While some may agree that Pais’s critiques don’t necessarily change the argument and substance of Frayn’s play, it may inspire others to hold people accountable when depicting historical events. Throughout the analysis of Pais’s essay, we have noted important details regarding the context of production and the reception, by answering the question as to why Pais wrote this article. We have also looked into the intended audience and the main function of the text, as I believe it was to argue the historical accuracy of Copenhagen. We then ended the essay with Pais’s style and diction, in which we concluded that Pais was trying to persuade his readers into believing that his evidence disproves particular circumstances that take place in Frayn’s play. In the end, Pais does provide much more evidence to back his arguments, which in return provides the reader with a more accurate depiction of what truly happened on
While some may agree that Pais’s critiques don’t necessarily change the argument and substance of Frayn’s play, it may inspire others to hold people accountable when depicting historical events. Throughout the analysis of Pais’s essay, we have noted important details regarding the context of production and the reception, by answering the question as to why Pais wrote this article. We have also looked into the intended audience and the main function of the text, as I believe it was to argue the historical accuracy of Copenhagen. We then ended the essay with Pais’s style and diction, in which we concluded that Pais was trying to persuade his readers into believing that his evidence disproves particular circumstances that take place in Frayn’s play. In the end, Pais does provide much more evidence to back his arguments, which in return provides the reader with a more accurate depiction of what truly happened on