• Home
  • Start Here
  • Podcast
  • Investing
  • Writing & Arts
  • About
    • Mirror Man
    • Thinking Bigly
    • Yellow Gentlemen
    • Places in Between
    • Meet-up
    • Investment Aphorisms
    • Angel Investing
    • Mingle (old)
    • Arts
    • Investing
    • Newsletter
    • Theatre
    • Poetics
    • India (1997)
    • Indonesia (1998)
    • Unconference (Chatham House)
    • Grants
    • Privacy
    • Disclaimer
    • Contact
  • Search
Menu

Then Do Better

Street Address
City, State, Zip
Phone Number

Your Custom Text Here

Then Do Better

  • Home
  • Start Here
  • Podcast
  • Investing
  • Writing & Arts
  • About
  • Archive
    • Mirror Man
    • Thinking Bigly
    • Yellow Gentlemen
    • Places in Between
    • Meet-up
    • Investment Aphorisms
    • Angel Investing
    • Mingle (old)
    • Arts
    • Investing
    • Newsletter
    • Theatre
    • Poetics
    • India (1997)
    • Indonesia (1998)
    • Unconference (Chatham House)
    • Grants
    • Privacy
    • Disclaimer
    • Contact
  • Search

Salima Saxton: Cancer, ‘Bad Patient’ Honesty, Estrangement, and Writing Without Waiting

February 24, 2026 Ben Yeoh

Salima Saxton on cancer, honesty, estrangement, and creative work in real life. Salima is Ben’s longtime friend, and they talk about her cancer diagnosis and what she calls an unexpected new “year of undoing”, a return to herself rather than a neat reinvention story.

“Be the sky, not the weather. The weather passes through.”

They discuss why the language of “brave” can feel wrong, why “What can I do?” often misses the mark, and what Salima means by being a “bad patient”.

The conversation turns to Salima’s Substack essay “Builder Dad” on estrangement and what outsiders routinely misunderstand.

“‘Blood is thicker than water’ is not advice I believe in.”

Salima also shares the hardest things to write in memoir: telling the whole truth, including the parts that do not flatter you.

The chat then touches on anti-heroine storytelling, friendship breakups, social media’s double edge, and what creative work looks like without romantic routines: write where you can, start small, “plod”, find mentors, and build community.

“There’s never a perfect moment. Start with something tiny and plod.”

A lighter finish includes an overrated/underrated game (champagne, dressing up, height, hustle culture, social media, coconut oil), Salima’s plan to audition again, and why dark humour matters when things get rough.

“A sense of humour is absolutely vital. You either laugh or you crack.”

Summary contents, transcript and podcast links below. Listen on Apple, Spotify or wherever you listen to pods. Video above or on Youtube.

Contents

00:00 30-year friendship,  Himalayas, coconut oil
01:23 Cancer diagnosis and a new “year of undoing”
03:41 Returning to the 18-year-old self
05:07 Illness clarifies relationships, energy is finite
07:29 Why “brave” and “What can I do?” can land badly
09:02 “Bad patient”: performing “good” on an overstretched NHS ward
13:05 Honest female voices, dissonance, anti-heroine truth
15:28 “Builder Dad”, estrangement, and searching for father figures
17:57 What people get wrong about estrangement and friendship breakups
21:29 Hypervigilance and the hidden inner life
23:31 The hardest memoir scene: dad’s death and anger at mum
26:15 Writing about mum: respect, friction, truth
29:44 Childhood contradictions: hippie roots, no heating, love of glamour
30:37 No perfect routine: writing around kids, work, real life
33:09 Ditch the artist romance: money, time, and the true cost
35:00 Tiny wins: one sentence still counts
36:49 Bed writing, socks, and self-trickery
38:06 Overrated/underrated game
41:31 Social media love/hate and quiet communities
43:59 2026 as the “year of saying yes”, auditions, dark humour
46:37 Advice to creatives: start small, “plod”, mentors, community
50:15 Long friendships and gratitude

Transcript (lightly edited, transcribed by LLM AI, so mistakes are very possible)

Ben: Hey everyone. I'm super excited to be speaking to Salima Saxton. Salima is a brilliant writer, performer, and podcaster herself. She has her memoir the Year of Undoing, which should be out in 2027. She's also my friend of 30 years or maybe more. Before we had mobile phones. She was my friend. She was my first friend I know to actually have had a mobile phone.


I've directed her for the London stage. I've climbed mountains to go and visit her and we still argue about who is taller. Salima welcome.


Salima: Thank you so much. Just to clarify one thing, I am certainly tall now I cannot believe we've been friends for 30 years. That's terrifying.


Ben: Says something about our age.


You are also gonna shrink more than me.


Salima: Oh God. You have to get that in, don't you? All I remember is that you arrived exhausted halfway up the Himalayas very early one morning when I was living there


Ben:  I carried coconut oil. Do you remember that? .


Salima: Yes. I remember that very clearly. [ ]



Salima: As a proper friend, someone who carries coconut oil halfway up the Himalayas. 


Ben: You are having a year of undoing or maybe more than in a year. What are you undoing this year and what are you trying to rebuild in its place and why are we undoing anything?


Salima: Oh, great. Just give me five questions in one, why don't you? So this year was unexpected, so this year I got quite unwell. I had a cancer diagnosis, which  has involved two massive surgeries and a lot of chemo. And I'm on the, I'm on the mend now, so I'm, very blessed in that it was caught in time and everything.


But I wasn't expecting this latest year of undoing the year of undoing that I write about in my memoir, which by the way, you are in was about changing our lives when we left London, when Carl's mental health had gone up in the air, is the politest way of putting it. And we changed our lives radically overnight.


One lesson I have learnt in these last few months with the further I'm doing and I'll get more into what I'm doing actually means in a minute, is not a midlife crisis. Is what? Which is what many people seem to think it means. Is that, I thought that year, that neat little memoir year would be it.


I romantically thought I would get through this year and then it's plain sailing until my hundredth birthday and I'll die in my sleep. The end. And what I have really learned over these last few months, and perhaps a little bit too late in my life, considering I'm in my late forties and I've known you for a hundred years, is that we're constant.


There's going to be. There. There 's that old saying, isn't there about, be the sky, don't be the weather. The weather just passes through, right? We're the sky. So we just have to be, we just have to remind ourselves that we are that big blue sky and that the weather will pass through no matter what.


And I think I've always thought that for other people, but I didn't include myself in that rather childishly. So I always assumed that, yeah, that can happen to other people, all these things, but it's not going to happen to me. And then it did.


Ben: And so are you rebuilding anything or We just undoing like a midlife crisis would've been easier.


That's like standard.


Salima: Yeah. Midlife is just buying a motorbike. Or I don't know. Yeah. Leaving your marriage or just like turning a table upside down. No, this is slower. This is me coming back to myself. This is me coming back to the 18-year-old that, like I feel like I lost that girl for many years.


And that girl who wasn't intimidated by Mark, I arrived at Cambridge, didn't I? State school kid. Wasn't intimidated by the fact that you all knew each other and you did, all of you knew each other and was just interested and you know how I was just curious and enthusiastic and pretty optimistic.


Still always worried about everything as you remember, but I just assumed everything would work out, and I think I lost that a bit over the years and got closer to catastrophizing about everything. You know this more than anybody.


Ben: I still thought you had it, have it even, although, I guess perhaps that's one of the things we're just growing older with all of these things is more, we get more baggage to catastrophize over.


We've got 30, 31 years of it.


Salima: Yeah.


Ben: Compared to when we were 17, 18. But I guess what's, is there any small or maybe weird detail from the last few weeks then, which is captured? How has your life changed from that in terms of capturing back the younger you?


Salima: This is gonna sound quite brutal, but I'm not gonna talk about the beauty of walking through the fields and living in the moment because I haven't found that has happened for me.


And I think for a lot of people when they have health scares, they fall in love with the everyday and domesticity and the normal stuff that hasn't happened for me. What has happened for me though is that I. I'm really aware, first of all, of who I want to talk to or spend any time with.


And you know this about me. I've collected people over the years where I've just hung on to friendships for sentimentality. But over this period, some people you included, have appeared for me and. And just being, and just speaking very truthfully and reminded me of who I was.


Other people have disappeared, have totally disintegrated in these people I wouldn't expect. And in observing all these new dynamics in my life, which I wasn't expecting over illness, I've really realized I've had a, I've got a real awareness of that. My energy is finite and I must only spend energy on the people that I really love or the people that I'm very energized by, or who really see me.


But I used to compromise a lot more. So I've done the opposite. I haven't become like that. Sanguine wise little owl over these last few months. As you know from reading some of my essays, I've become like a pretty cantankerous bad patient, but I see real beauty in that.


Yeah, for my own take.


Ben: I think there's actually really relatively few people who do this mindfulness thing. Maybe they write about it on Instagram occasionally, but that's probably fake, I reckon. You've got a handful of monks dying breed. Yes. And some mothers because I remember now, this is ages ago now, this is over 30.


This is over 30 years as well. When my dad had cancer, he got a bit annoyed when people used to say, oh, you're being brave. And he was like. It's just, there's no bravery stuff about it.


Salima: Yeah, exactly. I can't, there are certain words and phrases that I haven't been able to stand over the last few months.


Yeah, so definitely you are being brave. You are so courageous. You're and also, the, what the famous, what can I do, which I think is the worst question to ask anybody who is unwell, what can I do? Really puts the onus on that person. And I think when, whether you've just had a baby, whether you are unwell, whether you're going through divorce, like you just need people to turn up.


Just to call you or just to check in or just to send the thing or whatever that you haven't got space in your brain to know what to ask that person to do.


Ben: If you'd figured it out, you'd be doing it.


Salima: And I think it's a little bit of a get out of jail card for people because then they feel they can give themselves a pat on the back.


They've said to the person, what can I do? And so they've done their duty, but actually, yeah.


Ben:I don't even remember. In Cambridge one of my close friends Nadia died and it was a little bit like that. Although you're surrounded by 18 and 19 year olds, they don't really know how to react.


Anyway, although it hasn't changed that much in 30 years, 'cause most people don't come close to death for quite a long time. COVID changed that a little bit, but you've written this series, I guess this is your sort of second year titled bad patient. I'm interested, what does being a bad patient mean, mean to you?


'cause it isn't just really being cantankerous, it's like you say, being a little bit more you, but with these different elements to it. Why did you decide to write about being a bad patient and what, what does bad patient mean? Because actually it isn't being bad. It's bad. That sense of, again, when we were young, when bad was actually good.


Salima: Exactly. I suppose a bit of it is like. Because I didn't feel that I was being good enough, or grateful enough, because people told me early on, while I was lucky, it was lucky it's been found, it is lucky that we've, we were doing this. It's lucky this is happening, and I didn't really feel lucky at all, until very recently.


Since I've had, since it's out. There's a bit of me that feels lucky. Now I can see how that is. How I will feel more like that in six months time possibly. But back then I didn't. And also I gave the impression in my NHS ward that I was a very kind and kindly patient, but I wasn't, I was doing that in order to make sure the nurses took care of me.


So I knew I needed to be charming and kind and ask after their son and ask whatever, so that they came back and checked on me because I could see how overworked everybody was and I could see what they were fighting against. So I knew they had to remember me, remember my name, and they had to like me so bad.


Patient was also outta that, in that I was very consciously being good.


Ben: There is no altruism. Maybe we are kind to others, so others are kind to us.


Salima: I was buying biscuits for everybody and everything, but that again, that was to be like, oh, the lovely lady in bed one A, so that they come back and check on me because I could see what happened when you didn't behave.


I am, I had to have this nasal gastric tube inserted, which was horrendous. And another lady in the ward was arguing about why I should get this special window bed because that's like the best bed. And she was so rude about it. But then she effectively got punished because.


The matron came to see her and then like they weren't checking on her as much I could see, so I could really see things, really see, that's no one's fault. It's just natural


Ben: They're all overworked already, right? So


Salima: They're all exhausted. They don't get paid for their lunch break.


They don't get paid for their breaks. As I met incredible gems there, I was also working the system. So I was really aware from very early on there was a real dichotomy between who I was perceived to be and who I actually was.


Ben: But I think maybe you're just being honest about it. I think the majority of us, most of the time are like that and there's only small glimpses of when I think we're feeling particularly 150% good, then we can have that excess and it spills over into the spills over into the world.


Salima: Yeah, because also I was humoring people all the time, but then that's how I got an extra blanket, or that's how I got a bit longer with the consultant or whatever.


And also look, I'm, I was very lucky in that I had a combination of private healthcare and NHS healthcare for all of this. So like straddling the two systems and and obviously I'm incredibly privileged to be in that situation, but, but


Ben: You're also really unlucky that you had to be in that situation at  all.


Salima: Yeah, and also, but just like how much work, how much emotional work I had to do whilst in the NHS, whereas that didn't exist for me within the private sector. I didn't have to do any of that work.


Ben: Do you think there's do you think people are more receptive now to this, I guess honest writing about how things really are, not how we would want them to be or how we wish them to be, but how things really are.


Salima:  I think so. Particularly from women. I think they might have received it from men, but I think it's a much, it's much newer that we'll receive this from. A female voice.


Ben: The lived experience of women. I guess you, you explored this on your own podcast that it's been so undertold for so long. We don't have those boluses of stories and they're not what they tell us in the movies or the books, or at least the bestselling books.


It's actually the range of experience and what you can feel is just it's a myriad of everything. Yes. And that hasn't really been expressed.


Salima: And also that there's going to be a constant dissonance between what you are feeling. There, the heroine doesn't exist.


Like the, he, the heroine is made up of the villain and the heroine always you like for all of us. And I think we've only been ready to hear that. From Women's Voices relatively recently. So I, and for me, is really the cornerstone of my writing. When I'm writing memoir or fiction, I'm just finished I'm just finishing a novel as well about a kind of anti heroine, and that's really important for me because I cannot stand it. That's part of the reason that we get on so well because you are so blunt, cannot stand people, what's the word, Ben? When someone's not ready.


Ben: They're pretending


Salima: They just pretend. That's as simple as that, right?


Yeah. You can dress it up. Not so ways, but like I know if I ask you a question, you'll answer me truthfully, even if I don't like hearing the answer.


Ben: Yes.


Salima: That's right, that's why I married Carl. Carl's similar, right? In that he'll, that's, I always say that's part of the reason I married him, because he'll say things to me and I don't like the answer, but.


Answer, then I feel safe. But I think that is a direct result of having been raised by someone like my dad, where I never knew where I was.


Ben: Yeah. Never got the answer. That's a good segue. You wrote this long essay memoir piece, build a Dad.


Salima: Yes.


Ben: I'm interested in what you were trying to understand in that piece, writing from your perspective?


Salima: I was estranged from my dad for the last 10 years. I chose to be estranged from him. He was a kind of alcoholic, he was an alcoholic. And I had a very difficult relationship with him. Not really, I think anymore because of the alcoholism, but because of who he was, which was an overused term at the moment.


But, a kind of narcissistic self engrossed. Artist who didn't really, beco didn't become the artist that he thought he deserved, he should be, and was very angry and bitter really, and bored. He was a very bored man. And he wasn't really cut out for fatherhood. I can see that really clearly now.


So builder dad has fed really into my memoir. I write a lot about it because in the year of undoing, my dad also died and left explicit instructions for me not to be invited to his funeral, and he cut me out of his will. So it, my relationship with my dad is ongoing, even though he's dead. And


Builder dad. That Substack piece was really about the fact that I have looked around for years. Other examples of father figures, not necessarily even fathers in the traditional sense, but people who are playing that kind of role and were always seeking edges of that even…. Don't you remember that very much older boyfriend that I had?


Like that was definitely part of it, seeking that kind of like male elder reassurance, and trying to work out for me what a father was because I didn't really know what a father was meant to be. Luckily I've married somebody who I think is an amazing father.


And he's had to work it out himself 'cause he wasn't fathered in a traditional sense either. But I am quite obsessed by the ideas of motherhood and fatherhood and what they mean to all of us, and, and what we all come from. They're dominant themes in my life.


Ben: And what do you think outsiders misunderstand about what estrangement is or what estrangement is in, in your experience, although I guess this was two ways you chose first, and then in some ways he was making a point in his will. But is there anything you think on the outside looking in, it's just oh, this, these are the pieces that you just really don't get?


Salima: Oh yes. And I've had many people's opinions over the years. Normally really well-meaning, but just not understanding, so the most obvious. People literally have quoted blood is thicker than water at me so many times, which I don't believe. I don't believe in that. And many people ask me, what will happen to you when your father dies if you don't?


Resolve it. But look for me, and I can't speak for other people, I would say that my father died many years before he actually died. So there wasn't a big moment when he actually passed away, and I heard that he had done. I didn't disintegrate into some big thing and if only, I felt really sad.


He had just never been able to be the father that I had wanted. But I had been grieving for my dad probably since I was a teenager, to be honest. So I think that's an odd thing to hold above someone's head. It's like holding someone's finger to a flame, but what if they die?


What if they die? I don't believe in mending, fractured and often harmful relationships. Just because somebody might die. That makes absolutely no sense to me.


Ben: And I guess this points to the fact that the family we choose, or the friends we choose in some ways then are more important and could be more painful if friend, I've seen this now, getting a little bit older that I've seen some friendships have broken up, and I look at that and say, actually that's more painful than other things.


Salima: I've had friendships dissolve and it's been really painful. I was very good friends with somebody and. I think I kind of misunderstood that friendship because we became friends when our kids were tiny. And she was a school mom. And I, somebody once said that when they saw us together, it always looked like we were having a party.


Wherever we were, we were always laughing and things. And that friendship, she walked away from that friendship. It wasn't me at all, and I was heartbroken. I was completely heartbroken. I never quite understood it. Nothing there, there wasn't a big argument or anything, and who knows what it would be from her point of view, but I was really blindsided by it.


And, but also look, when you've got tiny kids, I had three tiny kids who knew where my brain was at that point. But yeah. But coming back to people misunderstanding, estrangement, everyone's obsessed at the moment about Brooklyn Beckham.


Ben: Yes.


Salima: And sure, okay, writing on your Instagram stories. And it's all very public.


But even though that's all he really understands, isn't it? That's how he's grown. That's his language. He doesn't understand privacy and handwritten letters. Obviously, that's not how the Beckhams have brought him up. But who knows, who knows? And I think that's the main thing that I would say to anybody who judges quite harshly about estrangement, unless you were there. It's very difficult to know what's happened in the


Ben: Yeah. Understanding that in the li well, understanding one's own inner life is hard enough, right? Like, how am I actually feeling, let alone other people's inner lives?


Salima: And also, Ben, if you think about it, you were around, like you were around when I was 18, 19.


And you wouldn't, I didn't talk about it then. So you wouldn't have seen me, we had that nice house, didn't we? It all looked quite pretty. I dunno whether I did ever mention anything, but I think I kept it all fairly,


Ben: not until we are flatmates in our twenties, then it,


Salima: right exactly.


You do it, we had that lovely thatched house and I had piano lessons and then I went to Cambridge and I was head girl and it all looked very beautiful and in control. But things were very out of control actually. Things were really out of control. That's partly why I loved school so much.


I would never have shown that to people wouldn't have believed it at the


Ben: time. Yeah. Even if you did, it would be like, this is the thing about some nonfiction is if you wrote it as fiction, nowadays, people don't believe you.


Salima: Yeah.


Ben: It has to be written as well, no, this is my inner life. This is how this


Salima: course, what, and also look, I think with alcoholism as well, it was all kinds of things. I became a very hypervigilant kind of kid because I could just sense things turning in the evening or I knew and things wouldn't go the wrong way at home when, when it was all gonna explode. And then everything would be fine in the morning.


Nobody would talk about it. Like I remember going to a birthday party when I was about 10 and my dad was really drunk and I was very upset. And my mom just said, put on a party dress. Here's the present. And we just left. And she called me to blow my nose. And then I went to the party and I was completely fine at the party and I remember enjoying it.


There was a magician, I remember really loving it, but I was very used to, from quite early on, just going, okay, that's happened. Blow your nose. Don't tell anybody. Get on with it.


Ben: Wow. So what's your story? E either bit of the story, bad patient or build a dad or anything which you've most resisted writing down, but I guess have written down or there's something which is resisting at the moment and you think, oh, maybe I'm, it's not even gonna make it in.


Salima: The hardest thing to write about has been the day of my dad's death, not because of the news, but because of my behavior with my mother on that day. So mothers,


Ben: mothers do it to us, right?


Salima: They do. So my mom, although she's been divorced by that point for nearly 30 years, was catatonic with grief and I lost my temper.


And behaved really badly. You'll have to read my memoir to see just how badly, but I just


Ben: but you did manage to write about it then if you're not gonna


Salima: leave it out. No, I'm not gonna leave it out because I think it's a really important thing for people to read about. If you're going to write about estrangement and you're going to write about difficult dads that I think you are owed, you owe the readers like all of it.


Yeah. 'cause if anyone's reading this that has any overlaps with this kind of thing, I want them to know that they're not imagining it or by themselves. I think that's what I felt for years. Oh, I'm making this up slightly. Yeah. Drunks drink whiskey for breakfast and they beat their children, don't they?


Black and bloom. But when it's emotional stuff, like I hit my dad never hit me. When he was very drunk, I pushed my dad. I hit my dad as a teenager in a very out of control way. And know, we hear about the extremes, don't we? We hear about, yeah.


You are beat in black and blue by a parent, or you hear about the other extreme, the kind of like the best of the best parents, but this kind of murky middle, which left me. Pretty I was always worried really as a kid, and you knew me from the tail end of that, where I was so happy to be at Cambridge and be meeting people and doing all these exciting things.


But


Ben: and as part of your point that it's. I guess it's not that it's okay to behave badly, but that it happens and it happens. I'm guessing you're still talking to your mom and life also goes on and we have to admit that these things happen. And put it where it is and potentially learn from it, or at least acknowledge it and see what happens in the future.


Salima: And also look, you know my mom, mommy has had a very difficult life. She came here at 16 from Pakistan Scholarship to Guda and Lama. Amazing, but a fish outta water, obviously. Then even had, got, had an arranged marriage, then left that it was an abusive relationship.


Then married my father and was with my father for years and years. Living in the middle of the eighties British countryside, where she really was like the only South Asian for a hundred miles and everyone thought she ran like the local Indian takeaway. And my mom. I owe my mom a lot.


'cause my mom kept everything going. Always. And you know what she's strong at. She's got some overlap with your mom, hasn't she? Actually. In terms of what they demand of us, what they expect from us. But it hasn't always been easy with my mom, you know.


She's not an easy woman. But I also admire my mother and I do respect my mother. But we don't always get on.


Ben: Is your mother as present in the year of undoing as your father or,


Salima: Yes, she is. Although that's the interesting thing about writing a memoir, isn't it? Because I also feel that I want.


Look after my mother.


Ben: Yeah.


Salima: She's alive.


Ben: She's gonna read it. Probably.


Salima: Yeah. Although I've told her not to read it because of my dad and everything, but no, I, because no more, not because she's gonna read it or even, because even if she wasn't alive, I would feel the same about my mom actually, because for all the difficulties and complications my mom has.


Really, I, I know. My mom would always do anything for me or my sister. We might not agree with it. We might not agree with oh, the way she thinks about it, she is, she's a very strong, a strong woman who's also pretty blunt, yeah, I'm truthful about my mom in the year of undoing, and we went to live with my mom for the first few weeks when we left London, and that wasn't always easy, particularly she's got a much more traditional Pakistani way of like bringing up children compared to my EZ fair, more relaxed way of being with kids.


So that wasn't easy, but


Ben: I still remember. Your mum is teaching me how when you put things in a bin, you can eke out a little bit more volume depending on the way that you turn around your cartons. And I think about that sometimes when I reverse it goes, oh, you know what? That's crazy. Silly was who was, mum was the one who advocated this way of bin filling.


So there you have it. I don't think that says anything about anything, but I do remember it


Salima: also. But you know what, my, my parents were, before it was fashionable, like in the eighties and nineties when all my friends had immaculate Kneehigh white socks and like fabric conditioned, school uniforms.


My mother knitted my brown socks. We lived on dhal and rice and stew. Everything was composted. She didn't believe in heating, so being a child around my parents wasn't the most cozy experience. We lived in this massive house that we couldn't really afford, so we only heated half of it. And the other half was just absolutely, I like, icy basically.


And my dad would run over pheasants and then pluck them at the kitchen table. They were like hippies in many ways.


Ben: Does that make the book? 'cause I guess that's not the year, but that's the background.


Salima: Yeah, it does because it also explains how. Why I am me and what, what creates the contradictions within me.


Like I am more material minded. Partly because of that, because there's a lot of discomfort


Ben: Yeah.


Salima: In childhood. As I like glamor.


Ben: Yeah. We often go the other way, don't we?


Salima: Yeah. So I like the aesthetic is really important to me, I think because my house was just full of books.


Ben: Yeah. Still filling your teenage hole.


Salima: Yeah, exactly. Exactly.


Ben: And as in your creative process then, are you more of a procrastinator or do you get it all out? Are you a morning writer? Evening writer, 3:00 AM writer. Anything goes. And from your performing stuff, has that informed how your creative process works?


Do you have things or rituals you go to? What? What is your writing process?


Salima: I have no writing process. I, and I think that is informed from being an actor. So I'm really aware that like sometimes you're just not in the mood and sometimes it's just impossible. But you've gotta get, I don't know, 2000 words done by the end of the day.


So maybe we start at midnight or maybe I'll write it in the morning or maybe I like it, so I try to be quite instinctual about it. And obviously I've got three kids. I'm so busy with my family, home life, so I'm not, like I'm not a single white man who can just go to my office. And write for.


I don't… that's nothing to do with being white. 



Ben:  But sometimes I was thinking about this famous sculptor, about a hundred years ago. Giacometti was really famous, but he had essentially two women running after him. So he could do sculpture 12 hours a day.


They would literally feed him and make everything, everything goes, and it can work fine and no. Consensus genius art, but the enablement to have that genius art done to dedicate yourself to art is a strain on everything else around your life. Yeah. And that is really interesting how many artists are like that.


I wouldn't like to say it all because it isn't always like that, but it is interesting when you look at those that there is a cost to all of that.


Salima: And also I'm not willing to sacrifice family life for that. So I could be more boundaried and say to the kids, when you come home from school, mommy's in her office.


I don't know. I have Carl's office. Don't disturb me until 5:00 PM or whatever. But I don't, I just, that for me just doesn't feel right. And I've always wished, like even when I wrote a novel that didn't get published, but they got me a literary agent. When I was writing that, the kids were tiny, so I would just write, I'd write it even in the car at pickup, I would just have my laptop.


I'd get there half an hour early and I'd just do an extra half an hour of cafe bits and pieces like that, so I think also. There's a romance that people attach to writers, to actors, to artists, but I think we need to really get rid of that romance because I think it's quite damaging for a lot of people.


Ben: It's really rare. There's some who have that in them, like Giacometti, but it is really rare.


Salima: I was gonna say, let's say you're a trust fund baby, and you've. You don't have to think about money or anything like that, then of course, great. And then you can go and writers retreats and you can write your novel halfway up, a mountain on a beach, Bali, whatever.


But the reality is 99% of people that I know who are doing anything creative are, if not struggling, are very aware of finances, right? Because increasingly. These kinds of lines of work don't pay huge amounts. And you have to


Ben: fit it in with the rest of your life,


Salima: fit it in. And also if you want other elements of your life, do you want a long term partner?


Do you want children? Maybe not, but if you do want those other things, you also take up time and energy. Yeah. And some days, your 16-year-old comes home, she says, pulls up from her boyfriend. You can't just disappear. And go back to, you've gotta just sit on her bed with her for that.


That's the end of your day. There's no way around that.


Ben: What's the best advice you have that you've subsequently just ignored?


Salima: The best advice I've had, but then I've then ignored why is it the best advice?


Ben: It doesn't need to be best, but there's some, like I'm I'm always ignoring this whole, oh, you've got a show, not tell.





Salima: oh, I see.


Ben: Let's just ignore that, or I don't know. It could just be advice. Yeah. It might be more funnier because it's like classic advice and then actually it's not reality.


Salima: So I think you make a good point about the routine thing. In that, I would say, let's just blast out to smithereens, because you're never gonna start, if you are a normal-ish person, that's just never you.


There's never gonna be the perfect moment and the perfect space to do it. Yeah. But often people write their first novel whilst they're in the office, and then they get, eventually get a book deal, and then they realize maybe they can write full-time or whatever, and that's like the lottery winning writer, so yeah.


Ben: I ignore sometimes the thousand words a day thing in the sense that sometimes I just do one sentence and that's you know what? That's a win. I've managed to even get a sentence like, I was just sitting on the loo and I thought of one sentence. Yes, I'll take that, that


Salima: I've just noticed something down.


Or I just know I noted down something about or what's it called that the Japanese way of repairing things with gold.


Ben: Yes. [Kintsugi]... Something


Salima: like that. Exactly. I just noted something about it the other day and I was like, okay, yeah. And then I will write more on that, but I haven't …


Ben: One day….


Salima: I've just added it to my manuscript and I might expand on it or I might not, who knows?


Maybe that just that thought in a week's time could end up taking you somewhere interesting. So I think that's it. Like not waiting for the perfect. Moment to start anything and also remembering as well, much like we remember as actors, right? Or directors that like when you're in the rehearsal space or when you're in your early drafts, just get something down or just do something.


Just play with some words. Pick up the script that's already written or write your own thing and it can be absolute gobbledy gook, but then that gobbledy go will become something. 



Ben:. Do you have any rituals or quirky rituals or even quirky rituals? Just generally. I still remember, so this is the coconut oil.


Again, it was coconut oil with green socks. Like I don't remember why I remember the green socks, but there was a for skin moisturizing. But do you do anything? 


Salima: These are socks your wife actually sent me. They're very cozy pink socks I live in. I still have to convince myself that I'm not working. I still have to trick… Do you remember when I was revising finals and things like, I was very much like never in the library. Like handles buy cookies, like incense has been in my bed. Like I still write often in my bed under a duvet on the sofa. I've always made it very nice.


So I'm like, oh, I'm just opening my laptop and Oh, I just happen to be writing. Yeah. It would be disastrous going to a library every day.


Ben: Then it feels like work.


Salima: I had to kid myself.


Ben: I remember advising, spending a lot of time just sleeping.


Salima: But you got that kind of super brain for those kinds of things you didn't need, you didn't need to do what the rest of us needed to do…



Ben: Let's do, I dunno if you played this little game, we'll just do, it's, we do overrated or underrated. So I give you a thing and you say whether you think this is overrated or underrated or maybe even correctly rated. And you can just say, you can just say why or not. Okay. Champagne overrated or underrated?


Salima: I think you know what I'm going to say. Underrated, but vintage champagne overrated.


Ben: Okay. And that's 'cause vintage champagne just doesn't taste very good


Salima: Exactly as you found out.


Ben: Okay. Alright. Dressing up. Overrated or underrated?


Salima: Underrated. Always feel better when you're dressing up. You can never be overdressed.


Ben: Never overdressed. Very good. Being tall, is this overrated or underrated?


Salima: Overrated. There's no need.


Ben: Yeah. What is With all these tall people


Salima: There's no need.


Ben: Your head on the doors


Salima: There's heels, there are step ladders. Many ways to get around things.


Ben: Hustling, hustle, culture.


Salima: Underrated, underrated.


Ben: We've all gotta be doing something. Side jobs.


Salima: Yeah. Always. Even if it's just to keep you awake, like even if you don't really need to just, I think it's like you are really great at that, right? If you think about what you cram into your life. You managed to hold down this very serious job.


I don't really understand what you do. And you do things like this. You are always doing creative side projects and things that you always have done right?


Ben: Yeah. So hustling is also underrated. Okay.


Salima: Yeah.


Ben: Social media


Salima: quick aside, do you think that's partly being second gen immigrants?


Ben: They might be attached to it. I think there's also a little, for me, it's a little bit. Money, although a lot of these things aren't money, but it's like you're doing things, then your opportunity might happen. Yeah. You're not doing anything. Opportunity won't happen particularly creatively where


Salima: yeah,


Ben: It doesn't, and then a little bit actually was not quite death, but Nadia dying and my dad dying.


But the little bit, just knowing, if you want to get on and do things, you should need to do it because you don't know. What's, you dunno what's gonna happen. Yeah. And then a little bit I think is the immigrant thing, but I think that just, you just get that from your parents so it,


Salima: Yeah.


Ben: It doesn't necessarily have to be that, but obviously if you think about why people tend to immigrate or tend to leave their home country, there will tend to be a bit of hustle. Because if you were very comfortable where you were in your home place, then usually you don't wanna move. Because it's comfortable.


So why are you moving? So I think there is like a little bit of that and I guess I'm probably, I get bored a bit as well. Yeah. And then it's what do you do with boredom? Am I sometimes being bored for a tiny bit and then it would be like, you gotta do something.


Salima: Yeah, I agree. I think that's heavily linked to the immigrant experience though. Like your mom and my mom, neither of them are still people.


Ben: Yeah, they're not, that's true.


Salima: No. So both of us have grown up with mothers who were like, busyness is a necessary part of existence.


Ben: Yes. I think that's true, although it is hard to know whether that's just our sort of mothers, but then you get them from immigrant mothers, don't you?


Okay. Last couple on overrated, underrated social media. Overrated or underrated?


Salima: I would say neither. Okay. Because I love it and I hate it.


Ben: So it's correctly rated or it's like it's both.


Salima: Both. It's both. Yeah. Yeah. I'm confused by social media. I've met some great friends over social media and actually it helped me get my publishing deal because of that moth talk that I did.


It went viral and then the publishers were very interested in my pitch, I think partly because of that. So it has really helped benefited me. But I'm not immune to comparisons and forgetting. Like you were saying about my bad patient writing and how people write about having realized certain things on social media when they become unwell or something.


Ben: Yeah.


Salima: So often it's just curated.


Ben: We're not immune to the algorithm and the things. I think that's all true. I do think that we do sometimes underrate other communities that it can bring, I see this in autistic communities and other special interest communities and 'cause they're not loud, right?


Yeah. Groups of communities which are interested in street food or buses or landscape or geocaching. And I think so. If you've just got a geocaching Instagram, that's all you are seeing, you don't actually complain about it much 'cause it's doing your thing so it's not noisy. So I do think there are actually, quite a lot of those quiet communities there probably are overshadowed by all of the other noisy stuff, but there are interesting things happening.


So it is, it's a complex one, which just reflects humanity, right?


Salima: Yeah, exactly. Although I love seeing your newest foodie things.


Ben: Yeah. I'm going into food again, yeah, I'm just really interested about food com and particularly London. I think London is underrated for food and if you want to eat cheaply you can, but you generally have to go out of zone one and you have to go for slightly more interesting food.


Okay. Last one, because it's been our recurring theme. Coconut oil. Is this now underrated or overrated?


Salima: Underrated. I still absolutely adore coconut oil. Still good. I cook with it. I eat, make chocolate from it. I moisturize my sculpt with it once a week. I use it as a body moisturizer. I pretend to my kids.


It's a medicine. I'm still pretty obsessed with coconut oil.


Ben: Okay. So it is a magic ingredient. All great. It's,


Salima: Yeah.


Ben: Okay. And so in terms of current projects, you have two books on the go, the Substack, you do your own podcast. Yeah. Anything else you wanna mention in terms of current and future projects?


Salima: Yeah, so I've recently agreed with my acting agent, I'm gonna start auditioning again actually. So although I took a break from acting, with all the health issues, yeah, I've just thought, I'm just, this is the year of saying yes. So I'm just gonna go for everything and see and see what happens.


And also my energy is very up and down. I've still got a few more weeks of treatment, so I'm just trying to say yes to whatever I can and what, yeah, what works. If I have to not be able to do it because I'm still not feeling a hundred percent fine, but yes is 2026 for me.


Ben: What do you think, if you look back on this year, last year, are you gonna look back and find anything funny about this or oh, that was a thing, or you're still too much in the middle of it?


Salima: I sat because Carl, as his sense of humor is incredibly dark, already laughing at lots of it.


Listen, only three and a half weeks ago, I was dragging the drain from my wound along the corridor of an NHS ward to try and get someone to change the dressing. And Cole was just appalled, but I just knew that was the only way to make things happen. So we were laughing about that last night.


So I do think a sense of humor is absolutely vital for life, even more so than I even thought. Like I found, I've had some of the funniest moments. Over the last six to nine months, in really in situations that appear very dark. Yeah. And gruesome. I had some very funny moments.


Ben: Yeah. You either laugh or you crack.


Salima: Yeah. And also, look, I think the funniest things about life tend to be on that kind of precipice, right? Is it horrendous and are you going to sob or is it very funny? Like those. That they're the highest stakes, aren't they? So actually they can be the funniest things about life because actually most of life is pretty ridiculous considering we'll both be forgotten in a couple generations time.


Ben: Yeah.


Salima: We all think we are, these kinds of our egos as humans generally are pretty inflated considering what kind of little dots we actually are.


Ben: Yeah. Who's remembered from a hundred years ago? Like virtually nobody. Yeah. Famous people then. Great. Last couple of questions then. What do you think you've got anything to tell someone who's in the middle of a thing, which they're trying to do?


Find it hard to fix or maybe that they can't fix. And maybe we can broaden this out as also, do you have any thoughts to people who wanna be creative? Or I guess you've got lots of bits to talk about, like being a bad patient or building a dad and estrangement, but is there anything you'd like to offer as thoughts?


Salima: Yeah. I'd like to say plot. I think it's really important. Okay, so let's say you have a burning ambition to write a novel, for example, like lots of people do, they'd love to write a novel. They just dunno where to start. So start with the tiniest thing. So start with like a hundred words a day, like 50 words a day, like whatever, like on your bus route home.


Write 50 words. 50 times, seven times four. Oh God, I don't know. But that's up, that's 1400 words a month. So and that's with barely any effort whatsoever. So these little micro habits I think are really very vital. And like you were saying, you've just written one sentence that day, great.


So I think plot is a, is actually a word that can be used. In a way that we don't normally use. Like the mechanics of creating something are just like habits. It reminds me of how when you were in your twenties, you had on your computer these screensavers. Do you remember?


Ben: Yeah.


These are my, like lifetime goals.


Salima: Yeah. Yeah. Do you remember? Because I really remember that. I won't say what they were, but I do remember what they were.


Ben: I've hit a few of them. On


Salima: done. Yeah. Yeah. I think anything like that appeals to you. We've gone peak, manifesting peak, manifesting boards and all of that, but there's lots of different versions of that.


It doesn't have to be pretty. Collage that you put on your wall. It can be a screensaver or it can just be like some, like random notes that you make to yourself. So starting small I think is one massive thing. Start


Ben: small and plod.


Salima: Plod. And lastly, there's no. I need some help.


'cause I think these things are rarely created in a vacuum. So for example, years ago I did a favor and favor, those courses? Just an online writing course. 'cause my kids were tiny so I couldn't do the one that was like in their offices. And I just did a mini six week course of that.


And that got me, I think that was like how to write the first three chapters of a novel. And I think I wrote a few chapters from that. So whether you have a friend who is a writer or an actor or or you can find a mentor, I think that's really key to, rather than just taking yourself off and doing it.


And it also holds you accountable. Somebody who's gonna check in. It doesn't have to be something expensive. There's lots of versions of this, I think the collective, the community is really important when you're doing something creative.


Ben: That sounds excellent. So just start, plod keep going.


Find a mentor.


Salima: Yeah, exactly. And whatever that person is,


Ben: Excellent. Anything else you'd like to say?


Salima: I want to thank you for being my friend for so many years.


Ben: Let's hope it's gonna be we're, we could go for another 30 that should be within…..


Salima: Come on.


Ben: Yeah.


We'll be approaching 80 then…


Salima: I'm just living to a hundred remember


Ben: Yeah. Okay.

Salima: So I can, we can do another, we can do another 30 to 40. Yeah. I think, 'cause look. On a serious point, it is rare that you find people who then know you in that way. I can use a shorthand with you. We can pick up when we haven't spoken for a long time, and I can speak to you very directly and in a shorthand that I can't with very many people.

Ben: That's true. Cherish your long term friendships. On that note, Salima, thank you.

 Salima: Thank you so much.

In Podcast, Life, Arts, Writing, Theatre Tags Salima Saxton, Ben Yeoh Chats, cancer recovery, NHS, patient experience, estrangement, memoir, writing process, creativity, dark humour

Simon Kane: Performing Shakespeare on YouTube, Immersive Theatre, and Why Fun Matters

February 14, 2026 Ben Yeoh

Is walking around a fake bathroom really “immersive” theatre, or is a theme park actually more honest art?

“If you’re making a space from scratch, why make a space that already exists? One of the reasons I love Disneyland is: Walt Disney made a thing that doesn’t exist.”

In this episode, Ben sits down with Simon Kane, a writer and performer whose work spans the devised theatre world of Shunt, BBC radio comedy on John Finnemore’s Souvenir Programme, and a lockdown Shakespeare experiment where he began reading and performing the plays chronologically. Simon takes us inside the mechanics of performance, questioning what “immersive” should actually mean, and arguing for “fun” as a rigorous artistic metric.

“An idea of what theatre should be is not theatre. You can do anything. That’s the point.”

We also dive into why Richard II can be read as a story about a fallen celebrity, the difference between stage acting and voice work, and the challenge of maintaining creative intentionality in an age of streaming algorithms.

We cover

  • Story first: why Simon shifted his Richard II from “Sigma male” energy to “washed-up star” to make the play land.

  • The immersive fallacy: why “walking around a set” is not enough, and why theme parks might be the clearest form of intentional spatial design.

  • Devised vs scripted: how Shunt built worlds without starting from a text, and how that contrasts with the discipline of audio comedy and drama.

  • Yes, and no: the improv rule that a clown “must always say yes”, and how refusal can be a creative act.

  • Escaping the algorithm: practical ways to consume culture on purpose rather than letting autoplay dictate your taste.

“Do stuff on purpose. That’s harder and harder these days because it is so easy to just click the next thing on my algorithm. It’s different to go, no… what do you actually want to do?”

Summary contents, transcript and podcast links below. Listen on Apple, Spotify or wherever you listen to pods. Video above or on Youtube.

Contents

  • 00:00 Meet Simon Kane: writer, performer, and lockdown creator

  • 00:24 Lockdown Shakespeare marathon: the idea

  • 01:44 Why YouTube? From Defoe’s Plague Year to tackling Shakespeare chronologically

  • 05:02 Making Shakespeare accessible

  • 06:36 Story-first acting: motivation, ‘pretending,’ and finding the way in

  • 11:10 Cracking Richard II: reinventing the character to unlock the play

  • 15:28 Julius Caesar choices: Cassius, Antony, and playing the populist

  • 16:28 From Shakespeare to Shunt: ensemble theatre and a different kind of acting

  • 22:07 How Shunt builds shows: space as text, rewrites, and devising under pressure

  • 25:19 Audience, space, and ‘immersive’: Jonah, walks, Punchdrunk, and Disneyland

  • 34:25 Clowning 101: Saying “Yes,” Saying “No,” and the Absurdist Engine

  • 35:59 Writer-First vs Ensemble Theatre

  • 37:04 When Critics Don’t Get the New Thing

  • 39:32 Devising, Short Runs, and the Joy of Doing It Night After Night

  • 40:20 Voice & Audio Work: Fast Choices, Characters, and “Reacting”

  • 43:11 Post-Pandemic Theatre + Digital Futures

  • 47:29 What Sticks: Influences from Theatre, TV Comedy, and Low-Fi Ambition

  • 50:53 Overrated/Underrated: Criticism, Arts Council Funding, and Netflix’s Impact

  • 57:52 What’s Next: The Book, Edinburgh Decisions, and the Cost of the Fringe

  • 01:00:55 Advice for Creatives: Do It on Purpose, Make the New Thing, Have Fun

Transcript (lightly edited, transcribed by LLM AI, so mistakes are very possible)

Ben: Hey everyone. I'm super excited to be speaking to Simon Kane. Simon is a brilliant writer and performer whose work ranges from devised and ensemble theater to new writing, solo shows, audio work, and from comedy to Shakespeare. Simon, welcome.

Simon: Hello. I've never actually written any Shakespeare.

Ben: But performed in?

Simon: Yeah. I've just been re-edit, trying to re-edit on this phone, the stuff I did in lockdown projects where I was reading the whole thing. But the phone doesn't have quite enough memory. I want to make sure I, in case YouTube ever suddenly falls to pieces, that I have everything I put on there in other versions.

And I also thought I'd just to explain: during lockdown, I did an actor weekday. That's a bad way to explain it, isn't it, Ben? I read an act, a play, a day for a week, intending to do the complete work of Shakespeare a week at a time. And I got four plays in and then I came back for another play and didn't like it.

So I did that again. And basically, yeah, I didn't achieve playing every character in Shakespeare, but I'm very proud of some of the work they did. I really love the Titus, I really love the Julius Caesar, and I'm thinking of coming back to it as well. I stopped 'cause things were opening up and because I was doing the histories, and Rich II goes into Henry the Fourth, which goes into Henry the V.

And I didn't really feel like doing Henry the V at the time. And also I realized recently, another reason I did it was I didn't know how to do Falstaff, and I've worked out, 'cause I have to choose lots of different voices and it did just have to be big voice choices. 'Cause I'm, and I realized I'll do what I did for Petco, make him Australian.

Ben: What made you choose that as a lockdown project?

Simon: So I'd started the project was I've always been interested in YouTubing and then in lockdown, a lot of my friends were suddenly making stuff like John Finnemore was doing stuff as Arthur from Cabin Pressure and Carrie Quinlan was doing stuff with Andy Stanton.

And that was one aspect of the decision. Another was, as lockdown started, I thought, oh, I'd really wanna read Daniel Defoe's Journal the Plague Year. And then I realized I had that in the flat and I started reading it and it was really interesting. And I thought, oh, I can do read that on YouTube. I'll read 10 pages a day and I'll, and that'll be me reaching out to people on YouTube and by the, and I really enjoyed that.

I really liked that. Discipline's too strong a word. Structure. And already I have a blog and for some reason at the end of the year, previous year, I decided this time I'm really gonna post a thing a day, which would never be the discipline before. And then we went into lockdown. It's, oh, great.

And so that was also provided a thi, the blog was a place where I could then post an episode and a little explanatory thing. And then I got to the end of Journal of the Plague Year and thought, I'm really enjoying this. I want to rea, I'll do another book. And it had to be out of copyright, didn't have to be out of copyright, but I thought—

Ben: Preferable.

Simon: Yeah. And then I suddenly thought, oh, there's no theaters. I haven't done Shakespeare in a while. I'll do the complete works of Shakespeare. And I have, which I won for a competition. I can't remember exactly what it's called. It's the Oxford University Press, I think, which has made some controversial decisions such as Falstaff's not actually called Falstaff.

They call him John Oldcastle. So I quite look forward to being the first actor to play John Oldcastle in a while. They've got a giant magic cat in Macbeth and it's got two king Ls. And I just, anyway, I just, I've got this book. I'll perform the complete works with Shakespeare chronologically as he wrote them.

And I realized I'd get to The Tempest if I'd done that by Christmas and I started reading Two Gentlemen of Verona and really enjoyed it.

Ben: You think you are going to get to the end one day?

Simon: I don't see why not. What was great because it was locked down, there were no theaters, so it would've been a project that would seem, I don't, I actually, I'm not sure I believe in stupid hubris anymore, but it would, this actor's gonna do the complete works of Shakespeare, but if there's no theater going on, it made more sense.

But I'm so pleased with the stuff I did, and I, and it's so, for some people, for some of the people who saw it, and that's very few people, it was their first introduction to this play. And I think they're good introductions. I thought I try to make sense of it and that's, it is good for me as well to have come up with a version of a play that to me makes sense.

Where I know why everyone's doing what they're doing and they're fun and that you approach and it doesn't seem frightening. Like people know I've prepared this in the morning. I've shot it, I've edited. One of the reasons I stopped doing it again was it was just taking up every waking hour.

So by the time I got to Tamer the Shrew already, if I was actually gonna do it chronologically, I would've gone onto the histories. So I thought, save the histories and do those separately. Okay. So then I got to Titus Andronicus. And by the end of that, I was so tired. I thought, I need, I can't continue this.

I'll do, I'll just head onto Julius Caesar, which was a play I was interested in. And then stop. And that's a season, that's four Shakespeares, that's a season. And then come back to it later. So yeah, and then when I tried to do the, I don't, yeah, I tried to look at the Henry of the Sixes, part one, two, and three, which are plays I love, but there are a lot of characters in there who—

Ben: [that's tricky].

Simon: A lot of 'em talk quite similarly and especially the first one is, I think, a big spectacle. So without all the battle scenes and explosions, it's a little hollow. Yeah. It's a much harder, it's a much harder thing to do if you don't, like 12th Night, the characters are really well defined and you can have fun playing all of them.

But also history, people keep changing their names 'cause they win and lose titles. So Richard II is quite handleable because there's three or four characters in it. And also every time I do a new act, I say the story so far. And also usefully offer some content warnings and explanations.

Explanations of the stuff. And also, yeah, all the melanin hatred you keep coming across. You just go, this is gonna turn up and yeah, don't make an excuse for it, but it's good to warn people of it. 'Cause you don't want people to go, oh, watch Shakespeare, suddenly feel like they've been mugged.

Ben: It's good to make it accessible.

And I think there was a tradition even at the time of essentially throwing around your troupe of players. They had a day to rehearse and then they just put it on that evening. Oh yeah. Yeah. So there's a, there was a lot of that. I'm interested in your overall process, but maybe through the lens of this project about what's your starting unit or starting point.

Do you tend to like character or an image as a starting point?

Simon: For what?

Ben: For getting into putting on the piece or performing somewhere. Is it through image or line and speech? Is it through character? Or there's a lot of talk about directors nowadays from the US school about everything has gotta be action and want and things like that.

So I'm interested in how you mix together all of those things.

Simon: I do different things, so I don't, it's not all the same process. I've never really directed anything.

Ben: But you're directing yourself in this piece in a way.

Simon: Yeah, but I don't, I'd happily go, yeah, I'm directing, but that's not directing.

Yeah. If you're not, if you're not taking it to someone else that's not directing. It's, but it's, it is like, all writing is improvisation as well. At some point you're improvising it and then you're recording it. And that's how I worked in devised theatre often we'd be improvising stuff and then, and I'd be the one to go and write up my memory of it, then bring that in and everyone else could go, no, there's this.

And at least there, there was a text there to turn, to use, however everyone wanted to use it. But I guess I still don't, I make things in different ways, so I dunno what you're asking me about.

Ben: Yeah. Okay. I guess for this project, [. Because we'll come onto the Shunt work.]

I'm interested, perhaps when you are getting into Shakespeare, you're gonna perform Shakespeare or a play. A play where you have a written text and there's characters, so we are defining it down.

Simon: Yeah.

Ben: Do you, and maybe obviously you'll listen to the director and things, but before the director or the work you are doing alongside the director, do you approach that from a very character driven, let's get inside the head of a practice or?

Simon: I approach it from a, I approach it from a, I think, a story.

Ben: Story?

Simon: Right. So, I think the two main focuses for me, not as a manifesting, but just the thing I do, is the story and, but, and the, all the normal story things of that. What's your motivation?

Ben: So it is a motivation. Yeah.

Simon: Another way to put it is what are you pretending?

Ben: Yes. That's slightly different though, but, yeah.

Because a motivation could be just your simple want, but if you are pretending that's a kind of projection of what you or whatever you want to pretend, but it might not be the same as your want.

Simon: But how is it different, give me an example?

Ben: You could come across, I guess, as pretending to be beautiful or pretending to be ugly.

So that's the thing.

Simon: Oh, I see.

Ben: [But you are but you are wanting to do… cross talk]

Simon: I don't think in those terms at all. How do you pretend to be? Some people do are completely in, that doesn't make sense. Sorry, I'm talking over you.

But you can, yes. You yourself projection is a thing. But you're so, yeah. You're doing it in character, I think, oh, actually. Yeah. I guess a lot of the work I have hasn't really relied on me finding a character because it is so much about my interaction with the audience or my, or my interaction with the story.

And it's just, and I think actually now you bring it up, one of the wonderful things about doing full Shakespeare is I could really do characters and immediately play people who weren't me. Yeah, no you are right. You're right to make that distinction.

Ben: Yeah, I guess this is because I probably want to go and start with the Shunt work and then come forward at this time, and I, this is obviously taints everything in a really simplified bucket, but you could say that some people would approach something purely from get inside the head of the character and from the character.

Play, pretend, or however the extreme, which you may not think works or not, is I'm not gonna think about the character, all I will just dress up like this character, everything on the outside, clown nurse or something. And from that external point of view, everything might flow. And then you have potentially a third blob of work, which is where you don't have a text or anything to working from and you're working with a bunch of other people.

And from that, and then I'm interested, what might be the thing from flows from that. And it's interesting when you're working with a text from Shakespeare, you think I can get inside and think about a character and do that. And so that's why I was interested about coming to that and how that might contrast for when you are devising work or doing ensemble work when you might not have a script or you're trying to do the script or you're making the script and how that all works.

Simon: Yeah. So I've put, I've got a few things to put a pin into for the Shakespeare, I think. The, it's the absolute best illustration of that for me is the fact that I played Rich of the, I did two Richard IIs. So when I came back to it, I thought, I'll start with the histories. And by the time I got to like the fifth act, I was like, I still don't get this play.

Ben: Yeah.

Simon: I still don't. I've made, I've make, I'm making and putting some something out, which is a story that I don't understand what the story is. And I thought, and I think round about Act four when I was recording, I thought what's one of the things we know about Richard? We know that Elizabeth the First saw Richard the Second and thought that's me.

And I thought I'm definitely not playing that. I am giving a very naturalistic, slightly odd book as every, I, I lean into the oddball nature of myself when I do Shakespeare. I've a lot of experience of, of doing Shakespeare when I was young, and it was really nice to be playing that kind of, I might be using this phrase wrong, sigma male, but like the Jaques and the Lucio and then Hamlet, like the, the underminers, the outsider intellectuals.

I, I really, and who don't fit in but have their own authority. And that's how I've been playing Rich II and that's how I often see Rich II played. And I thought, but that doesn't make sense. That's not who e, if you look at Elizabeth the First, did I say first or second? Elizabeth the First, there's a very clear on that. And I was thinking, I'd seen photos of Ian Richardson.

I thought what if I play Richard II as Ian Richardson, complete full old school, absolutely delivering every line like you love the poetry, like it's a proper performance. And I thought I'll, I'm gonna redo Rich II, but with a completely different characterization of Rich II. And that changed the whole thing and it made sense to me.

By Act four of this second one, I realized I've been playing, I'm Thatcher, this is, I'm playing amongst other things, and I'm also Norma Desmond, because we don't really have a concept of majesty, but we know what a fallen star is.

And Richard II was as, as a story about a fallen star, about a story about someone who absolutely was the thing they projected themself at, and then loses that because it's built on nothing and then has nothing to replace it with.

That changed the play and also changed how every other character behaved. And that, and it suddenly became a story. I understood what I was telling, and that was specifically because I changed the characterization, Richard the Second, and similarly when I came to and I'm—

Ben: Just gonna pick on that.

Simon: Yeah.

Ben: And that makes sense to me now that you say it's story first, because from understanding the story—

Simon: Yeah.

Ben: The character changed. And from the character, everything else changed to make sense of the story. Yeah.

Simon: Yeah.

Ben: Whereas you could have gone, someone could have gone the other way, I'm just gonna make sense of the character.

Yeah. And then whatever story comes out of that, comes outta that. But you weren't satisfied. 'Cause the first time around you, you had a character. Yeah. But it's like, when I play this character the story doesn't seem to make sense to me anymore. So I think that's a really interesting way of approaching it.

Simon: Yeah. I, and you know that, that's why talking about character and motivation and story are interlinked. But often, especially with a well-worn text, especially with part of the canon, I'll see productions where it doesn't make sense. I don't understand what the story is 'cause the characterization doesn't.

And, but with the great classics, you can change what a character is and still tell a different story. Yeah. And I think Hamlet's the, the best and worst example of this. I've seen so many Hamlets way that work so well, yeah.

Ben: Great character.

Simon: For the first, for the first act, and then come the second act it is, but why isn't he killing Claudius?

Ben: Yeah.

Simon: What, there is this huge gap in Hamlet where you… I think you have to know what's, you have to tell the story of why Hamlet then doesn't kill Claudius.

Ben: Yeah.

Simon: And it's not, well because he is pretending to be mad.

What is he, why is he pretending to be mad? Yeah. And I think yeah, it's what's the, so great to be told a story and it becomes, there, there could still be lots of great stuff, but I'd also like, Polonius, what's going on with Polonius. That's a great thing. One of the great things about Shakespeare is just, there are stories there if you wanna—

Ben: Yeah.

Simon: And what's the story—

Ben: We're telling.

Simon: And oh yeah. I, and one of the reasons I'm so proud of my Julius Caesar is I'd always sensed this version of Cassius and Mark Antony. I loved the character of Cassius. I loved how right he was about everything and how he kept deferring to Brutus because he also knew that he was a hothead.

He also knew that he was not a born leader and that dooms them. And I'd always wanted to play that. And then when it came to Mark Antony, I just, I dunno why, is bloviating the right word, sort of Boris Johnson, him, I don't dunno. It was just, he had a very few lines in the first act, but they were so obsequious, Dees, I thought, just go B.

And then by the time you get to his oration, to the Romans, I love doing that so much, even though it's such a sort of classic scene. It was just playing a total populist as a total populist. Without any. Without any, yeah. Without any, yeah. And anyone you play is charming. I could, this is really what you would talk about, but yeah.

It was, it just felt so good to be getting it.

Ben: And let's contrast that then. Do a little potted history. There was a collective called Shunt, which I think was one of the most influential theatre collectives, call it almost a movement, particularly within the London theatre scene.

And so arguably global. And you did a lot of work with Shunt and a lot of their work comes from an ensemble basis. Yeah. Although it often does use a director, but doesn't have to, and we can talk about how ensemble works differently, but often when you start, there isn't a written text. There might be one by the end.

So that's quite different from doing Shakespeare and you might not even start with some characters. But you might do, and I was looking at some clips 'cause I still remember, I don't actually remember the details very well, but I definitely remember the feeling of Dance Bear Dance.

Simon: Yeah.

Ben: [Cross talk: All the way back then. So I'd be interested in, did you—]

Simon: [See the one with me in—]

Ben: Yes. I think I saw it twice. I saw it in the arches. And your one with—

Simon: [Yeah.]

Ben: Yeah, because it was so extraordinary for the time. So I'm gonna let you talk a little bit maybe about your experience of that and then relate it back to making work.

So we just talked about Shakespeare and going through story and then into character and then performing. And then you've got this whole other way of working. And so with contrast, and obviously it's performing, but you start ensemble, you might not even start with much more than an idea or a character, and then you produce this other kind of work.

So why don't you talk about that?

Simon: That's the other thing I want to put the pin in. 'Cause for me there's, the really interesting journey for me was even before I was working with Shunt I knew Shunt through Gemma Brockis, who I knew at Cambridge. And towards our last years at Cambridge, we started working with a guy called Jeremy Hardingham.

So the journey for me is like at the end of my first year at Cambridge, I played Hamlet and I, and it was an amazing company. And then I watched and there it was an amazing company.

I thought I've played Hamlet. I'm gonna… unless there's touring or unless… a friend wants me in something… I don't really wanna act anymore. And Jeremy asked me to be in King Lear, and I said, I don't wanna do King Lear. And I saw his King Lear. And it wasn't like how I imagined, how I had imagined putting on Shakespeare before…

This was not about casting actors who have a really interesting take on the character and bringing them all together and telling the story. This was a completely different kind of piece of theatre, but it was complete, absolutely King Lear. And there were brilliant actors in it. But there were also performances that on their own might be seen as quite wooden, but weren't about people pretending to be that character.

And it was, excuse me, it was just a phenomenal room to be in. For three hours where this thing was happening. And then I started working with Jeremy. We did a thing, we did a version of A Midsummer Night's Dream, which I loved being in, and, but this type of theatre. And then I stayed, I've been making work with Gemma ever since, but this kind of theatre made me usefully self-conscious about just playing a character and what else an actor does in a company on stage.

And when I watched Shunt’s first show… watched Shunt’s second show, actually, The Ballad of Bobby Francois, which was quite a silent piece, quite a clown show. All the performances were great, but they were not really playing characters. And similarly, a lot of this devised stuff, immersive installation.

It wasn't about seeing someone play another character. It was just about someone interact with an audience. And I, and so I became… really, I saw that the thing I wanted to learn to do was absolutely just deal as myself in character with an audience, with a situation, but not present a character that was an interpretation of someone from a story.

And that's what went into when I did my, it's still my head, my solo sequel to the Shunt work, Jonah Non Grata. It wasn't about, I'm presenting my characterization of Jonah, it's about what is this person doing on stage? What are they trying to be? How are they interacting with an audience? It wasn't about me putting on a voice or doing stuff like that.

And in terms of the ensemble I made a piece with Gemma where I played two very different characters and that was an adaptation of, or inspired by, the book Invitation to a Beheading. And a lot of Shunt’s works are inspired by books. There's always some kind of text, but then you improvise scenes within the situations in those texts.

And I think normally when you're improvising it's normal anyway to improvise without actually coming up with a character. You're, it's about the situation and the back and the forth. And so I play two very different characters. I was a nervous lawyer and then a sort of weird surrealist alpha male executioner, but I used my own voice for that.

It was just, the situation was different. And the look was very different. If you put on a costume to be a person, you still need a mirror, otherwise you dunno what you're wearing. It might help you stand or move differently. But I, yeah, I have, I think I have at least those two strings to my bow, if that's the metaphor.

Like I can, like being present with other actors and with an audience in a space and interact with that. And also going away and finding a character and going, doing the whole Antony Sher thing, which I loved growing up. Seeing him draw the characters he was going to be and then transform into that.

I think the visual aspect is really important. And that, and also fun.

Ben: And how did you make decisions within the ensemble? So you're improvising, you're going back and forth, people are playing, however they're playing, all the scenes develop. How does a group of people then decide this is the most interesting way forward?

This is the best way forward. There is no way forward. Let's argue about this for a while. How do decisions within a rehearsal room start to form? Can you articulate that?

Simon: Yeah. Although I'm an associate artist, I would never be involved at the very beginning of a process. The time I would come on board, there would always be a set. The set is the text. What Lizzie designs. And the basic idea, which can change, that the collective has of the audience's journey through that space, or just within that space, is already in place and the text is already in place.

The one slight exception to this was Tropicana, where I came in mid-run. And so there was already a show there, but when I came in as the lift operator, I was allowed to rewrite my stuff. And that rewriting inspired other people like Hannah to rewrite their bits and yeah, I could work on everything I did and it was really useful to have a show in place and for me to be allowed to come in and go, oh, I think this might work, and do this.

And so there's always some kind of thing already there when I come into a Shunt show, and it really varies. It's always down to the wire, at least down to the wire.

And I think when I was first brought into Dance Bear Dance, it was as someone who, working with Gemma on Invitation to a Beheading, it was someone who had experience of coming up with text for a devised show.

Bobby Francois, there wasn't really much text, but because this was gonna be a council meeting, that this was gonna be a much more text-heavy show than they'd done before, which at least I think is one of the reasons I've been invited to come in as early as I did on it.

And I think one, definitely something I literally brought to the table in Shunt was an idea of how to create text that worked within an immersive environment that wasn't just like delivering a lecture, say. Like how you present information to an audience and give them the information to present audience back as well.

And you play games and one of the best bits about the devising process was just, oh, every hour go away, come up with something to present. And the presentations are so important. And when they were doing the cabaret, that was also people would present a thing, a scene.

Ben: Just make the work and see—

Simon: See where it goes.

Yes, it was very much that, yeah. That improv thing of just do it and then see.

Ben: I'm gonna try and pick up on quite a few things and we see where we go here. So I think it's really interesting. I guess it's always been within performance, but there's emphasis, first of all, on audience or audience experience.

And second of all, where the audience and the performer is within the space. And this idea that, and actually it's influenced my more recent work around the show starts immediately. Or in fact my last show, it even starts when you're not in the space, within the bar. Yeah. I'm speaking to people.

You're inviting them in, you are already telling them about what it is, and then you're invited and go through the space. And I've been very much more interested in how much the audience has agency within a space as opposed to in a very traditional, or some traditional, where the audience just sits and watches something and, or you go further back and they're always rowdy.

And I'm interested in how your line of work here thinks about having an audience pay attention, how you think about audience within space, and maybe you can do this with reference to your latest work or even some of the Shunt work, with how that works in terms of thinking about the audience where they're not simply a passive piece of the performance, but a more active piece.

Simon: Yeah. It's obviously about that, but I guess why I become, why I get antsy is I don't wanna start, as I hear often, suggesting that a passive audience is unengaged.

Ben: To do with attention.

Simon: [Not even that attention. Yeah.] No, I thought you said tension.

Ben: [No.]

Simon: All engagement, all art is about holding someone's attention and I think so much of it for me, in terms of doing immersive work, is you're doing this every night. For me, it's really about making the experience I'm going through night after night a proper experience, and that means different from the one before.

And so I was thinking about this on the way here, 'cause I'm thinking about making another, a second solo show finally after Jonah, and what I'd forgotten, one of the things I loved writing about it and when I took it to Edinburgh last year and all the things I was refining about it, but one thing I hadn't really, at least I don't remember acknowledging, is how it's so much a show about a performer in a space.

It's what I'm doing in a space. It's about a person in a space with an audience. And that, which sounds redundant, but I was really thinking about what to do next. I realized, oh, my problem is, I dunno the way in because sort of everything I wanted to play with about the idea of what it is to be, to go into a room and then have someone talk at you, was there in Jonah.

And so I'd be thinking about, oh, maybe the character of this new piece, we sit at a table, it'll be a date. And I'm like, but that's, so you're losing something. It's about the less I have to pretend, the better. Unless there're bits where I suddenly really do have to pretend. And that's a great bit.

So when, although the audience may never be conscious of this, when I'm in the whale and there's just a blue spotlight, there's loads of theatre happening in front of you. And I am covered in stuff, and I am playing a person in the belly of a whale. And that's, and I love it.

And that's something mystical going on, but I always thought a theatre's like a church and a church is set up a bit like an airplane and just all these spaces where an audience come in and that's the contract, and they understand the contract, and you can play with the contract, but that's also something I don't have to pretend.

Ben: Yeah.

Simon: That allows me to come in and be as alive as possible in front of them in this show. In the same way that with Shunt where we had these incredible play spaces designed by Lizzie, you could just come in and play that game in that space. What do you want to do in that space with those people? It was a huge inspiration.

And so I was, yeah. I think this was inspired by a bit of a documentary about Punchdrunk last night on Sky. And I've never seen a Punchdrunk show, but someone was saying about, oh, the audience coming in and they're in a space. But also that space has been designed, like yeah, that's just pretending.

I was like, I don't want to detract from their incredible work 'cause I've never seen it, but I was just like, just a set. You're just walking around a set. What's interesting about being either in a, sharing a space with someone and realizing that, oh, maybe if I do go to Edinburgh with a show, it should be in Edinburgh, it should be a promenade thing.

I do a lot of Jack the Ripper walks. And my friend Ben Whitehead, who came up with them, also came up with ghost bus tours. And I've worked at Phantom Peak and so much of my, so many of my day jobs are within a space. I relate to a very specific space. So Jonah was really good because it was people coming to listen to a man in a box.

Ben: And that's why the label immersive is slightly mislabeled in that sense.

Simon: It's why I think you can call it an immersive work even though it's an audience watching a person on stage. That's why I think it is an immersive piece, yes.

Ben: Oh, so I guess I was saying that for instance, the Jack the Ripper walk is immersive in a way that people might not think it's immersive.

Simon: Yeah. Yeah. But although, everyone knows you're walking around the streets.

I think if you say you don't use it as immersive theatre 'cause you haven't created the space, I think normally immersive suggests to me a creation of a space. And it's some form of installation.

Ben: And which isn't just a set.

Simon: No, it can't help but be a set.

But I think, I guess like I was watching the footage of Punchdrunk and they go, oh, you've walked into a fake bathroom. And it's that, how, it's this dreadful, 'cause I haven't seen the show, but it's like, how interesting is it ultimately to walk into a fake bathroom? And yet, and this is the thing I had to deal with.

I love theme parks. I love theme parks. Okay. And that's just walking around a very created environment.

Ben: Yeah. But they're very honest. It's if you are not pretending to be a bathroom, you're not, theme parks aren't pretending to be something other. So where if you get a very detailed piece of set, which is trying to be naturalistic, but somehow misses a thing, it then feels, oh, it's because you're not the very best fake person.

Simon: That's not the problem for me. Okay. 'Cause everyone makes mistakes. It's not about, it's about the intention.

Ben: I see. Okay.

Simon: I think if you're making a space from scratch, why make a space that already exists? Why? One of the reasons I love Disneyland. Does it exist? Walt Disney made a thing that doesn't exist.

Ben: Only exists. Yeah. Imagination on some points.

Simon: It's such a realization of his very specific idea of what is good, which you don't have to agree with at all, but it's absolutely… he lived there as it was being made.

Ben: Yeah. It's a real—

Simon: I get that. Here's Main Street, USA and here's, there's a steamboat and there's a mountain, and there's the world, and there's all of Africa in a boat. Although that came later, I think.

Ben: Yeah. And even more amazing. Maybe he's the only one who could make it.

Simon: Yeah, absolutely. Singularly, yeah. That's why David Hockney said he is the most important artist of the 20th century.

But it's a very singular vision of a space. And I also love walking around fake environments.

Ben: Yeah.

Simon: So I dunno what it was about that bit of the documentary. It's not just artifice, it's something else. I'm sure I'd find it huge fun to see one of their shows.

Ben: If it's not too controversial. I'm interested that you haven't been to a Punchdrunk.

Simon: They used to be too expensive.

Ben: Okay.

Simon: When I was watching the bit of the documentary going, why am I seeing the Punchdrunk show? And I think I would be too scared of not enjoying it.

Ben: And in some ways I think, maybe it's not quite fair to say, but I would say Punchdrunk… there's an argument saying some of Punchdrunk couldn't have existed without some of the stuff that Shunt and Shunt-adjacent work had done earlier.

Simon: So I have not seen it. I wouldn't say that. Because I think there's a huge creative crossover.

[Cross talk]

Simon: BAC was an incredible building and they were using it. And I think that's huge fun. And I think similarly when Shunt moved into underneath London Bridge, it's what do we do with this? And I think the approaches to space are very different. And the approaches, hard to put a show in a space.

Shunt made a clown installation. There's something very absurdist about it. And one of the great things about absurdism is it can be done quite cheaply because there's a slight post-apocalyptic sense of the comedy of scarcity.

Ben: On clowning. I had a very short clown question, which is, should a clown always say yes?

Simon: Oh yeah, that's a very interesting question, but it's not interesting because I feel I have to answer it. It's one of the things that put me off when I was in twenties, I was doing clown school.

I'm rediscovering Dylan Moran. I'm just rewatching Black Books. Dylan is a hugely negative figure. But also there's a real innocence to him when he falls in love.

Even if you're saying no, you're saying yes to no. Instantly you're developing it. But just to be given that lesson, because the very first time I heard that was a weekend workshop, that's such, it's such an important question, which is why it's an interesting one.

Yeah, because also like Jonah is like Hamlet was my investigation of refusing the call to adventure.

Ben: Yes.

Simon: And I did my English dissertation on the early work of Woody Allen, who again is like three films in a row about political assassination with a clown who doesn't want to go on with it.

Absolutely. Obviously a clown can refuse.

Ben: This other absurdist things… I was interested in your audio work, which I'm gonna come to as well as a kind of almost separate strand in how it feeds in. But before that, I was just gonna pick up on the BAC, the space, Shunt…

Because at the same time as that was happening and I'd been theatre blogging a little bit around there as well, there was an ongoing argument from a more traditional writing school which would put the writer first. So you have a writer first, a well-made script.

You get a director and actors and you put things on, versus an ensemble school, of which we touched on various ways that you could do that. I guess I was a theatre maker, but I wasn't doing it full time. I had a whole other job and still was making some bits of theatre.

I found that was a really exciting argument, which was played out in performances. It was played out over blogs. And I guess still to some degree plays out now. David Eldridge, who was from very much the writer school has got some great stuff on at the moment, but I'd be interested if you had any reflections on, did you feel that was an ongoing debate then, and how that fits into the liveliness of theatre now?

Simon: I think the only stakes of that debate really were that theatre critics were suddenly being sent to things that they had no experience of. I'm a theatre critic and though I'm watching this I don't know how to process the thing I'm watching because it's not, not the job I signed up for.

Ben: Interesting.

Simon: I'd already gone through that one. My experience of watching Jeremy's King Lear was like that. One of the things was also really great about that was because he was a student. He was a student who was not trying to be a journeyman director.

He was using the resources that we had to try something new and it killed and it completely transformed or broadened my idea of what doing a show could be. And it wasn't just an idea, it was the brilliance of the execution. It was that Jeremy was so good at that. And I think that's a hugely important part.

It wouldn't have happened if he wasn't so good at that.

Ben: Yeah.

Simon: Sometimes as we were talking about, you make the thing that doesn't exist. Often the best artists are artists who are good at something that doesn't exist. Some who are brilliant at something that doesn't exist.

And so they make the thing and then it exists.

Ben: And the critics didn't understand it at the time.

Simon: Yeah. Do you know Nicholas Craig, the Nigel Planer character?

Ben: A tiny bit.

Simon: There's the only credits to, is The Naked Actor show is such a perfect sort of snapshot of black box, him in different costumes doing things and some science fiction and some, but the point I'm getting at is someone brilliant will come along and do something completely new and people go, oh, there's this.

And then a whole bunch of people who don't really get it at all will come along and go, oh, now we're doing this. You go if you don't do it, if you don't get it. And that sort of theatre of the seventies and eighties, which has huge talents doing incredible stuff, but also the sense that quite a few directors were coming along.

In their twenties and going, oh, this is what theatre looks like now. An idea of what theatre should be is not theatre.

Ben: Yeah.

Simon: You can do whatever you like. That's the point. What is it you want to do? That to me is what theatre is.

I think what annoyed me and some of us in, was the idea that we were doing this because we couldn't do text.

Ben: Yes.

Simon: It was, no, we've done text. Yeah. We fucking kicked Shakespeare's ass and now we want to see what else we can do.

Ben: Yeah.

Simon: And it's not necessarily a transferable skill. We're coming back to that idea. The main attraction is that you're doing it night after night, so you're doing something slightly different.

Ben: Yeah.

Simon: And so I don't have that much experience of a long run of a play.

Ben: Yeah.

Simon: I really don't. And that's not 'cause I don't want to. And I don't want to get back to that but yeah, in the first half of my adulthood, it's been mainly devised work.

All very short runs, different things.

Ben: And maybe now be interesting to touch on your audio work. Do you think audio work is essentially your form of theatre as well? You don't necessarily have a set or a space, although you can definitely engage or have an audience pay attention. You don't necessarily get the feedback.

From that. Do you see it as a separate strand?

Simon: There's lots of stuff I'm not good at with voice work, but what I'm good at, I'm good at sight reading, and I'm good at making quick decisions that aren't dumb.

And I also really enjoy working with other people. So most of my voice work that people will know is in a sketch show, where you get to do a lot of voices and use characters very quickly. And it gets me, it allows me to mimic some old school kind of acting because a lot of John's sketches deal in old school genres.

But John's a brilliant performer, a brilliant writer, and everyone in the company's a brilliant performer, brilliant writer. So I'm very happy just sitting and listening. But that kind of work. And then the work I've been doing with Audible and with Big Finish, it's making quick decisions and letting them play out.

The thing that always, and also when I was doing John's show, that's the first sketch work I did. So I wasn't a sketch comedian and a bit like talking about devising, I didn't have a default persona that I could just bring to a sketch and that I didn't have a default voice, but both John and I had been writing for David Mitchell, Robert Webb, and David has a very clear default voice where you could just play it.

I didn't have that. And I certainly hear that in the first two series going I dunno what I am if I'm not playing a specific character. Oh I'm a little awkward about that. I can't remember what's going on and it's all quick decisions.

Ben: Is it just more natural?

Simon: It's just, that's natural. I'm very happy at pretending. I like that game. I like, it's the story, it's the storytelling thing. And I don't always make the right decisions.

There are jokes I don't get. Acting is reacting. You can't react in voice work.

Ben: Yeah.

Simon: I did occasionally. I went, oh, oh. But listening to people, the thing I enjoy a lot about acting you just don't do on the radio, but then you're reading a script, so you're not even looking at the other performer.

Your eyes are basically always on the words. But it's a really nice thing to come in and have recorded. But…It's at the far end of the pretending to be other people spectrum.

Ben: Yep. That's fair. And what do you find exciting or the other side challenging about performance today?

Maybe we could say London theatre performance, but you might have views globally or just about performing arts or culture in general?

Simon: You mean as an audience?

Ben: Either.

Simon: In terms of me watching stuff or?

Ben: Either watching or even doing, maybe in terms of doing actually, and I could frame it as a couple of thoughts I had is I had thought that maybe the pandemic might change things more than they have.

We've got back to a state where I don't think it's maybe changed that much. The little bits around, but that's interesting. I still think there's a big question mark on how we approach digital work. Although I think we're getting more, becoming more interesting still, I feel.

Simon: What do you mean by digital work?

Ben: So digital work is essentially, I'm thinking about digital work as digitizing live work or putting the digital—

Simon: Oh, I see.

Ben: Like video archiving or partly archiving or a little bit. So your YouTube or performing Shakespeare is a kind of form of digital work, right?

Simon: Yeah. .

Ben: Rather than just video cameraing,... So that's one element. Or you go the other way where I think Katie Mitchell's done more of this work, or there's been others around it, where you have much more digital within your live performance.

So using video and things, that's maybe one end of the spectrum of where digital could land. We'll see what these LLMs, AIs bring or not to the process. So I'm interested in what you find exciting, either from a performance view or indeed it could be on the other side in terms of watching, and also what you feel is challenging or boring or is we should really just do less of that and do more of something else.

Simon: I don't necessarily find anything as a performer exciting, otherwise I'd go and do it. Again, I was thinking on the walk here how much easier it was making a show like Jonah when I had so many friends and contemporaries who were also making works in small rooms and presenting me with options to copy or being inspired by.

And now I am, I'm seeking it. I'm still seeking out not beginning artists, but artists working in that space. And I'm really excited by their work. I've met a few people who are doing, yeah, just brilliant stuff in a way that brilliant stuff has always been brilliant.

But less that I can take away and go, oh, I wanna do that.

Ben: Yeah.

Simon: Which is one of the reasons I made Jonah was I wanted people to watch it and go, oh, I could do something like that. Yeah. That's another thing I like about the affordability of a piece of theatre.

And as an audience, like the last three big shows I've seen, two at the Globe and then one at the National, I've all really loved. I saw Pinocchio, I saw a fantastic Troilus and Cressida, which is not something I thought I would see. And then I sat at the front row for The Bacchae, which I think is the place to see it.

I know people have sat further back, had a very different experience of it, but everything that went into it seemed so engaged in what they were making and the idea that it should be fun, but that fun's not an embarrassing— that's made by people who get fun, made by people who seem to genuinely be able to have fun.

Ben: Fun, yes.

Simon: And communicate that, but that not be done incredibly intelligently and argumentatively as well. Yeah. Presenting an argument and that's a run of three of those is not something I'm used to.

Ben: Pretty good.

Simon: I really came away from Pinocchio thinking, yeah, everything's fine. People get it. Don't overthink it, but do think it, and have fun. And be fun and don't, yeah.

Fun's not a genre. Yeah. A lot of things are feelings that you genuinely want to inspire in people, and they're not, and then they're a genre. You can't fake it. It's working out what in the medium you have to fake and what in the medium you shouldn't fake. And I think I've never really had that much respect for criticism.

'Cause I always think it lets people get away with absolute murder.

Ben: We'll come to that when we do a little bit of overrated, underrated. But maybe the last one on this. Is those are recent pieces, which are all done well.

I was wondering if there are any particular pieces either that you've seen or maybe that you've been in, which have stayed with you in the sense that you come back to it from time to time. So actually Dance Bear Dance is one of those. I'm not saying I think about it every month, but I'd probably say once a year something comes along and reminds me of either the feeling of the piece or what it's, ah, this is something there.

There's a few other pieces for me and it might not even be theatre. It might not even be performance. It could be, I sometimes have it on visual work or words or things.

But I'd be interested if there is a piece of performance, either as an audience or as a performer, where maybe once a year or something it refloats back in your mind and go, oh yeah, this has influenced how I think about the world or art.

Simon: There are lots and I, but I can't, immediate, nothing immediately comes to mind.

But when I was, I had a brilliant PR for Jonah Non Grata, which is a 20-year-old show that I did at Edinburgh last year, and I had to write a lot of pieces about it. And so it was interesting to me at least going, what did inspire it? Where did that idea come from?

And so some of it was books by Alasdair Gray and Stan, and all the idea of Stanley Spencer and the idea of the importance of religious art, even as an atheist, just how handy that is dealing with old stories.

But if I think of when I was in Edinburgh I started watching a lot of rewatching, a lot of National Theatre of Brent, and I'll happily put forward that— do you know the National Theatre of Brent? Brent, Desmond Dingle, and then Jim Broadbent and up into Raymond Box.

And I was rewatching them going, oh no, this is really influential. Not even in a, it's a, they're a comedy, but also the lo-fi-ness. But the fact that within this joke, the human scale they gave to history, which is often missing from how history is talked about, was so genuinely pertinent and moving.

And I loved the cleanness of that idea and I loved just the clown-ness of it. And I loved, we are going to stage the biggest thing imaginable, but we don't have the resources. So it's not something I've seen live. But I watched a lot of television, Black Books.

Watching Black Books just 'cause I thought it was about time and every, everything Dylan Moran does, I don't, again, this isn't necessarily really, we talk about, I just go, oh yeah, that informed me so much.

Ben: I haven't re-watched it recently, but there's probably been a series that I've watched—

Simon: Even before Black Books, when he was doing, How Do You Want Me? Just his performance. This is, yeah, I think I saw it in Edinburgh. Yeah.

But that doesn't really… just when I'm, a lot of my writing for comedy, writing for Mitchell & Webb was inspired by the way Dylan Moran wrote. So there's one sketch about Queen Victoria that, where this is sort of David Mitchell rant, and I thought I wasn't intentionally writing a David Mitchell rant, but it was a Dylan Moran rant that David Mitchell then said, and that it sounded like a David Mitchell rant.

But again, so yeah, television is a huge influence and that's I guess why when I'm doing theatre I want, it's based on stuff that isn't screenable.

Ben: Yeah. Okay.

Simon: It's based on being with the audience.

Ben: Great. Let's do a little bit of overrated, underrated, and then into last couple of questions on current projects or any advice.

So I'm gonna say a short thing or word, and you can say whether you think it's an underrated thing or an overrated. I guess things can be correctly rated as well, whether we want more of or less of. So I'll start with one, which we touched on.

Simon: At what point in this should I say I'm absolutely against ratings?

Ben: At the—

Simon: Beginning.

Ben: We could say—

Simon: Because everyone likes different things. This would be underrated, I think, rating. I think I'm really, I don't think, I think in print, I think criticism has stakes with the employee. Yes. And so I don't necessarily trust that people who say they like stuff in print necessarily like stuff.

But I think outside the media, outside journalism, just outside, like in personal interactions, if someone likes something, they like it.

Ben: Yeah. Oh, I don't mean in terms of that sort of rating. So I'll see. So like whether we want something more of or less. So I would say reviews and criticism.

Simon: Right.

Ben: And you are saying we should probably have less of it.

Simon: No but we've now it's, but it's a zero. It's not a zero. I'm game, is it? No it's, no, I've, dear God, I got some amazing writeups from Jonah and genuinely amazing. Not, oh, I've won this prize, but oh, you got it.

Oh, and you taught me something about my show. So if you try, I, I don't just try to see the good in stuff in a kind of self-policing way. I try and see the good in stuff because why wouldn't you find good stuff? Like no, the only benefits your life to find the good in it. But I'll try to not, not answer the question.

Ben: Yeah. Yeah. And what about the Arts Council? Do you think we should have more of it or less of it?

Simon: I don't, I've never had interactions with the Arts Council. So neutral. Not even neutral. I don't understand. Maybe more. I'm very, I'm very, okay.

I've never, one of the reasons I've never applied to council funding—

Ben: Is a good thing.

Simon: State funding for lottery funding less. I think that's why I've never applied. I've always been [uneasy with] poor people gambling and funding me. And also I'm a very privileged person. I went to Cambridge. … I should be able to find a way to make a thing.

I get it. That, yeah, exactly….  I've don't think I've been around long enough to deserve a bit of that pot now. But I think  like with the blog and the lack of a financial incentive makes it much easier for me to do what I want.

Ben: …I've done the same, done a podcast, never gonna be commercial. My blog, actually, it is on Substack, but only because they email it out. Never gonna be commercial. My very early work, I did get some Arts Council money, but then I didn't have any money then.

Now I do have money. I wouldn't ever, I would never say never. But I don't foresee a path where I would take Arts Council money. And there's just an interesting, legitimate question about what level you do arts funding, particularly in this country where you wanna fund the NHS, you wanna fund education and things like that.

Simon: Yeah, there's so much money in this country. We do give money to take whatever money …that's my feeling about it's not what it was 25 years ago.

Ben: That's fair enough.

Simon: So have you seen what they're giving money to? If they wanna give something to you, take it.

Ben: Yeah. Okay. And the last one on this, influence of Netflix, do you think it's more influence, less influence? Do you think it's been a good thing, bad thing, or just a thing —

Simon: On what?

Ben: On writing and performance, culture stories, maybe broadly. So I guess there's one argument that it has brought more stories and more funding and maybe more global stories and more funding.

And then there is also a critical argument saying it has maybe narrowed us. It's also taken away attention from other forms. Arguably social media and things are the worst, but there is that sort of argument as well. And then there's in the middle.

Simon: I dunno. I need some actual stats. This is just vibes on what, yeah. Because like sometimes something can get an audience that's not taking away someone else's audience. It's not zero sum. It's like building an audience.

This is a non-answer, but one of the things that intrigues me is how just before the Me Too movement started, like two of my favourite shows on Netflix were Jessica Jones and Kimmy Schmidt, and there were all these massive narratives being made about a woman living in a nightmare world completely controlled by an evil man.

Oh, okay. Yeah. That and yeah, when I, that time, so that would've been 2016, I think, 2015, it was brilliant to see such huge narratives that then played out. And it is extraordinary that Netflix has no money. It just keeps spending more and more money, billions, companies…. I don't understand how that works.

… I still watch. I do stream more than I watch television, but I watch a lot of YouTube. I watch a lot of YouTube channels. Yeah.

Ben: You have a favourite?

Simon: Yeah, I have a few favourites. A few of my favourites don't exist anymore. They've gone on to, is it, and there's a real gender divide by who's stayed on YouTube and who's been driven off.

Theme parks. I love all theme park YouTube. Defunctland doesn't do much now but was an incredible channel. Jenny Nicholson was incredible.

Ben: Do you have a favourite theme park…?

Simon: Hm…

Ben: Every theme park is a great theme park.

Simon: Yeah. Not every, but I do just love theme parks, but Disney, Disneyland is absolutely my favourite. I went as a kid. I went at exactly the right time, right? It was a, for those who dunno, it was a futurist series of rides in the eighties where futurism was still really exciting.

There'd be underwater schools and you can go on, I think you can go on YouTube and see a version of this ride Horizons, which was as responsible as anything for me thinking about the future up until I realized what the future would actually be like and that you can't see underwater 'cause light doesn't travel, which is a huge disappointment.

And I don't, yeah. And so I follow, I really enjoy Red Letter Media. Again, it's really interesting to see people who have started off just putting stuff on YouTube and then have thrived very much within their own scale.

So these now middle-aged friends in, is it Milwaukee, getting together and watching terrible films and getting drunk and talking about them. That is, that, is that now a business model? Matt? Men? I love, I love.

And you couldn't have done that without all of that. Putting that on BBC One, there's no way. And Vlogbrothers, both John and Hank Green, I think, although, and it's a great— Hank videos are now more than five minutes long and I don't follow them so much, but the people who use— I was really interested where suddenly anyone could be a presenter, what they chose to preserve.

Ben: And it gives you a real slice of humanity. Even human flourishing I think is a form of human flourishing. Okay. Last couple of questions 'cause we're running up in time. So one is current projects. Any current projects that you are working on, current or future projects that you'd like to?

Simon: Yeah I'm going back to, I'm writing, am I? Yeah, no, this, I'm writing a book…  First I took to Edinburgh was the first three chapter adaptation of the first three chapters of a book, which at the time was the whole story. It was never meant to be the story. And then someone said, oh, that's the story. I went, oh yeah, it was, 'cause it's a sort of a hero's journey.

But now I realized, no, I wanted it to be a bigger, a proper, children's short novel. And so I'm now thinking about that and it involves thoughts about theatre and stories and lies and fantasy and, but it's also just, yeah, really fun to think about and occasionally write.

I won't make the self-appointed deadline for getting a draft done by the end of this month. But that's an unpaid project, but that's what I'm writing on.

And we're towards the end of January now, thinking about whether or not to go to Edinburgh with another show. I've got two in mind as starting points.

But now I'm thinking about venue and how important that is. That sort of completely, and it all starts with as you said, at what point does the audience start feeling like they're in the show?

Ben: Yeah.

Simon: And you, that, and I do, I want an audience to be excited and I want to maintain that feeling of excitement.

Ben: And you think that's 'cause it's something particular about an Edinburgh audience, or why wouldn't you do it in a London venue somewhere?

Simon: Because Edinburgh has, oh, just, oh, guess this. Oh. That's really, that's a really good question, 'cause that's how we're taught to think.

Fair. But also because you can win prizes, Edinburgh. Yeah. If you wanna go, oh, actually I'm a theatre maker. Yeah. I've got a class, that's where you, that's the deadline you set yourself. That's the best place to show new work.

Even though I've long weighed it in my mind and gone, I live in London. I don't need Edinburgh. But yeah it's different. Which just, it's just, you have to think now, am I gonna do Edinburgh? Yeah. I haven't done a big advert that can definitely pay for it, so probably not. And I'm just moving to a new flat. Financially it does take a bite.

Unless I do free fringe and I do something and that's another thing to think about. Who am I going up there with?

Ben: Just to say most people may not realize that the vast majority of Edinburgh shows don't make any, in fact lose money. Not only do they not make money, they will lose money from— Oh, do they?

Simon: Yeah. If you dunno that. Yes. Yeah.

Ben: Tens of thousands.

Simon: That sort of magnitude. Yeah. Yeah. I, yeah I lost 10,000 and that goes in your rent while you're up there because there's a lot of rent. And it goes on a producer if you have a producer and it goes on a PR if you have a PR, which is a good idea.

And what else? What else other things?

Ben: It depends on how many people you've gotta pay for actors and set and things.

Simon: If it's not just you. You have to pay for technicians, certainly. 

Ben: Okay. That sounds a great range of current projects. And then obviously audio work and other things running by.

Simon: That keeps coming up.

Ben: Do you have any advice for maybe wannabe creatives or you could have life advice in general? I guess you've had a portfolio career of different parts of creativity across everything. Have you reached a stage where you would offer any thoughts to others—

Simon:  Get out, see work you like, meet the people who make work that you like. Do stuff on purpose. That's harder and harder these days 'cause it is so easy.


Ben: Purpose is an intentional thing you're doing?

Simon: Yes. It's so easy. Because I have a lot of time off and I might just click the next thing on my algorithm and it's different to go, no, intentional, what do you actually want to do?

Watch something on purpose, not because you are in a position where you're watching things and you want to go, I could watch this next. But that's maybe something more for my generation. Maybe people deal with stuff easier.

My other advice is you can do anything. There are a lot of dialogues about, or conversations about what is it you can do. 

See what you can do. And that I've been very lucky to be surrounded by creatives who really do stuff that I never saw exist before. But even before that, I knew that was a common factor in a lot of stuff I loved was that it was stuff that was being done for the first time.

So I shouldn't imitate it. I would see who's doing stuff I've never seen before. I really like that. That seemed like an obvious idea once I'd seen it and work out what's going on there. … And have fun.

Ben: Yeah. That sounds amazing. Have fun, do things with purpose, make things which haven't existed before. Great set of advice. With that, Simon, thank you very much.

Simon: Thank you, Ben.

In Podcast, Arts, Theatre, Writing Tags theatre, immersive theatre, devised theatre, Shunt, Simon Kane, Shakespeare, John Finnemore, creativity

Deena Mousa: How Much is a Life Worth? Effective Philanthropy, AI for Good & Global Health ~ Podcast

January 2, 2026 Ben Yeoh

How do you put a price tag on a human life? It sounds like a cold question, but for grant makers, it is the necessary calculus of doing good.

"Every time you choose whether to take a more dangerous job at a higher wage... or choose a house that's closer to environmental toxins but is a little cheaper, you are implicitly putting a price on how much you value a year of your life."

In this episode, Ben sits down with Deena Mousa, a grant maker and thinker at Open Philanthropy and Coefficient Giving. Deena takes us inside the difficult decision-making frameworks used to allocate finite resources—from the "Coefficient Dollar" to the complexities of measuring pain.

"In high-income countries, the question is 'Will AI replace radiologists?' But in a lot of low-resource settings, the question is not whether AI will replace the radiologist, but whether you can access a radiologist at all."

We also dive into the role of AI, why government procurement might be the world's most underrated problem, and, on a lighter note, Deena’s specific writing habit regarding white noise.

We cover:

  • The Calculus of Altruism: How philanthropists use "revealed preference" to value a year of life.

  • The Pain Paradox: Why standard health models struggle to account for chronic pain and suffering.

  • AI for Good: Why the risks of "AI washing" in nonprofits are real, but the potential for capacity building is massive.

  • Systemic Bottlenecks: Why fixing boring government procurement processes might be more impactful than flashy new policies.

  • Life Advice: Why you should probably ignore the advice that resonates with you most.

"Often, the people listening to a piece of general advice are exactly the group of people that should be doing the opposite. They are already leaning too far in that direction."

Summary contents, transcript and podcast links below. Listen on Apple, Spotify or wherever you listen to pods. Video above or on Youtube.

Contents

  • 00:00 Introduction

  • 01:17 Valuing Life and Health

  • 05:46 Challenges in Measuring Pain and Health Outcomes

  • 13:32 Creative Process and Research Methodology

  • 18:38 Journey and Early Experiences

  • 22:23 Debate on International Aid and USAID

  • 29:20 Impact of AI in Global Health and Development

  • 36:25 Overrated or Underrated

  • 44:59 Exciting Projects and AI for Good

  • 46:14 Balancing Cause Areas and Funding Decisions

  • 58:31 Advice for Aspiring Philanthropists and Innovators

Transcript (This is AI assisted, so mistakes are possible)


Ben: Hey everyone. I'm super excited to be speaking to Deena Mousa. Deena is a grant maker and thinker on global health and development, as well as thinking on innovation and progress. Deena, welcome. 

Deena: Thanks so much, Ben. It's great to be here. 

Ben: Your work at Open Philanthropy and Coefficient Giving and really in Global Health overall requires making decisions about where to direct finite resources.

So at the heart of that, you have to grapple with the question of how do you value life and health? What is the value of life? How do you think about that and even begin to approach that question? 

Deena: Yeah, it's a really great question and it's a hard one to answer in large part because it is so personal and there are so many different ways of approaching it.

There are. Fortunately, some studies and research that we can ground some understanding in. So there are two broad literature on this. One is on stated preference, which is where you ask a group of people or survey participants in a lot of different ways how much they value in monetary terms a year of health.

and this can be by asking them, for example, how much they would pay for a particular drug or treatment, how much they would pay to avert a particular outcome, how much they value particular aspects of their health. And these kind of converge on. one form of the answer, which is, what do people say when you ask them how much they value health?

Then there's another literature that is focused on revealed preferences, which is what we actually do and how much we actually pay when we have to make the choice. So every time that you choose whether to walk home or get in a car, every time you choose whether to take a more dangerous job at a higher wage premium or choose a house that's closer to some environmental toxins but is a little bit cheaper, you are implicitly putting a price on how much you value a year of your life.

And so there are quite a few papers that take a lot of these decisions and try to back out of them, how much people, implicitly care about their life in monetary terms based on the actions they take. And this sort of leads to another cluster of answers. and by looking at a combination of these two research studies, you can get to a triangulation of what is approximately right.

This is of course a very hard question because when people make decisions, they're not necessarily explicitly factoring in all of these effects, and they might not necessarily be accurately diagnosing them. And similarly, in the stated preference, it's quite hard to know exactly what decision you would make when it comes down to it.

So there is quite a bit of uncertainty around that, but that gets you at least to some estimate of how people feel and react in real life. 

Ben: And so in the US when you are thinking about this, either thinking about grant making or in your research, do you have a range in your head that you're thinking about?

I'm aware that it'll probably be different in us, say to Italy, say Nigeria. but do you have a range on what, let's call it a statistical life, year of life or a life year to differentiate it from some other thinking? What do you say? 

Deena: Yeah, absolutely. So one, upfront clarification is that different institutions have different numbers for this and in large part because they're doing different things.

So the value of a statistical life, quote unquote, that is used for example, in the United States when deciding on, health insurance or, healthcare issues is different from the one that you might use in a different country. But that in turn is a pretty different question from the one that we are answering, which is how to allocate our finite resources across interventions that mostly target health and ones that mostly target income.

So we, when we calculate, the value of a particular grant. We have a metric we call Open Philanthropy dollars or coefficient giving dollars now. And that is used to equalize health and income gains. so that allows us to basically compare across health and income increases to figure out how much you should value one versus the other. Though of course the metric of coefficient giving dollars isn't necessarily comparable outside of the institution. It's, not like a, objective dollar metric, if that makes sense.

Ben: Sure, yeah. You can't compare it to what the US government is saying about anything to do with dollars. But even within that, do you think your order of magnitude is about right when you're using this a hundred thousand and, spreading it, they say, that's within plus or minus 20%, That's the sense I have.

Or do you think there's a risk that you are completely wrong on that? And maybe we can think about that because you had a really, interesting essay on thinking about pain and I think pain's a really interesting thing to think about because on the one hand you could think for minor pits of pain we use say aspirins and things and they're really cheap and we don't seem to value it very much.

And another aspect actually, if you ask doctors and you think, oh, this person's in pain, we've got cheap medications, or they're out, it often doesn't. Get into their calculus that much because we think, pain or maybe acute pain is this is not life-threatening at the moment. You'll get round it.

On the other hand, if you speak to some people, it could be, really valuable to try and avoid or chronic pain is, different and it comes in enough and it's also more nebulous because there's some part of it which is psychologically based, some part which is maybe biologically based and they interact.

So I was interested in, whether you've got your reflections on how you've been thinking about pain and, whether this is the type of metric which could be used at all with this, or whether we should really be thinking about something else. 

Deena: Yeah, absolutely. It's, a really good question because I think pain is an area where DALYs get a lot harder.

In large part because it is quite possible, if not likely, that a DALY is not a DALY in all circumstances. You might care significantly more about alleviating a marginal quote unquote DALY's worth of pain. The more acute pain that you are in. For example, and there was one study, that I referenced in Japan that implied that this might be the case.

That the more serious the injury or illness, proposed to individuals, the more that they were willing to pay to avert the same amount of additional pain. And so we don't necessarily think of pain or negative health outcomes as linear. but we might have all sorts of different curves for how much we value amounts of health at different points in our life and at different, levels of discomfort.

so I think this is, an area where yeah, certainly the model and here is six we are using might be a little bit blunt. With that said, it is, like you said, it's such a hard question to answer because a lot of people might have quite divergent beliefs and feelings about what that, what the shape of the curve is for them individually and It would be quite prohibitively hard, I think, to apply that sort of differentiated DLI metric, especially depending on the disease. And looking at how it affects different people in to different orders of magnitude and so on. 

Ben: So does that mean we just have to be really cautious with these type of models and thinking when we come across something like pain or is it a kind of this is the best we have, so even if we're a little bit unsure, it's gonna give us some sort of answer?

Deena: Yeah, I definitely think it's, a good reason to be cautious and a good reason why. The quantitative answer is not necessarily the be all, end all, it's a good heuristic. It's a good guide to break down a problem. But for example, with with chronic pain or with, areas where the DALY figure that is given appears to be a little bit questionable or potentially a little bit too high or low one thing we often do is compare it to the DALY burden we've used for other diseases and just think conceptually about whether this is reasonable.

So for example, we might say, the DALY burden associated with cluster headaches is x. Now let's compare it to the DALY burden that we've used previously for o other quite, painful diseases, for example, is it significantly higher or lower? and this can help us triangulate a little bit, what are we really saying when we're using this multiplier for this disease?

Ben: Sure. And when you were looking into pain and, doing your research on that, was there anything which surprised you around that? Or do you think is actually, this is really misunderstood, we should really clarify this more. 

Deena: I was very surprised by the degree to which we don't really fully understand pain.

We think of pain as a direct response to the magnitude of an injury we receive. you stub your toe, you feel some amount of corresponding pain, but that's not necessarily always the case. The amount of pain we feel can be very disproportionate, either higher or lower to the actual damage that our body has felt.

And so it is like a much more complicated and psychosocial, fa thing and phenomenon that we experience as well, which I think I underrated to some degree. And for example, also our understanding of like chronic pain and how chronic pain comes about, is quite limited. Our understanding of, phantom limb pain and why it only impacts some people and not others is, similarly a bits body.

So I think I, I underestimated the degree to which there are a lot of open questions around the biological components of pain and how pain literally works. 

Ben: Yeah. Particularly in chronic pain. I think the scientists call it heterogeneous. We really don't know some of the causal aspects. So you might present with these same type of symptoms, but the underlying can be completely different.

And we might not even have that big of a clue. And it's interesting maybe making a segue into something where we might think we have clearer numbers around, maybe thinking about the UK or any system which has got a constrained budget. How would you deal with funding for extra money, for instance, for a diabetic versus perhaps a preterm baby or maybe say a rare genetic disease at birth or something like that.

So the overall disability life years, the dalis come out at maybe 20, 30,000 pounds, maybe a little bit more in dollars for the diabetic. So you go, oh that's really good in terms of, life, but the preterm baby is coming into hundreds of thousands of dollars. Same with genetics.

So we could be talking half a million up, up to a million, million or more. And that under kind of pure thinking, just cost benefit or say this. First or the utilitarian kind of goes, it's the diabetic all the time. But then when you ask people, and here in the UK we try and ask people, although we argue about whether this is it, people end up saying no, we think the baby should be worth a chance.

Or, particularly with the genetic and then there's arguments around that. How do you think we should think about that? And do you actually fall on one side of the fence around, how we should make that decision? 

Deena: Yeah, it's a really, it's a really hard question and an important one. I definitely won't presume to be able to give a particular answer or say, necessarily what the government should do in a circumstance like this.

It's an impossible one. But I will say that, the, allocation methods that I'm talking about are. Something that's like quite useful for us in our context as a philanthropic funder who are, have a particular pool of money. We are allocating it across cause areas we are explicitly going into it being cause agnostic and impact maximizing.

So we know that is our approach and aim going in. Whereas a government is in a very different position to an individual donor or a philanthropic funder. And they ultimately are tied to a social contract with their citizen. They're democratically elected, they're intended to serve the voice of their people.

And to a large degree, I think the sort of bare utilitarian calculus needs to also incorporate what people believe, how they feel what their opinions and perspectives are on how funding should be allocated and what the priorities of the government should be. 

Ben: Excellent.

Perhaps you could talk about your creative process or your research process. Say you're picking up a new topic like AI in health or you're doing some of this research within pain. How do you go about thinking about that? And also you've had a journalist background, so you've been interested in stories and the narrative around that.

So I'd be interested if you've got any particular creative process or anything you'd like to share around that. 

Deena: Yeah, absolutely. I picked up freelance journalism, in large part as a forcing mechanism. I thought it would be a really interesting way to. Create a structure for myself to get myself to explore the questions that came up day to day that seemed confusing or potentially interesting to me.

so it, I think has been quite good in that it has given me another lens such that when I read something that is, seems a little bit contradictory or seems a little bit unexplained or intention with something else that I know I have a mechanism by which I can say, okay, I, actually wanna get to the bottom of this.

and I'll go and interview several people and I'll, if it starts to look like an actual story, put together a pitch to an editor who will then, be able to act as like a little bit of a scaffold for me as I go off and explore the question and distill what I what I believe in writing.

And that has been quite helpful in large part because I, have this strong belief that, writing is thinking and, in order to. Be able to understand something very clearly. You just have to be able to write about it very clearly in a way that someone else will understand. and that process I think has allowed me to dive, shallowly into a lot of different areas that I find somewhat interesting.

And, so I'm, really glad that I've that I've been doing that over the past couple of years. I think it's been a really enriching process for me, in thinking about the world. Yeah, I've, oftentimes the topics that I'm looking at intersect somewhat with the topics that, I'm thinking about in a professional setting.

but it's a quite different lens on them than doing, research or making grants. And so I think it's quite complimentary in my experience. 

Ben: And do you like making notes as you go? Do you read and write? Do you write two three hour chunks in the morning? Are you an evening person? There seems to be 1,001 ways of doing it, but I'm interested in your actual process.

Do you write by hand or you, straight on computer, or is it just all completely random? 

Deena: I tend to type and I usually do all of my interviews first and get a good picture of what I think the story is in my head, and then tend to write the draft all at once. I usually like to leave it for about 24 hours and then come back to it fresh and do the editing then, because I often think that you're a bit too close to it when you've just written it for the first time.

So yeah, that tends to be my process and I like to reserve Saturday, Sunday mornings to, write for a few hours each week, which I think has been helpful for, forcing some cadence and consistency. But certainly everyone has their own sort of writing habits and patterns that I think they're so personalized and individual that, I'm not sure anyone's, writing habits would work necessarily perfectly for anyone else.

Ben: I think there's been a book looking at this. And if you look at people who, are thought to be really great, you can find, they work at every single different hour of the day with every single different habits. Although there's maybe at the meta level some quirky things about them, which seem to have a, pattern, although the actual individual quirk is hard to know.

Do you ever listen to music or things or is it like music or, no. And is there anything about your process you think is perhaps a little bit quirky? Like you don't write with a pet crocodile beside you or anything, or? Really, a lot of people seem to be, at least in humanities creators, a lot of them seem to be high on drugs or alcohol or whatever when they write.

But I'm assuming you are not, but, yeah. Anything quirky or do you think you're just normal? 

Deena: Unfortunately, nothing's so out there. I, I can't listen to music with lyrics while I write. otherwise I think the words will distract me quite a bit. But, I do often put on white noise particularly like the sound of rain, I think is helpful for, just being a little bit more focused and concentrated.

No, I can't think of anything particularly weird. I'm a bit, I'm a bit more of a night owl than most people. And so I think often my in spite of plans usually to finish something early in the morning, usually my, most productive writing comes quite late at night. so that maybe is, is slightly quirky though.

I think that's a bit common with writers. 

Ben:  I think not having lyrics is maybe somewhat common, but actually wanting brain music or white noise is perhaps a little bit more uncommon. So that's that's an interesting note. Maybe that's a good segue into your journey as to where, how you've got here.

Because if I read it correctly, you were a teenage medical inventor of some sort, or at least a kind of social entrepreneur back where you grew up and then you did a little bit of a consultancy gig and then have come into that. I dunno, what did you learn growing up being kind of social entrepreneur like, and, any thoughts of that in terms of how you went from there to here?

Deena: Yeah, I grew up, so I was born in the us and I grew up between upstate New York and Cairo. I spent my summers in Cairo. So usually about three months of each year, I would be there. And I grew up with, yeah, a family of much older siblings who I think, really shaped a lot of how I think about things.

And, I think just being constantly exposed to, adult conversations and like around the dinner table. I think to some degree, shaped my upbringing a little bit. I did work with my sister on a solar energy social enterprise in, in Egypt that distributed solar water panels that, heated water for households and also for organizations, around the country.

So I think that was a particularly valuable experience. given the fact that, like you mentioned, I worked at McKinsey as a consultant and now at Coefficient giving as a grant maker, getting some exposure to implementation and to operations was incredibly valuable because I think it gave me a taste of how.

Unintuitive difficult. It is, in many ways actually getting something done on the ground is quite hard and quite hard in ways that are almost impossible to predict at the outset. so in each particular circumstance, something will come up, but you don't know what it is until it happens.

And, yeah, often things take a lot longer than you project they will at the beginning. And I, so I think, that, that's been a really important perspective for me to have as I've, consulted people from mile High and also given grants to operators to be able to understand a little bit, of what they're going through.

Ben: I guess that will tilt you into thinking about impact if you've done social entrepreneur things as a teenager. Is there anything you've changed your mind about then over the years in thinking about it? you hint at one in the sense of actually implementing things always seems harder than the paper because unexpected things always come up, but, any grand ideas where you think, I used to think this, but now I think.

Really it's that. 

Deena: Yeah, it's a great question. I think that is certainly one of them that you mentioned, that, operations is much harder than it looks. and that strategy often, di dilutes the nuances of the details of actually getting something done. I think in consulting, for example, I went in half wondering whether this this common refrain that consultants are just risk management, might be true.

it seemed shocking just because of the sums that, fortune 500 organizations pay for consultants. But I actually think I, I came out of it more positive about the value of consulting, if that makes sense. I think one thing that surprised me is how. Integrated, a lot of our consulting teams were with the organizations where we worked and how almost over time essential we became.

And I think that the scope and scale of that across, industries, across organizations, big and small, across sectors, I think was quite surprising to me. So I guess I came out a little bit less cynical about consulting than I went in, which I I think might be the reverse of what, what happens to a lot of other people.

Ben: it's good because you actually did go into consulting. 'cause otherwise some people would've said, don't do consulting at all. Go straight to making actual impacts. So I'm glad you got something out of it at the high level, I'm interested in a couple of systems piece. So there's been a lot of debate on, for instance, US Aid or even just international aid in general.

And on the one hand you could say we lose usaid. There's definitely some projects which had high value impact. Those are not happening and there's that is negative versus having it right in that world. That counterfactuals definitely negative. I guess some people would though say that there are some projects which maybe not higher return, and we really wanna build on local infrastructure and local projects for people, because there's a whole set of examples when, foreigners go in, try and give money, with good aims and have essentially messed it up.

It's gone to the wrong people. They haven't understood these things, the unexpected has happened. And so that money has not only been wasted, has been wasted, but has been actively poor. And there's examples like that. I don't think there's a consensus answer with within that aggregation. But I'd be interesting from in your reflection this mean that actually it's more important the work that you guys do in terms of philanthropy, because there's a little bit less international aid philanthropy from the government level, or is just this whole idea of aid has perhaps been a little bit more down rated, so it's making your life harder.

I'd be just interested in any reflections on whether USAID was any good pros and cons and how it's affected your work. 

Deena: It's a very timely question. I think there is a very reasonable argument that usaid would have benefited from reform. there, there is a group of people that is or a sort of line of thinking that is, the bureaucratic nature of foreign aid in the US and in other large countries has overwhelmed, the institution and it needed a significant overhaul.

I think I sympathize with some aspects of that argument, and I think it is re reasonable to say that, even a pretty heavy handed, overhaul of USAID could have been good. There is a version of that could have been, very net positive. I think a version that, some have talked about since of, like massive slashes to foreign aid, that are indiscriminate or, just go across the board pretty heavy handedly are.

certainly not the version of, the overhaul that I think, would have been most effective. And I think that is something to note, which is like, there is a, there is a, good and a less good version of reforming usaid, if that makes sense. And I think in a, just the magnitude of funding that comes through foreign aid, in global health and development is staggering.

And losing a large proportion of that really would, significantly alter the field. regardless of the sort of spread of projects. And maybe you can say that the range of cost effectiveness that, happens within institutions, it is just so much funding that it, inevitably leaves a massive gap and a massive hole.

I do think that makes our work as philanthropic funders, more important and more sorely needed. And often opens up, more opportunities for us to do cost effective work. Though it is also of course much more difficult when a lot of USAID programs were supporting foundational infrastructure that then enabled us to build, for example, on top of them.

when that infrastructure goes, in some cases there isn't an actor who is well positioned to fill the gap. 

Ben: So net, net, although reform of usaid, a reasonable person could have argued for that. What we have now in practice is probably net negative because of the absolute levels of, funding cuts and this issue of some infrastructure with no credible stakeholder or actor being able to do that.

So those, not only those first order projects have gone, but a whole infrastructure layer has been, withdrawn, made, life difficult. Was that a fair summary of thinking around that? 

Deena: I think that sounds right. yeah, there is a version of USAID reform that, that could have been certainly net positive, but I think, a combination of magnitude of the cuts and the way in which the cuts were decided, if that makes sense.

In terms of how to prioritize projects and how many people opined on that and how long that process took, I think, resulted in, in less than optimal implementation. And therefore, I definitely do think it was net negative. 

Ben: Another systems piece. Perhaps this is wider in, in thinking around cost benefit type of analysis or at least simple utilitarian thought.

I still think with suffering in the ecosystem around some of the effects that F-D-F-X-F-D-X and SBF had on thinking about that partly because of funding and partly because they were so explicitly we now think naively utilitarian around their thinking. Do you think there's still an echo of that and do you think I, mean I guess this is on some of this, but I think it's wider philanthropy in general.

And we are probably a little bit younger and a little bit more apart from it maybe. Has it made your thinking around that systems piece change or been influenced at any way? 

Deena: it's a good question. much of the fallout of that happened before I joined coefficient giving, and I was very much looking at it from the outside in.

I think coming into my role, I am less of a sort of hard line utilitarian than maybe some say SBF or pure rationalist or pure effective altruist. And so I think I was already coming from, a little bit of an outside in view, and a bit of a sort of more, more sort of mixed perspective, if that makes sense.

I definitely do see it as having shaken up a lot of the effective altruist or rationalist community and a lot of the thinking around it, I think, a lot of people reflect it after that. Which I think is quite healthy sometimes. For sure. 

Ben: Yeah, I'm definitely an outsider looking in.

I think one of the things I reflected on was, what would they call it? Normy stuff. So I now really understand why you just have a regular independent board if you can do it well, because this is the things which gives you distance over some of the things. And when I see things which don't have that, which I mean there's no guarantee, right?

A lot of those things go wrong. But I now understand why those boring, normal measures are put in and maybe there's too much bureaucracy with some of those. But you can see now the counter examples where they failed because you just went on high trust with a couple of individuals with no oversight accountability.

So it was a, win for normal boring covenants. which is which is weird, which is an interesting meta layer. Meta layer thing. Maybe thinking about a meta layer thing. You've done some work on technology and particularly ai, which within say health or climate or a lot of global development is potentially an enabling layer.

Yes, AI in itself might settle certain projects, but maybe it's more importantly is going to enable a lot of other things. So I'm interested in what you think is actually happening within ai. I think global development and health, you wrote a really interesting essay on sort of radiologists, how it hasn't, for instance, there are still a lot of radiologists.

In fact, we don't have enough radiologists, even though. AI is doing that very well, and that's in a narrow thing, but it looks like it could be supporting quite a lot of a infrastructure layer and then into global development in general. has this altered your kind of thinking, and does this mean we should be in investing more in a metal layer, or at least in transforming that metal layer into something practical?

Or is it really the kind of, yes, this is a new technology, but our old models and our old ways of thinking? Just incorporate that and that will just be the same, but with different measurements. I don't know Your thoughts on ai. 

Deena: Yeah, it's a big question right now. maybe I'll start with some things that worry me and then some things that I'm excited about in the area.

So a few concerns I have upfront. One is this idea of using benchmarks to determine how much AI can do in the field or in practical terms. for example, looking at AI performance on a benchmark, or a test related to a particular job. And then to say this means that AI can replace.

87% of people who do this job, oftentimes the map is not the territory with benchmarks. And so there's quite a big difference between the questions on a benchmark and the true process of actually doing a job or doing a role. And usually it is quite hard to come to a like detailed and nuanced understanding of what it really means to do a job and how people spend their time in that role and what are the long tail outcomes that are, come up very infrequently, but are actually quite important to get right.

So I think that is one worry I have with ai. another, I have with AI in development in particular is incentivized AI washing. people are very excited about. Potentially implementing AI in a lot of new contexts and settings, which I think is, great. And I'll, also get to that in a moment.

But I worry about setting upfront too much this idea of we would really like to fund AI related projects. So we really like to invest in AI related projects. And then encouraging, nonprofits, organizations that are doing great work by default to feel pressured to incorporate AI where it doesn't necessarily make sense or it isn't necessarily adding much impact so that they can then say, yes, we are AI enabled, we, qualify for this particular program or this particular incubator.

I think there is always a danger with technology of, implicitly shoehorning it into processes where it is not quite the right fit, because it is the next really exciting thing. and I think, in part, in particular, we wanna be careful as funders in terms of how we are shaping the field in that way, and whether we are driving incentives in a negative direction in that sense.

But with all that said, I think this is quite, AI and development is quite nascent, and this is a really exciting moment for it. and I am quite excited by the potential for AI to increase capacity and throughput at, almost every level of development. I think often, human capital is a constraint for a lot of different fields from everything from, do you have enough doctors to do you have enough people to run the government properly?

And if AI can act as a multiplier on people's time, for example. Increasing diagnostic throughput for every doctor by making them a few seconds faster with each patient. Then I think it could have, significant positive effects in low and middle income countries in particular where, that is really the key blocker.

You mentioned, a piece I wrote about radiology, that was really focused on high income country settings, where the question was will ai, replace radiologists and therefore make, radiology interpretation much cheaper and much faster? But in a lot of, low resource settings, the question is not whether AI will replace the radiologist, but whether you can access a radiologist at all and whether AI might act as a sort of better than the default standard of care option for you.

So I do think the questions are quite different in low and middle income countries, and I'm very excited about, the potential for AI to increase capacity in lower resource settings. 

Ben: So that sounds like we should move quite fast and hope not to break anything as opposed to moving very fast and breaking lots of things.

Deena: that's a very good question. I think I mean I think that there is also obviously a reason for caution in particular because there, there is a sort of paradigm in which if you believe that AI as a technology will get significantly better in the next, let's say one to three years, implementing a, very imperfect solution Now could, this is an example, but could, lead to mistakes that therefore eliminate trust in AI that will then be very hard to win back. Even if in say, three years the models that you're working with are significantly more accurate or significantly better in a healthcare setting, for example.

So I think that is like one consideration, which is that, when you're introducing a new technology, you are setting the terms of people's impression of that technology. and in a lot of cases right now, AI is people's, most people's interaction with AI in some countries is simply as a tool that spams use to send them a lot of, scam text messages on WhatsApp and scam phone calls.

And I think it is important to consider like the. The relationship that you're creating between the technology and the people and to a, I think to some extent the more that you force technology in where people do not organically see a need for it, the more you can sort of risk creating this negative impression and those impressions can be sticky long after the technology itself has changed significantly.

so I think that's, maybe one reason for caution, particularly right now. 

Ben: Sure. I hadn't thought about that. It's very hard to recover from a bad first date is what you're saying. 

Deena: Exactly, yes. 

Ben: And I guess we also potentially move through some one-way doors, as in you do X and it's quite hard to row back from X, but maybe there might be some two-way doors.

I find it's really interesting that the technologists have a. There are different clusters of them, obviously, but they have a different view, from what a lot of the economists and sociologists think around this. And it's really interesting that they're so far apart. But yeah, when you don't have that consensus, it is a little bit tricky.

Maybe we should do a little short round on overrated and underrated. So I'm gonna give you like a little topic. you can pass or you can say neutral but you can say, yeah, I think this ideal concept is underrated or overrated, or we should have more of it, or less of it or something like that.

Yeah. Are you good? 

Deena: Yeah. Happy to do it. 

Ben: Yeah, let's do it. Okay. so the comedy one, malaria nets underrated or overrated. 

Deena: I would say in general, underrated, still, underrated 

Ben: even though we've been going on about them for so long. 

Deena: I think so. I think we are in a bit of a bubble in that, within the world that I'm in and that to some extent that you are in as well.

people take for granted this idea of malaria nets are the canonical, reliable, cost-effective intervention. But I think one that's not necessarily really like common knowledge beyond this sort of corner of the world. And two, there is still quite a lot of need for it. Like it is still, an intervention that can absorb more funding.

And I think, until we reach equilibrium with that, I guess by nature or almost mechanically, I would say underrated. Yeah. 

Ben: So hundreds of millions of dollars of capital could still flow to mal nets and we're nowhere near, reaching that. Okay. Interesting. Good. Climate net zero. Underrated overrated.

Deena: It's a good question because this is such a polarized one. you have almost, I guess in the US at least about half the country feels extremely negative about this and about half the country feels very positively about this. And I don't know, I would almost say as it nets out neutral yeah, I think when I think about each half, I would say, has been overrated maybe in the past 10 years, but in the last, like year or two, I think that has, like the pendulum has swung and it's pretty sharply corrected.

So maybe I'll say neutral on this one. Okay. 

Ben: What, so your, observation is that the US or the world is neutral in it, but are you yourself now neutral or, actually you were saying that maybe the pendulum has swung. Too far. although the world is maybe balanced that actually because of where the pendulum sung, it's a little bit underrated.

Deena: I think. I think, where the pendulum has swung recently, maybe, makes it underrated, if that makes sense. 

Ben: Yeah. It's, definitely a tricky one. I would probably say it's overrated for environmentalist and it's underrated for the average person in America, but, yeah, that's, the difficult one.

Universal basic income. Overrated. Underrated. 

Deena: Wow. Such a good question. I would say almost. Not discussed, if that makes sense. Really, it's gone. I thought this was 

Ben: the Californian solution to everything. I've obviously been misled. 

Deena: I think it disappeared. it had, it's had its moment in, the, presidential campaign a few cycles back.

But I, my understanding is recently, like UBI as a policy proposal has fell out of the popular zeitgeist. I suspect as we think more about AI, labor market disruptions solutions like UBI will have their day in the light again. and I'm quite interested to see how different the reaction is this time around.

So I guess I would say, yeah, perhaps for our current like labor market structure and where we are literally today, slightly overrated, but for potential AI labor market disruptions in the future, potentially a little bit underrated in that yeah, there's not, there's, there aren't a lot of, concrete policy proposals around that yet.

and I'm, I think I'm excited to see more thinking around it. 

Ben: That's very, well hedged on that one. It's interesting to see that it's actually completely di disappeared from the debate from what you said, or in which case, that would make me think it's a little bit underrated, even if it might have been overrated before.

I was reading that in Ireland, they're gonna do a small version of this, aimed at artists. So if you can get on this list, there's a few thousand artists which will have a small artist, UBI. And to your point about job disruption, maybe this is the offset about, okay. Put all of your work illegally into l and s because it's out on the internet, but maybe we'll give you a UBI instead.

Okay. Long-termism or thinking maybe about the very, very far future, is this overrated or underrated? 

Deena: I think in non rationalists and effective ultra spaces, as in for the average person? I think somewhat underrated. I think it's just very instinctively much more salient to think about things that are impacting us today.

Even if, when you truly consider it and when you think about, future generations of, the people you know and your family, you would care significantly more than you do today. I think the average person likely might care significantly more than they do today. if like properly framed about longer term impacts, if that makes sense.

Ben: Yes. But the rationalists themselves maybe think about it a little bit too much. 

Deena: Yeah, I think, it's a a concentrated dose of something that is, not popularly considered in, in most of the rest of the world. 

Ben: Sure. I think they might just go too far. They just, maybe if you get us to think about 100 to 200 years or 500 years, that's something useful.

Once you go out to say a million, all of the math seems to get really screwed because when we're very, not very good with large numbers anyway. Definitely. But very good. Yeah. Okay. Overrated, underrated direct giving. So this is direct giving of cash transfers. 

Deena: Oh, good question. I, guess I would have to say similar to my mechanical answer on bed nets underrated.

Yeah. Build demand in general use. Exactly. still lots of demand and, and not enough supply. So I'll say underrated. 

Ben: Great. Okay. AI existential risks. So a GI risk. Do you think this is overrated or underrated? 

Deena: it's really interesting, like some of the other questions, it depends radically on who you talk to.

I think, if you spend a few weeks in the bay, it will feel like there's almost nothing else happening in the world. Whereas, if you spend a few weeks. Many other places in the country it's a non-issue or not barely something that's even regularly discussed. So I guess I would say, I wish it were more evenly rated.

If that makes sense. 

Ben: Sure, that makes sense. Okay. And Cairo, do you think that's an underrated or overrated place? 

Deena: I would say underrated. I think yeah, often, people don't don't manage to get out there themselves, but I think it's, a city with so much rich, with rich history and on top of that it is a city that is just incredibly alive.

It reminds me a lot in some ways of New York and I'm biased because I've spent, quite a bit of time in both cities, but it is one of the few cities that I think compares in terms of sheer, like volume of people and energy and, like the idea of the city that never sleeps and the 24 hour city.

Ben: Yeah, very intense. I was there once for a little while to go to a friend's wedding, and it did ha it did actually have that New York vibe of everything happening all at once everywhere. yes. and last one on this philanthropy in general, do you think it's overrated or underrated? 

Deena: Yeah, I, again, am biased, but I will have to say underrated.

You go, you're gonna have to say 

Ben: that otherwise you're in the wrong career. 

Deena: Yeah, absolutely. but I truly believe it. when you think about the volume of charitable giving each year compared to, for example, like pledges that have been taken or the amount of money people, intend to give, I think it is quite low.

And yeah, I think it's underrated and I think I am excited over time to see more. Very high salience and very visible and easy, ways of giving charitably for people who, maybe are stopped by a form of decision paralysis or uncertainty. but who would like to give, which, I suspect is, is, quite a few people.

Ben: I'd accept that effective philanthropy is definitely underrated, but I still think it's a potentially a bit more of an open question than I was hoping for about overall giving, which seems to have, a little bit more of a, more patchy history. Although I guess that's why places like co giving and open philanthropy come about.

And so any current projects that you're working on that you're particularly excited by, or things that you have granted to or looked at and when these are really great projects and have now come by because you are, because you've been working on them. 

Deena: it's a good question. one thing I really love about my job is over the past year I've been able to look at such a wide variety of cause areas.

I think I started the year thinking about antimicrobial resistance and, I'm, ending the year thinking about AI for good and I've hit, many, cause areas in the middle. I think I'm, I am quite excited about the potential for AI, for Good. In particular, I think it's a very nascent field and one where it's possible that a lot of the problems that implementers have are shared even across verticals.

whether you're doing AI for health or. AI for agriculture or weather forecasting? I think there are maybe some common needs and challenges. And I'm excited about, continuing to learn a little bit more about the field and thinking about ways in which we might be able to support that, though, that's quite uncertain right now, so I don't, wanna make any particular promises around.

we, don't have an existing program in the area yet. 

Ben: Sure. And so how do you balance out between looking at something like, antibiotics, a MR and. Climate and AI or systems, pieces and things. And you said that the own internal sort of metric is this a hundred thousand in coefficient dollars, which you, seem to be able to, go to, and I guess you're looking for 10 x, five x, a hundred x, that type of, that type of return.

And I guess that's it. You just have to, whatever area you are doing somehow bring it back to these are the inputs and the costs and get to those sort of figures or how do you think about weighing it up and at the strategic level, I guess you've gone development health, ai, also existential risk and some other elements where you're talking about maybe not, some other people aren't looking at it so much and have ideas about tractability or other, but I'm interested in how your own thinking is shaped about what should we work on and then when we work on it, how are we really thinking about whether this is a good idea to fund.

Deena: Yeah, it's a great question. in large part because by nature our time is limited, which means that we can't investigate every cause area. And so making prioritization decisions based on relatively little information upfront, is quite difficult, but a necessary part of the process. I think we often try to split the process of investigating an area into, parts that will allow us to pivot quickly and frequently.

So we might start, for example, with a two day investigation into an area that focuses on one particular crux that could basically suggest that we shouldn't look into it at all. So for example, if there's an area where. It seems really important and really neglected, but we're quite worried that there are basically no solutions and therefore it is totally in intractable, in which case we shouldn't do a full investigation.

we might just spend two days specifically looking at tractability and solutions. so I think that helps quite a bit. And then in terms of prioritizing cause areas, for funding, we do rely quite a bit on this framework of disability adjusted life years and percent increase in income as the sort of north star metrics or heuristics.

and we try to consider three factors, importance neglected is and tractability. So importance represents the overall magnitude of the problem and how many people it impacts. so this can often be dollies in terms of, health issues, for example. but might, go by other metrics depending on the area.

neglected is a measure of how many other funders are working on it and how many dollars are chasing the problem with some sort of adjustment for, what in particular they're working on. And tractability usually focuses on a few specific things that we could hypothetically fund if we were to enter the area.

So we'll try to do direct models of the impact per dollar spent on a few hypothetical grants that we might make in the area to understand whether they might be comparable to the rest of our portfolio. so that is, often how we try to make comparable judgments across very different cause areas, though, of course that is very tricky and there's a lot of, uncertainty there.

Ben: That's a really detailed level of analysis. Do you think it's worth, if you are an organization or even a startup thinking of applying to funders or even thinking of submitting to you guys that they already start to think a little bit in these terms? Or is it just more useful for you to do the analysis on what they would give you and not necessarily say that they've already started to try and translate it into a market size or impact size or a probability of success?

Is it actually helpful if they've already tilted it into your language and thinking, or is it. Better for them to just do their purpose and their things and you do the analysis on top. 

Deena: Yeah, certainly the vast majority of grantees we work with, will not have used exactly our model or not be thinking about things in exactly the same way we are.

So I think that's something that we understand. And so therefore, it's quite important for, us to be able to convert even very different materials into something that makes sense within our framework. I think it is often useful, when, organizations have thought about things in, somewhat similar ways though, if that makes sense.

When they've thought about, this is a really big problem. here, we know the shape of the field and what other funders are doing. we know why we think what we're doing is particularly, effective at solving this problem relative to other potential solutions.

things like that doesn't necessarily have to be. very, quantitative terms or in exactly our language. But I think the general mode of thinking of, here's why we think what we're doing is quite effective is, often helpful for us to know. 

Ben: Great. And couple of final questions leading into the end.

If you are the Ben benign dictator of the United States or the world, you can think about this globally or the us. what one thing, or I guess if you've got loads of ideas, you could do two or three things, would you implement in the world today? 

Deena: Very hard question. As in, any sort of like law or regulation.

Yeah. You're 

Ben: the ruler of the world, so I guess it'd be a law regulation more than more than anything else. But yeah, you can make this law and let's assume people are gonna even follow it or policy. or maybe you could, go the other way, right? You could take away a policy which you think is so bad that actually the, most net benefit we'll get is if this thing disappeared rather than this thing came in.

Deena: Yeah. Is it, too niche and boring to say I would fix government procurement processes in the US and in other sort of high income countries? 

Ben: No, but I guess the, challenge then is, so you think government procurement A is not a, is first of all probably a pretty bad, but b would probably have an impact which is much larger than the average person might think.

Deena: let me caveat that with saying I've certainly not done a cost effectiveness analysis and I've, definitely not even it was just a thing that immediately jumped to mind. I'm certain there are many other much more cost effective things you could do if you were a dictator of the world.

So this is like quite a small petty thing to be considering. But yeah, in large part, I think our ability to, 

Ben: I mean in some ways the US government did have this in mind ish. When they came up with Dodge, they thought, there's something going on here. I know that was only a part of it, so not completely crazy.

Deena: I think it's, certainly at the core of a lot of our ability to get things done. And, maybe this is also maybe again, I'm, biased here 'cause it's something that I personally experienced. For example, when you take public transit and you think about that the magnitude of the budget of the MTA and yet how expensive it is to do any particular project or process to improve the subway system.

and I think this goes not only for transit, but for things like construction, for for almost anything that the government, procures or does or has an RFP for. I think it's a wide ranging problem that impacts a lot of different sort of verticals that we experience day to day, if that makes sense.

Ben: yeah. So when you talk about procurement, it's not just buying supplies it's the building side of things as well. 

Deena: Yeah, exactly. So any sort of like contractor agreements or RFPs. 

Ben: Yeah, I guess that doesn't have a single bullet to it in a way that say if you propose a global carbon tax might or something.

So if you had 10 minutes with the president and they were gonna do the thing, you would implement that, this is the thing you would say, you'd go fix your procurement, fix your building. 

Deena: Yeah. I, don't know. I think it's in part a sort of a funny answer. and in part something that I think is like quite important.

I don't know how much that I would stand by, if I spent 10 minutes thinking about it, which I certainly hope that I would, if I, were, to be dictator for. For a day. I'm not sure that's what I would come out with, but I, do think I do stand by that. It's quite an important problem.

Ben: Yeah, no, I think that, I'm surprised you didn't go for health though, but you won't. Procurement maybe maybe health is even too complicated. Not as tractable 'cause it's too many bits to it. Okay. I'm gonna ask the question in another way, but bring it rather than at the policy government dictator level.

If I give you a billion dollars, which actually might sound like a lot, but actually we know is not a huge amount in the context of the world. And I say, you have to spend this, by the end of the call you have to decide how are we going to do this billion, what would you what would you allocate it towards?

You've got a billion and you can do anything with it. But it disappears unless we use it. So we can't like invest it and save it and do something even better in 10 years time. But what would we do now? 

Deena: Yeah, it's a good question. It's a hard one in large part one because often the answer might be divided into many little grants, but of course if one person is trying to think about how they would spend the funding, then you really just have to pick a few organizations or just a handful of, places to direct the funding. and then the second problem comes in of you get pretty, potentially pretty strong diminishing returns as you give the extra marginal dollar to the same organization, if that makes sense.

so the first, a hundred million, they might spend extremely cost effectively, but the further you go, the further down of the list of projects they have goes and, the more you start hitting constraints, sometimes thinking about like these very scalable opportunities I think there are certainly some organizations that that could take a large chunk of that billion and use it well.

again, bias, but organization, give, I think, would definitely be on the list. give directly thinking about, Gavi, for example. that could use a huge amount of funding. yeah, thinking about like organizations that are, Able to take a quite a large budget and have limiting diminished return as they move down the next dollar.

so I think ideally I'd split it up to at least five or 10 organizations, but I think something like that. 

Ben: Sure. The effective giving organizations like your own and, but then if you had a pet project, so you're not allowed to give it to an organization. And maybe this would be a smaller amount of money and maybe this isn't first order the most effective thing.

What sort of project or areas would you fund about? I think about this a little bit because one of the criticisms around some of this line of thinking is it never really works on the systems level. Although we've slightly negated that with AI and policy and, the things that they're like and sometimes I talk about, or I think about where we've had great social progress, like over hundreds of years progress, Slavery, women's rights, disability rights have come from this systems level change. And this is my art or your storytelling hat on. Because if you don't have a storytelling narrative for some of this, then you don't have that enabling layer at all to get change. But then, maybe that isn't that effective and we have to do it in a different way.

But I'd be interested in your thoughts of that. And did you have any other smaller pet project that you would want to fund? 

Deena: Yeah, it's a, good question. I think abstracting away from. My day-to-day role here a little bit. I think one area that we've looked at this year that I think has seemed quite timely and important is health system strengthening.

And in particular helping, low and middle income country governments allocate their health budgets and their budgets more generally as effectively as possible. I think this is particularly important now given, the perspective aid cuts and potential reductions in budgets for a lot of these countries.

And so it feels quite salient. But I do think there is a lot, of potential benefit in allocating those budgets a bit more cost effectively. And also in terms of, helping with budget execution, for example, ensuring that the budget can be spent, and can, and the money can get out the door each year which is almost an interesting and opposite challenge.

Ben: Excellent. Okay, last question. Would you like to give, any advice to people, listening? So this could be life advice or people thinking about how to give money or perhaps thinking about going into a career, either in terms of innovation research or grant making research, or your thoughts on where you've got to today.

life advice from Deena. 

Deena: Another tough question, I don't know that I could presume to give personal advice. I guess I will say one meta observation that has been interesting and helpful for me is that often some subset of people listening to a piece of general advice, should take that piece of advice and sub subset actually need to take the exact opposite.

Okay. and often it's reverse correlated with who is hearing it. usually the listeners of a particular, or the readers of a particular outlet are quite similar to. The person giving the advice. And so they have like similar inclinations. And so they're exactly the group of people that should be doing the opposite.

They're already leading too far in that direction. So maybe my, meta piece of advice is try, to collect advice from pretty disparate sources and from people that you maybe don't necessarily normally interact with and from different bubbles of the world. I think, it's very easy to end up in like a sort of, relatively small intellectual circle that thinks relatively similar in relatively similar ways.

But, I think one benefit I found of living in New York is that I am constantly exposed in a way that I might not have been in SF or DC to people who are in completely different industries who, have never, heard about a lot of the things that, that I spend my days thinking about, but vice versa have a lot of pretty interesting and pretty different robustly different experiences.

Ben: Excellent. So that sounds like if you are looking for the advice you want, you should actually ignore it and go the other way. 

Deena: Yeah, in some cases I think that's right. 

Ben: advice is overrated. Great. on that note, Deena, thank you very much. 

Deena: Thanks so much, Ben. It was a lot of fun.

In Podcast, Arts, Life Tags Philanthropy, Effective Altruism, Deena Mousa, Open Philanthropy, Artificial Intelligence, AI for Good, Grantmaking, Public Policy, Economics, Social Impact, Global Health, Decision Making, Government Procurement, Nonprofits, Coefficient Giving
← Newer Posts
Follow me on LinkedIN
Contact/Support