How do we want to live? And how do we want to die?

Helge Schmidt talks about “Die Krebsmafia” (The Cancer Mafia), the connection between theater and journalism, and which topics are still relevant on stage.

How did you become aware of this topic?

Helge Schmidt: I met with [investigative journalist] Oliver Schröm to talk about the latest developments surrounding Cum-Ex, which we did two plays about. During the “cozy part” of the conversation, Oliver told me about new information from the field of oncology, and I told him about my search for a new topic for a play. And, yes, sometimes it’s that simple—one thing led to another.

What surprised you most during your research?

Helge Schmidt: Definitely the scale of it. The book “Die Krebsmafia” (The Cancer Mafia) begins, to put it bluntly, with tax tricks that we have long since become accustomed to. But then it gets bigger and bigger. Pharmacists are involved, doctors are involved. The demigods in white. Patients die, human lives are put at risk. And for me, that’s the most striking difference from the tax issues I’ve been dealing with recently. The victims of the “cancer mafia” are not abstract. It’s not “the taxpayer” who is being harmed here. It’s Siegmar Bogen, and he’s dead.

Cancer is not a topic that people like to deal with. What are your hopes for this theater evening?

Helge Schmidt: Of course, the evening is about cancer. But the real question is: How can it be that we have not created a system in which patients receive the best medicine and the most caring treatment—but instead a market that refers to sick people as “customers” and turns health into a commodity? It’s about providing down-to-earth information, but “just” that might not be enough. I’m interested in the systemic dimension, not the scandal. That’s what fundamentally distinguishes theater from investigative journalism. We share a time and a space with the audience. And this sharing of space and time is a democratic experience. In that space, we want to negotiate the question: How do we want to live? And also: How do we want to die?

Why do you so often choose the really big issues?

Helge Schmidt: I think that the big social issues I’ve brought to the stage have the potential to bring people from different bubbles into conversation with each other. Whether conservative, liberal, or left-wing, most people reject the idea that the financial interests of individuals should take precedence over the life and death of cancer patients. In our productions, we have found that different milieus are dissatisfied with developments in our society and want to talk about them. And we want to invite them to do so.

In recent years, you have virtually specialized in making journalistic research on complex social issues suitable for the stage. What do you like about it?

Helge Schmidt: I think that both journalism and subsidized theaters are in a state of ongoing fundamental crisis. Journalism is losing attention to digital competition. In response, there has been a reflex to resort to clickbait. The headline dominates the story. The theater lacks a new (younger) and more diverse audience. It has slept through decades of reforms and renewal. Instead of finally tackling these issues, it gets lost in substitute debates to protect the same old privileges. The audience senses this and loses interest once again. I think journalism and theater have something to offer each other. Journalists have topics and texts that interest people. Theaters have forms, aesthetics, and spaces that allow for stories beyond news and “Isn’t that crazy?”

Do you see a connecting element between the plays “Cum-Ex Papers,” “Tax for Free,” and “The Cancer Mafia”?

Helge Schmidt: In all three plays, we try to provide our own small analyses of sections of society: first the economy, then politics, and now healthcare. In addition to connections in terms of content and motifs—they all deal with money, fraud, morality, and greed—the connection for me arises in the audience. We want something from them, and we have something to tell them.

Oliver Schröm was sued for his work—are you worried that the same thing could happen to you?

Helge Schmidt: I hope that theater isn’t relevant enough to generate the kind of attention from lawyers that we wouldn’t otherwise get. But beyond the financial risks of lawsuits, it would of course be interesting to know how courts would protect artistic freedom when dealing with journalistic topics. This is not exactly ordinary art. And fortunately, the people we are dealing with are more likely to be patrons of the arts than opponents of art.

The interview was conducted by dramaturge Franziska Bulban.