Silent Sky

by Lauren Gunderson

When Henrietta Leavitt begins work at the Harvard Observatory in the early 1900s, she isn’t allowed to touch a telescope or express an original idea. Instead, she joins a group of women “computers,” charting the stars for a renowned astronomer who calculates projects in “girl hours” and has no time for the women’s probing theories. As Henrietta, in her free time, attempts to measure the light and distance of stars, she must also take measure of her life on Earth, trying to balance her dedication to science with family obligations and the possibility of love. The true story of 20th-century astronomer Henrietta Leavitt explores a woman’s place in society during a time of immense scientific discoveries, when women’s ideas were dismissed until men claimed credit for them. Social progress, like scientific progress, can be hard to see when one is trapped among earthly complications; Henrietta Leavitt and her female peers believe in both, and their dedication changed the way we understand both the heavens and Earth.

Genres: Plays, Drama, Theatre, Historical Fiction, Fiction, Read For School, School

63 pages, Paperback

Published January 1, 2015

Reviews

[Cara (Wilde Book Garden) · Rating 2 out of 5]

2.5 stars

Not a fan of this one, despite a compelling set-up and some brilliant dialogue. As I said in my glowing review of The Book of Will, it looks like Lauren Gunderson is turning into a playwright who's either a big hit or a big miss for me - and sadly this one was a miss.

I love the focus on women in STEM; the camaraderie between the women; and as always, Gunderson's choice of subject.

But I had several big issues, and all the ones I can think of right now have to do with changes she made from the true story. I can see why these changes would "simplify" the narrative, or make it more expected for audiences, but I'm getting tired of that as an excuse.
#1: The choice to make Henrietta's colleague, Annie Jump Cannon, hearing instead of Deaf. Why would you do this? First off, it seems disrespectful. And also, if you are celebrating one incredible Deaf woman in the sciences, wouldn't two make for an even more compelling story?

#2: The choice to write Henrietta as nonreligious and to make that a big source of conflict between her and her sister. In reality (and I only learned this after looking up Henrietta Swan Leavitt after finishing the play!) Swan Leavitt was deeply religious throughout her life. This irritates me since it fuels the false dichotomy of science vs. religion. I'm convinced part of the reason this is still such an issue is that when it's NOT an issue, it's rewritten because...what, it's more believable to a modern audience? it makes for more/better drama? not sure what the goal was here but there seems no good reason to make that change.

#3: The choice to throw in a completely unnecessary romantic subplot that as far as I can tell from my very limited research, never was even suggested in real life. I love a good romance subplot, but it's a pet peeve of mine when authors are adapting a true story but then create a plot point out of thin air simply to leave it unresolved or resolved in an extremely disappointing way. Like, thanks for the extra, completely manufactured sadness, I guess?!

I can't remember if there were other issues I had with this play since I read it several weeks ago and these 3 things are the ones that are burned into my memory because of how irritated I am about them.

So - I'm still excited to pick up more by Lauren Gunderson, but this really wasn't a hit for me.

CW: Grief, cancer

[mjflowerchild · Rating 5 out of 5]

Absolutely beautiful 🌟🌌🌒💜💛

[Ashleigh · Rating 2 out of 5]

I am a woman in STEM and I greatly appreciate the women who have paved the way for me so I was able to study medical radiation science and work as a nuclear medicine scientist with little obstruction. So I was immediately intrigued by this play as I do enjoy works that celebrate women in science. A historical adaptation should not be a documentary but there were multiple aspects which I did not vibe with. Henrietta Leavitt is portrayed as deaf and wears a historic hearing aid for the time as she was in real life. However, her colleague Annie Cannon who is also a character in this play is portrayed as hearing when she was also deaf. I just do not understand why you would make that choice as a playwright? How bizarre.

There was also a sense of contention between science and religion whereas Leavitt was a devote Christian her entire life, I do understand that by not placing Earth in the centre of the universe and finding out how vast the universe actually is had a huge impact of society at the time but it seems odd to portray Leavitt this way when it seemed to be a huge part of her identity.

There was a romantic subplot added with a fictional character named Peter Shaw. His presence seemed to reflect the male opinion of women at the time but why did he have to become romantically interested in the protagonist? An odd move indeed to add such focus to something to a story about a woman who seemed to want to be just LEFT ALONE to focus on astronomy and to be taken seriously as a scientist.

Besides from opening with all the issues I had with the script, the dialogue is engaging, the dynamics and interactions between the individuals leap off the page so this would translate well to the stage. The script gives great scope to the potential for staging and creative set and lighting design.

I am all for championing women in science and I love to see historical feminist plays. As a real person in history I feel like Henrietta Leavitt deserves an accurate representation in a work that is described as a true story.

[lux · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5 ⭐️

[Andrea · Rating 5 out of 5]

In this lyrical drama, Gunderson tells the story of Henrietta Leavitt, the brilliant and determined young astronomer who discovers how to measure the distances between stars. Although it is based on Leavitt's life and work and her involvement with a group of young women who are charged with mapping the sky, the play is so much more than a biopic -- it's a pulsing, beautiful exploration of the need to wonder, to seek truth, to find the distance between things. Gunderson's writing is sharp and achingly beautiful -- it's a glorious read, and one can only imagine how beautiful it will be to stage!

[Lauren Merrifield · Rating 5 out of 5]

This play is so. good. Like, it's SO good. Lauren Gunderson is a playwriting genius and I have to read the rest of her works. The story is excellently put together. There are so many layers to the plot that help engage the reader and adds depth to the story. The characters are stunning. They have so much life and background that help us root for them no matter what they're doing. It's easy to feel so deeply for them. This story is so beautiful and I would highly recommend.

[Kat · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am currently working on a community theater production of this and am totally obsessed with the writing.

I do question the decision to depict Annie Jump Cannon as hearing, rather than deaf as she was in real life. If we are telling the stories of real people, then let's do that.

[Melinda Wingate · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was just cast as Margaret in an upcoming community theater production of this play, so of course I had to read it before rehearsals begin! I love this story. It is full of heart, some humor, and a whole lot of amazing woman power!

[Maddie Bartlett · Rating 5 out of 5]

Absolutely beautiful script. I cannot wait to see it come to life

[Ellie Watson · Rating 4 out of 5]

My eyes full of tears and wonder, my belly padded with white wine, and amidst the best that generation X has to offer, I looked at Henrietta and I said. I WILL write a lobby display about your life and the history of Cepheid variables

[Craig Werner · Rating 2 out of 5]

The play's heart is in the right place, focusing on the problems encountered by Henrietta Leavitt, whose pioneering research on the cephid stars played a crucial role in letting astronomers figure out the expanse of the universe. It's a familiar story to anyone who's studied women in science, and it should be told often. Problem with the play is it just isn't particularly well put together; the love story, the family story and the science story all belong there, but they're more nailed together than woven into an effective tapestry. It's possible that my response is shaped a bit too much by the production I saw, which had a great set, but just okay performances.

[Tori · Rating 5 out of 5]

Silent Sky is one of those powerful plays that evokes emotion even when read rather than performed. I enjoyed the story, characters, and setting and finished the read through in one sitting, not wanting to put it down. Lauren Gunderson does a great job of weaving a story over the course of many years and I hope to read more of her work in the future!

[Susan Abshier · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a play inspired by the true story of Henrietta Leavitt, the first woman astronomer nominated for a scientific award ( the Nobel Peace Prize at that!). This story starts with her first day at the Harvard Observatory and follows her commitment to her work up until her death. Those who like science, women's equality, or even romance would enjoy this book. It is a quick read but it is packed with so much to talk about! This would be a wonderful addition to any high school class of any subject. There are topics addressed such as sexism, patriarchy in culture and science, the suffrage movement, and the advancement of astronomy. A history teacher could use this play while teaching about the woman suffrage movement, an English teacher could use this to teach about irony and how plays are set up, and a science teacher could use this to demonstrate women in science or the advancement of astronomy. There are endless uses for Silent Sky by Lauren Gunderson.

[Catherine S · Rating 4 out of 5]

I loved reading this play. While it absolutely falls into the trap of deifying a group of first-wave feminists without acknowledging the nuances of their lives and politics, and I wish that Gunderson hadn't felt the need to add a romance that didn't exist in real life, I generally found it a compelling piece. I particularly enjoyed the exploration of scale and perspective, and the connections between Leavitt's personal world expanding as the universe expands from her perspective. I can't wait to put this on.

[pun dog · Rating 1 out of 5]

Forgot to log this, read it quite a while ago for a script class I was in. But yeah I really didn't fw this at all. Kinda fucked up that they just made up some dude for Henrietta to fall in love with and then make it her fault they didn't end up together when none of that happened in real life and the real Henrietta never expressed any desire for a relationship, especially not one with a man who was actively oppressing her. Lauren Gunderson has to be a pen name for a man because I refuse to believe a woman wrote this.

[Aaron Thomas · Rating 1 out of 5]

This is really boring. The truly unfortunate thing about Silent Sky is that it has no surprises in it. It has nothing new to say about anything, but instead it confirms everything we (think we) already know about men, about women, about physics, and about history. For all its investment in wonder Silent Sky has none of its own: this play comprises a world that has already been mapped, with all of its ideas already understood.

[Claire · Rating 5 out of 5]

A beautiful, sweeping play about an astronomer at the dawn of the 20th century and her discovery. Honestly, I really want to see this play in person. It's gorgeous, really, from the dialogue to the suggested blocking to the fantastic flow of the piece. Read this play.

One monologue a the end for a middle-older woman.

[Barb · Rating 5 out of 5]

I had the great fortune to see this beautiful play several years ago and fell in love with it. Each character is so distinct and well-defined. The story is told with humor and heart. I now have the great honor to be playing the role of Williamina Fleming in a community theatre production and am learning to love it even more.

[Chay Schmitt · Rating 4 out of 5]

A beautiful story about some of the first women in the world of astronomy. It's powerful, bold, and overall fantastic. I did take off a star due to Lauren Gunderson inserting a love story where it doesn't belong, simply because she thought that Henrietta needed a man. Yikes. Otherwise a, GREAT play about some of America's most influential women in STEM.

[Bree Glasbergen · Rating 5 out of 5]

A play filled with budding romance, duty, wonder and whimsy. It reads as bouncy wit peppered with profundity. A glimpse into the awe of an astronomer and pre-suffragette women's workplaces. Not heavy on feminism but unveils a light plot line of how the rich contribution from women to cutting-edge science was not credited before women got the vote.

[MB Shakespeare · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a beautiful play about Henrietta Levitt and her contributions to space exploration – specifically, that she develops a way to measure the light and distance of stars – a discovery that she is not credited with until many years later. A great play about the power of women and their support and friendship with each other.

[Paisley · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was a beautiful story, that I suggest you jump at the chance of watching it in a theater. I saw it during my time at ITF and fell in love with the characters. Of course I hated the guy that had up and left Henrietta, but it kept me engaged and had everyone in the theater gasping at the audacity and the love that the they had shared. It's an amazing story.

[Pam · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really liked this play. I forgot about the fact that i was reading it for play reading committee. And just in joyed the flow.
Henrietta Leavitt and her co-workers, women, had to work so hard to be recognized and to receive the same benifits as men. But what gripped me most was the wonder of the heavens.

[Courtney · Rating 4 out of 5]

I went into reading this knowing it was about female astronomers (or computers) and expected it to be much in the same vein as Hidden Figures (which it was), but was utterly delighted at how funny it was as well. Solid read, and I would recommend seeing the show if you see it advertised.

[JoHannah James · Rating 5 out of 5]

Beautiful, touching play. Loved every second of it. Probably in my top five plays I’ve ever read. I’d love to see a good production of it. Would recommend to anyone looking for a wonderful play to read!

[Collin Kavanaugh · Rating 3 out of 5]

A reminder that not only effort and method but a sense of wonder is necessary to propel us towards discovery. But the characters felt like façades, shells of full things. Conversation felt unnatural and performative (and yes it’s a play but 🤷🏻‍♂️). Proof did it better.

[Liam · Rating 3 out of 5]

I really liked this play. Some of the formatting was hard to understand, but doesn't detract from the quality. It's really cute and there's some really sweet, intimate moments between a couple of characters.

[Lillian Krohe · Rating 5 out of 5]

I had the absolute pleasure of acting in this play a few years ago and it has remained one of my favorite plays. Lauren Gunderson is a gorgeous playwright - her dialogue is so natural and the connections between each character is so heartwarming.

[Emily Van Vleet · Rating 5 out of 5]

I love this play. Beautiful dialogue, stage directions and characters. It is not perfectly historically accurate, but it doesn’t purport to be. It also is a beautiful concept for lighting/set designers.

[Allison · Rating 5 out of 5]

Lauren Gunderson you’ve done it again. What beautiful characters for a beautiful story. Would love to play Henrietta or Annie some day. And the way I truly felt the love and was invested in Peter and Henrietta?? Surprised by how much I cared.