The life of visionary mathematician Alan Turing will hit the stage at Central Square Theater in April. The play, “Breaking the Code,” written by High Whitemore and directed by Scott Edmiston, paints a portrait of a figure who was highly private and also hugely influential, playing an important role in bringing an end to World War II.
While working at Bletchley Park, the center of the Allied code-breaking program, he cracked the Enigma cipher, a machine-engineered code that encrypted Nazi Germany’s communications.
A war hero, yet also a tragic figure. Turing was a queer man who lived in an era when homosexuality was criminalized in England. He was persecuted for his sexual orientation, and formally prosecuted by the state, before his untimely death at age 41.
Prior to the premiere of “Breaking the Code,” we spoke with actors Eddie Shields (Alan Turing) and Josephine Moshiri Elwood (Pat Green), who plays a character based on Turing’s real life friend Joan Clarke, a fellow “cryptanalyst.” The conversation highlights Turing’s legacy, the indelible mark that he left on advances in artificial intelligence, and his internal struggles.
The production will run from April 2 through 26. For ticketing information, visit the Central Square Theatre website.
How did you each approach your characters, Alan Turing and Pat Green?
Eddie Shields: The iconography of what we know of Alan Turing — he’s considered the godfather of computer science. But the truth is actually a little more complex and interesting, and it has to do with his personal life, the personal relationships that he had, and how he became the person that he did. That’s thanks to people like Josephine’s character (Pat Green), his mom, and mentors that he had.
When I first approached the character, it seemed really vast. Me and Alan Turing? I could barely count to ten. I was a little intimidated to step foot into this world, because I wasn’t sure that I would even be able to understand what I was saying, let alone understand what he was thinking. But the more I read this play and researched about Alan Turing, I was able to find a human element in him and start from there.
And I discovered that back then, when Alan was growing up, mathematicians and scientists were really considered misfits. It wasn’t the norm. They were kind of the oddballs. Everything was a religion, divine creation, and God. That’s where society stemmed from. Nobody was really considering these mathematicians and these scientists legitimate. And that was my in.
As theater people, we kind of consider ourselves oddballs, in a way. Getting to learn about math and science, how beautiful it is (and I’m learning a lot, philosophy, beautiful theories), has helped me understand Alan and where he comes from better.
Josephine Moshiri Elwood: Pat Greene is based on Joan Clarke, who worked closely with Alan at Bletchley. There are some liberties that are taken in the script, but the relationship in the play is pretty true to their relationship in real life.
I also felt the same way as Eddie. I’m not good at math. I’m not good at science. This is completely new territory for me. But really what’s important about this play for me are the relationships, the humanity. The math and science is just a means of expression for both of them. I think they both connect deeply over their shared love of mathematics. But they’re also both brilliant people, and I think they’re very much on the same level and really connected with each other in real life, because they saw themselves as equals.
What’s been helpful for me is finding interviews of Joan Clarke speaking and hearing her talk about Alan. She talks about him, even after this death, with such tenderness. That was really special for me.
Alan Turing has been portrayed as a figure who tackled intelligence work but also ran up against the unwritten codes of prejudice. How does the play address both of those challenges?
Eddie Shields: They kind of work in tandem. One of the beautiful things about this play is, it’s not linear. The scenes jump across time. Because of that, we really do get an understanding of the project at hand, the work at hand, and also what was going on in Alan’s personal life, seeing how they were melding each other, how they were working against each other, and sometimes working in tandem with each other.
One of the most interesting things about Alan Turing being gay is that he was never “in the closet” per se. There were people who didn’t know. But he was quite open about him being a homosexual, especially with his friend Pat. They had a really loving and beautiful relationship. That’s part of what makes Josephine’s character so remarkable, especially during that time. Her character is so understanding, patient, and accepting, in a time when (and even today) that wasn’t (and isn’t) the case.
Josephine Moshiri Elwood: The play does such a good job at showing what Alan’s motivations were, his early childhood relationships that really propelled him in his work, through the rest of his life. That’s something that this play does so beautifully. Even when we’re rattling off numbers and information, there’s always such clear motivation behind it.
Alan was so inspired by one of his early childhood friendships, and he reflected later on that maybe that’s why he’s been trying to create the “mechanical brain.” There was some loss in his life that made him want to examine how we live on, if we can live on through machines.
Turing fabricated a powerful machine that he used to crack the Enigma cipher. Does the play address the question of what a human mind can do that a computer cannot?
Eddie Shields: I think the play addresses that question in a way that you might be surprised by. With Alan, there’s not much of a difference between what the human brain can do and what a singular, universal machine can do. I think that’s actually the root, a lot of the heartbeat of Alan’s work.
It’s difficult for us today to understand that the word “computer” was not a common word not so long ago. We kind of take it for granted. Looking back, a word like “machine,” “intelligent machine,” “a computer thinking.” These ideas were big, scary, intangible ideas that Alan was trying to get across. The distinction between the human brain and a computer — for us, even today, we’re like, “Well, no!” Alan always really believes that a computer, a thinking machine, can do anything that the human brain can.
What are audiences going to take away?
Eddie Shields: I think audiences will be surprised about Alan Turing. We’re finding things outside of the iconography of his computer science work. Josephine brilliantly said that we’re seeing the inceptions of how all of these ideas started. And they’re rooted in his relationships. I think the audiences will be surprised by how much they learn.
I certainly learned a lot with this play. It’s not daunting, and it’s not overwhelming. It’s actually really exciting and beautiful. I hope that we can understand that with AI, the existential list of ideas, the dread that we have of AI, there’s also an alternative which can happen. Machines can be good. AI can be resourceful. We can use it for good, not just bad.
That’s what I want people to understand, that that’s what these people at Bletchley Park and Alan Turing were really about. They weren’t doing it to destroy the world. They were doing it to make it a better place.
Josephine Moshiri Elwood: A question that I’ve been asking myself is, what would Alan Turing think if he were alive now and could see the present state of AI? I really wonder how he would feel about it. That’s been interesting to examine as we go through this process.
This play is so much about a different time. It’s not really about the moment we’re in right now. But we’ve learned so much about the moment we’re in right now by how optimistic Alan felt. To know that this technology we have was created for good — and yet, to me, I don’t feel that it’s being used for good presently. I hope that we can think about ways in which we can make sure that we, as humans with computers in our pockets all the time, can have a better impact on the world around us.
Why do you think that “Breaking the Code” is a story that we need to hear now?
Josephine Moshiri Elwood: We’re in a moment in time where there’s a lot of cruelty. There’s a lot of misunderstanding and othering. And this play is set in a time when there was a lot of misunderstanding and othering. It was also an incredibly dangerous and fraught moment in time. We’re talking about World War II. These were people who were living in unprecedented times, not knowing how the world would be shaped by their actions. But [this play is about] the importance of our shared humanity and what that means in practice, as we become increasingly isolated, whether that’s in our day to day lives or politically. What this play does brilliantly is remind us of the people behind the history.
Eddie Shields: Joan Clarke and Alan Turing weren’t meant to be there. It was rare for a woman to be working in this type of field, to have a job in general. Alan was a gay man who is now thought to have been possibly neurodivergent. He had a stutter. These were people who weren’t meant to be a part of this project. These were people who weren’t thought of as being helpful in society. There was no way that people would have thought that they could work together to help defeat the Nazis. I think that’s what’s really special about it, as well. [I think this is about] looking at the people around us and not snapping to judgements. Everybody is capable of so much, no matter what package they come in. [We can be] surprised by what people bring to the table and allow people to be themselves, so they can succeed and create miracles.
About The Author
