back, teasing names
from his memory, mind racing, Turney paints a portrait of a brilliant, conflicted
man with the desperate need to be understood. Lucy Bredeson-Smith is
a superb Margrethe. Angular and wary, sharp-eyed and sharp-tongued, she conveys
a stillness that adds emotional weight and counterbalance to the colliding orbits
of the more openly volatile men. Neil Thackaberry gives Bohr a gruff
heartiness. He makes you see both the formidable mind and the underlying generosity.
His performance is rock-solid, but it's not as deeply nuanced. That may be because
he truly excels in his second role: as "Copenhagen's" director.
It's a challenging evening, but ultimately thrilling. And the questions it
raises reverberate for days afterwards. If you cherish theater that makes you
think as well as feel, don't miss it. Eisenstein is a playwright in
Cleveland. To reach Linda Eisenstein: entertainment@plaind.com
FASCINATING, MUST SEE COPENHAGEN
AT ACTORS SUMMIT Roy
Berko (Member, American Theatre Critics Association) --THE TIMES NEWSPAPERS-- Lorain
County Times--Westlaker Times--Lakewood News Times--Olmsted-Fairview Times
Why didnt Hitlers Germany develop an atomic bomb and thus get
the means to not only win the Second World War, but control the world? That question
has plagued many intellects. If Michael Frayn, the author of the much acclaimed
and Tony Award winning play COPENHAGEN is correct, the answer lies
on two planes. First, Hitlers maniacal hatred of the Jews caused the likes
of Einstein and Oppenheimer, the cream of German physicists, to flee the country.
In addition, a most significant question,the clue to atomic energy, was never
asked nor answered by Werner Heisenberg, Germanys wartime head of its
nuclear program. | This
production is not a should see, it is a MUST see! | COPENHAGEN,
which came to the stage in 1998, is about the 1941 meeting between Heisenberg
and his Danish counterpart Niels Bohr. The probing questions of that meeting are,
Why did it happen? and What really took place? The history
of the world may well have been decided at that meeting. Frayns play has
given fuel to further fire answers to those questions and put to rest the issue
of Nazi Germanys nuclear failure. A lecture delivered by Ian Johnston
of Malaspina University-College, Nanaimo, BC, Canada, in March 2001, illuminates
the debate. He stated, The first (and most obvious) interpretative issue
the play raisesthe relationship between the historical record and a fictional
interpretation of historical events based upon a judicious selection of material
from that record, some imaginative additions, and a creative patterning of the
combination [becomes] what adds up to some significant totality as theatre. He
further states, Frayn's work cannot contain or incorporate all the historical
material relevant to the events, as well as the various ways this material has
been read. His task as an artist is to offer some imaginatively coherent vision
of the experience he is addressing. And that task necessarily requires him to
select, omit, and invent. From the standpoint of the theatre-goer,
Frayn accomplishes his task well. Even though the play is extremely long,
and could have been tightened up to make it more palatable to the average attender,
it holds ones attention throughout. Reviews of the script and its
British and American premieres were almost all enthusiastic. As one reviewer
stated, "An evening with Michael Frayn's dazzling new drama will be among
the most exhilarating, challenging and involving two and a half hours you
ever spend in a theater. And you don't need an advanced degree to understand the
profound questions it raises about motive, morality and the betrayal of memory. It
is exciting that the plays local premiere production, on stage at Actors
Summit, is presented at the same lofty heights as the original productions.
Neil Thackaberrys directing is exacting. The trio of actors are impeccable
in their character developments, and the setting created by having the audience
surround the stage results in an intimacy that makes the viewer part of the action.
Wayne Turney is on a theatrical roll. He was recently superb in HAMLET
and TARTUFFE at Great Lakes Theatre
Festival. He did a wonderful translation of TARTUFFE
at Actors Summit. He is a dual recipient of the Times Theatre Tributes.
He is a sure bet to garner another award for his fascinating performance as Werner
Heisenberg. Turneys performance shows what happens when acting talent,
character understanding, and the right vehicle come together. BRAVO! A.
Neil Thackaberry gives his finest acting performance as Niels Bohr. As is the
case with Turney, he absorbs himself into the character of the half-Jewish
Danish physicist who played a major role in helping the United States to develop
the atomic bomb. Last season Lucy Bredeson-Smith gave a career highlight
performance as Rosemary in Actors Summits PICNIC. Her
performance was recognized with a Times Tribute Theatre Award. She has followed
up that stellar showing with another fine achievement. She well plays the fulcrum
of the teeter totter ride between Bohr and Heisenberg with consummate skill. CAPSULE
JUDGEMENT: With the complexity of script, any production short of the Actors
Summits superb rendition, would make for a long and confusing evening of
theatre. 'COPENHAGEN is Actors Summits very best production
to date!!!! This production is not a should see, it is a MUST see!
By Kerry Clawson Beacon Journal staff writer Put two of the most
brilliant scientific minds in a room together, and you're bound to get something
volatile. That's what happens in the play Copenhagen, showing in its
Northeast Ohio premiere at Actors' Summit in Hudson. The three-character drama
explores what could have been said during a mysterious, real 1941 visit between
German physicist Werner Heisenberg (working on the Nazi atomic-bomb program) and
his old mentor Niels Bohr, a half-Jewish scientist living in Nazi-occupied Copenhagen,
Denmark. Wayne Turney and Neil Thackaberry are both highly believable
as student and mentor, both in their love-hate relationship and in the tempering,
profound respect that these colleagues have for each other. In many ways, their
lives as physicists resemble a good old fraternity, but when this story takes
place, they are on opposite sides of World War II. Both actors pointedly
convey their characters' passion for their science in animated, often heated debates
on a nearly bare, round stage that recalls the shape of an atom. This play, written
by England's Michael Frayn, has dense dialogue that heavily mines the study of
nuclear physics at a critical time in world history. The play searches
for Heisenberg's motive in his risky visit to Bohr: Is he searching for a piece
of the good old collaborating days, simply showing off, or trying to manipulate
a highly political, dangerous situation? Those questions are never clearly answered.
But Lucy Bredeson-Smith, who plays Bohr's blunt wife, Margrethe, offers warmth,
humor and wisdom as she holds mirrors up to each man to help them understand themselves.
Questions of motive and ethics kept me curious, but Copenhagen isn't what
you'd call highly suspenseful. Let's face it: This is a brainy play.
Glowing reviews of the 2000 Tony Award-winning Broadway production described it
as intellectually stimulating and emotionally satisfying. The play won Tonys for
best play, best director and best featured actress. I left the Actors'
Summit production more intellectually stimulated than emotionally satisfied. Copenhagen
is a very serious work, loaded with scientific jargon and discussion. That's
quite different from the celebrated math play Proof, which followed on the heels
of Copenhagen as the 2001 Tony Award winner for best play. Although Proof revolves
around math, it's really about family relationships. Copenhagen is more complex,
intricate and cerebral in its treatment of science. Thackaberry and Turney
come across as alternately naive, as Thackaberry's Bohr assumes that all the work
on nuclear fission already has been done (wrong), and Turney's Heisenberg assumes
that scientists could never gain enough critical mass to create an atomic bomb
(wrong again). We learn that Heisenberg races headlong into scientific discoveries
and life experiences without thinking, while Bohr approaches everything slowly
and methodically. We want to dislike Turney's Heisenberg because he's
working for the Nazis. But Turney's urgency and uncertainty make us sympathize
with him. At the end of the first act, we think all of these scientists'
thought processes have been explored, but the play's second act explores more
of Heisenberg and Bohr's old academic relationship. Playwright Frayn's writing
is rich in symbolism. Frayn, best known for his farce Noises Off, certainly has
explored every nook and cranny of these great minds in an attempt to explain what
might have been said at this dangerous, historic meeting. Historians have wondered
for years: Did this exchange between scientific geniuses have the power to alter
the outcome of World War II? Just thinking about those implications is frightening.
Copenhagen is more historically enlightening than it is entertaining. But
sometimes, that's what theater should be about.
| |