We need some disruption – to sort the Hard Problem



Tom Stoppard’s new play, the Hard Problem, asks whether individual consciousness (and the ideas of good and evil that go with it) can exist in a material world. A world in love with the matter of fact.

It’s been billed as an intellectual jeu d’esprit but I enjoyed it most as a study in the application of ideas in 21st century Britain. Much of the play touched on the activities of my daily living, which was odd as almost everyone in the audience appeared to be university lecturers!

The peril of being early

There’s a great moment in an early scene when an anonymous analyst for a hedge fund gets fired by Jerry Kroll (its owner) not for being wrong- but for “being early”.

His crime is to to share information that  Kroll, were he to retain it, could act on to create value for himself (destroying others in the process).

The play is not making a moral point, it is  rehearsing something that people in finance know  well – “keep your mouth shut”- “knowledge is power” and the ‘common “good” is not necessarily “good business”.

For Kroll there are no coincidences, only a failure in information. His fantasy is a world that is fully known – where nothing remains a mystery. But here knowledge needs to be the privilege of the few,the property of Kroll, his hedge fund and his institute.

Sacked for blogging!

The analyst blogs his way to a P45.

Independent blogging is not something that the financial services industry encourages. It’s too disruptive to business as usual, and BAU is what pays the bills.

The hegemony of large firms – whether in banking, fund management or consultancy – is absolute. As with Kroll’s hedge fund, the concentration of wealth (and therefore power) leads to asymmetries of information, where the ordinary man is cut out of the action.

Blogging adresses asymétries and democratises information.

A diversion into pensions (bear with)

I wrote last week about my concern that the independent governance committees were in risk of losing their independence (Gregg McClymont’s written similarly). My blog, openly criticising a major insurer and the process of selection that allowed a primary distributor to become an independent adviser, has caused pain and anguish in certain quarters (for which I’m sorry). It has caused a lot of anger too (for which I am not sorry at all).

The point of being independent is to provide an alternative perspective , to prevent market failures (from Madoff to Equitable Life). When Andrew Warwick-Thompson blew the whistle on Roy Ransome of Equitable Life and its burgeoning liabilities, he was legally gagged.

Warwick-Thompson was early, Gregg is early – I would like to think that this blog is “early”too.

In my neck of the woods , the legal threats are gone, instead the gagging is implicit in phrases such as “career threatening” – it is not a matter of being right or wrong – it is just about timing- it does not “pay” to be early.


Jerry Kroll and Hilary

If you’re not early – you tend to be late

The problem with not being early- is you tend to be late. If we had been early in identifying problems with pension mis-selling then we would not have had to put things right (at such great cost). If the pensions industry had listened to those like Alan Higham and Ros Altmann who demanded reform at retirement, we would not have had the chaos that we are facing today.

If you dam a river, you hold back the free flow of water and risk a flood when the dam bursts.

If you dam information, you do much the same, when the information that is held back, becomes public, the mud flies – and sticks.

Back to the play – “the play’s the thing”!

Within the play, Hilary is sustained by praying to a God that she believes will make good happen, she thanks that God when what she considers “good” happens to her. To this belief system, she attracts Bo, who falls in love with her, the kindly but spineless Leo and ultimately Kroll himself.

Madonna- eat your heart out!

She ain’t no madonna!

The show’s publicity depicts Hilary as a Madonna with her child. This doesn’t come across in performance.

She’s no saint- infact she’s a “tart with a heart” and about a quarter of the play is spent watching her jumping in and out of bed with Spike, a loathsomely one-dimensional crony of Kroll.

Far from demeaning her, I found her sexual exploits brought Hilary to life. Having had a child at 15, I expected a victim; instead I got a woman in control of her own sexuality (and a great deal more).

It all comes right in the end

For without her, there is no alternative to Kroll. The analyst is seen no more after his dismissal, throughout the Hard Problem, information struggles to be published for fear of the damage it might cause Kroll’s Institute (ironically of learning).

There are others within the institute who are conscious of the Hard Problem, but only Hilary who is disruptive enough to address it.

For all that, the play is a comedy. For all the destruction created by his extreme materialism, Kroll fosters a department of psychology within the institute that holds onto its Carthusian principles.

Paradoxically, the man who is God-like  in business  cannot  prevent the spread of consciousness , within the Institute.

This disruption culminates in Hilary declaring publicly that there is a God (and it is not Kroll), Though what God is, is defined here as what it is not. God appears as the  alternative to  pure Newtonian science that tells us that everything can be known.

Concepts such as “good” and “God” are able to be discussed within the play through the indulgence of Kroll. Somehow they even flourish. Kroll is shown as a father and in the denouement as someone who can recognise the good in Hilary.

The idea of motherhood as an example of altruism not egotism is returned to throughout the play.

There is a  human interest sub-plot within this involving a lost daughter, an adopted daughter and a found daughter. In the context of the intellectual action, it creates a narrative structure as we move to some kind of synthesis in the respect that Hilary earns from Kroll (both as a free-thinker and a mother).

This is not King Lear, it is more the Winter’s Tale. I would like to ask Olivia Vynall (Hilary) – who has played Cordelia – how she managed the transition to Hermione.

Even though it is not a bleak play-  it has bleak scenes (such as a disastrous dinner party) which show what could happen if Hilary were not there.

But we sense that Hilary will always be there- because she is given space to be. Is Kroll redeemed or redeemer – his relationship with Hilary is left an enigma.

Nous sommes Hilary (in our dreams)

This is the play’s political dimension. Set in the context of the suppression of liberties we are experiencing in other parts of the world.

tom stoppard

Ton Stoppard – a stranger to a hairbrush!

I felt when watching that because we are a free country, where you don’t get 1000 lashes for speaking your mind, Tom Stoppard can write such a play, Neptune Investment Management can sponsor it and I can write a blog about disruption inspired by its dialectic.

Hilary surprises us, she is neither victim, student, employee or maverick, she ends the play her own woman (and a mother) – she has opened all the doors

She earns this through 100 minutes of lacerating honesty on stage.

She is a 21st century heroine that we can aspire to be. Hers an example of disruption that helps us with the Hard Problem.


Hilary and Spike

Random Disclaimer

Some people don’t like the Pension Play Pen, they don’t like this blog, they want to “turn off the tap”. Some don’t even like First Actuarial because of the disruption it is said to have created by allowing all of this to happen.

The views of this blog are the views of Henry Tapper – no one else (unless the blog says so)!

About henry tapper

Founder of the Pension PlayPen,, partner of Stella, father of Olly . I am the Pension Plowman
This entry was posted in Bankers, Blogging, pensions and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to We need some disruption – to sort the Hard Problem

  1. Mike Post says:

    Thanks Henry. Prompted me to book to see it at the Regal Henley on 16 April before they sell out too.
    O/T but are the awful hydro screws near you both turning at 22 RPM? Their power output appears to be a state secret!

  2. henry tapper says:

    I haven’t been down to see my America friend who runs the screws at Romney Lock this winter. I am going down to Windsor at lunchtime and may wander over!
    I’d hope that they’d be going a bit faster than that as their is plenty of water in the river.
    The last time I spoke, the screws were meeting Regal needs and delivering some power back into the grid

    • Mike Post says:

      Last time l visited on 14 July the screws were rotating at 8 RPM in perfect generating conditions. Your American-born (he states that he is British) friend has a planning application in for Bell Weir and, egged on by the Environment Agency, is still threatening Marlow’s environment with a similar parasitic scheme. We will be resisting! I would be grateful for any feedback on Romney. Squandering of our wealth on these stupid schemes should be an election issue.

      • henry tapper says:

        Well Marlow can fight its own fights- I’d like to think that Old Father thames can provide you with some free clean energy for your household consumption and while it may not be the cheapest way of doing it, it is very elegant.

        Living directly in the line of sight of the screws, I can say they present no visual or aural pollution whatsoever, fish swim up the ladder and I don’t understand why you describe this scheme as parasitic!

      • Mike Post says:

        Hi Henry
        Thanks for your reply. Are you aware that generating electricity from this source is certainly not the cheapest way of generating electricity? It more than doubles the price. It is parasitic because it is pure subsidy farming. Your American friend explained to a group of us from Marlow that he was only in it for the subsidies. If you examine the similar proposed power station alongside the Lensbury Club at Teddington Lock ( http://www.hamhydro.org/ ) you will see the following statement: “Our vision for this project is twofold:
        to generate clean electricity from the hydropower installation, thus reducing carbon emissions locally and nationally, and to use the income generated to promote and develop further low-carbon solutions in Ham and surrounding areas.”
        The profit generated from such a low-head scheme can only come from the subsidies which electricity consumers pay. So the subsidies are supposed to pay for even more subsidised schemes. Ponzi would have been proud.
        Nobody would object to green hobbyists if they paid for their own hobbies and did no harm. the scheme at Mapledurham is delightful and properly situated in a mill race, not on top of a weir but why should it be heavily subsidised? Romney weir has spare capacity. The proposed scheme on Marlow weir would obstruct 10% of the weir – Marlow floods upstream of the weir. The twin screws are also planned by the EA to be 10 metres from the windows of the Compleat Angler.
        Low-head run-of-the-river hydro is not free. It is a mis-allocation of resources that, in the UK, should be spent investing in gas and nuclear power stations. Steam engines are elegant. Wind-jammers are elegant. But we don’t subsidse them to move the world’s freight around for a very good reason!

      • henry tapper says:

        I agree that the circumstances of each project are different and if the Marlow project leads to flooding or even to residents of the Compleat Angler having a bad night’s sleep, then you are right to object.

        On the more substantive point- the rules are rules, I can’t criticise someone for working within the rules- if you don’t like the rules you should be talking to DEFRA or whatever Government department controls them.

        There are many other aspects to this – educational et al which needs to be discussed but as a resident living beside one of these projects who pays several electricity bills, I’m not begrudging the chap

Leave a Reply