Welcome to the first meeting of session 6 of the Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee. I am Ariane Burgess MSP for the Highlands and Islands and the oldest member of the committee, and I have the pleasure of convening this meeting for the first two items of business. No apologies have been received. I would like to take this opportunity to welcome all members, and I look forward to working with you on this committee. Before we move to the first item on the agenda, I would like to remind everyone present to switch mobile phones to silent. I have just done that myself. A reminder to members to wait for your name to be called before speaking to give time for broadcast colleagues to activate the microphones. Broadcast colleagues will mute microphones for those who are not speaking to keep ambient noise down and prevent distortion, so we are absolutely in good hands for this first meeting. The first agenda item is for each of us to declare any interests that we have relevant to the work of the committee. Background information is provided in the declaration of interest paper 1. I will ask each member in turn, in alphabetical order, to declare any interests or to say that you have no relevant interests to declare. I would like to begin with my committee colleague, Karen Adam. Good morning. I have no interests to declare. I have no particular interests to declare, but I would refer members to my register of interests. I get to go next, and I have no particular relevant interests to declare. I declare an interest in a farming and lighting business, and I am also a member of the National Farmers Union of Scotland. I am a member of the National Farmers Union of Scotland. Sorry, I did not catch that last bit. Other than that, I have no other registered interests. I have no interests to declare with regard to the committee, however, I would refer members to my register of interests. Good morning. Other than being an islander, I have no registered interests in the committee, but others would prefer to go to my register of interests. I live on an island, but, apart from that, I have no relevant interests to declare, however, I refer members to my register of interests. I have no relevant interests to declare. We are going to move on to agenda item number two, which is to choose our convener. The committee's next task is to choose a convener, and the procedure is explained in the choice of convener papers, paper number two. The Parliament has agreed that only members of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist party are eligible for nomination as conveners of the committee. Can I invite a member of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist party to nominate their candidate for convener? We are in the box. I would like to nominate Finlay Carson as convener. Do we agree to choose Finlay Carson as our convener? Please indicate any objections by typing R into the chat function. I see no objections to Finlay Carson as our convener for the Rural Affairs, Islands and Nature Natural Environment Committee. I welcome Finlay Carson to your appointment. I look forward to working with you in your role as convener. Thank you very much. I appreciate those kind words. I am absolutely delighted and honoured to be taking the role of convener of the committee. It has the unfortunate name of Rain, which is not quite as nice as the previous committee I served on, but I am quite sure that it will be a fascinating committee. We have a huge amount of work to do in an area that I know that all of you are particularly interested in. I look forward to working with you and the clerks and the vice over the next few months. We want to agenda item 3, which is the choice of deputy convener. The Parliament has agreed that only members of the Scottish Liberal Democrats are eligible for nomination as deputy convener of this committee. I understand that Liam McArthur is that party's nominee. Do we have any objections to Liam McArthur as our deputy convener? If you do so, please place R in the chat function. No, we have no objections, so I congratulate Liam McArthur on being the deputy convener of our committee and I look forward to working with him over the months. Now we move on to agenda item 4. It is a provisional discussion about the legacy papers produced by the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee and the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee at the end of session 5. Those papers summarise the committee's recommendation in relation to the ways of working based on the experience over the previous session and highlights work that we think that this committee may wish to focus on. I propose to invite members to highlight any aspects in the legacy papers that they consider particularly important for our future work programme. What I will do is I will call on members individually—I will not call on alphabetically, but I will probably start with those who have had experience on the committee before and I will call on Liam McArthur to make a comment on the committee's work programme. Liam McArthur. Thank you very much, convener, and thank you to the committee for letting me as the deputy convener. I consider that to be a real privilege. I look through the legacy papers of the relevant committees to the work of this committee in the previous session and it did not lack for options in terms of issues that I think will be under some pressure and expectation to be covering. It seems to me logical to continue the work in relation to the operation of the internal markets and the rural frameworks issues. Added to that, we have got the questions around future trade deals that are being pursued and which are given some consideration to, but it is an opportunity within the committee to drill down into that a bit. The good food nation, I am assuming that we will have a bill to deal with in due course, but it is whether we can squeeze out some time before legislation starts to flow forward to do a better pre-legislative consultation in some of the areas that the good food nation is likely to cover. Aquaculture, to me, seems to be something that we are going to have to revisit as well. From a more island's perspective, I would have a keen interest in us continuing to shine a light on issues around procurement. I know that there is a bit of dubiety about whether or not digital connectivity sits within our remit or perhaps in another committee's remit, but if we have any locus in that, that has demonstrated itself over the past 18 months to be an issue of almost existential importance to many island and rural communities. We could usefully turn our attention to that. On closing, I would flag up that it is not on the list. I know that the petitions committee is looking at a petition in relation to air traffic control service centralisation, but that cuts across interests of the committee as well. I think that we need to wait to see what the petitions committee seeks to do with that. It is part of their legacy paper, but if there is a way of following that up, it is appropriate. I am very supportive of that. I should have said in writing the outset that we recognise that there will be some outstanding questions about where our remit falls, whether there is crossover between net zero energy transport committee's remit, and I propose to write to the Scottish Government after this session just to have some clarity and advance of our business planning meeting. Please do not hesitate to bring forward topics that you think might be the remit of this committee, and we can certainly clarify that before we move forward. Can I now ask Alasdair to make a comment? In the papers that we have, as has been mentioned by Liam, there are obvious things in there, such as cop26 or cap, replacements for cap, trade deals and all those issues. I think that it is interesting that we have a committee with three people who live on islands, so I apologise if we have tried to do a takeover from time to time, but I would echo what Liam said about the fact that many of the issues that affect islands and perhaps other parts of the country are ultimately all about the population, so there will be some crossover between issues and I suppose possibly some negotiation to be done with other committees about where exactly our remit lies. For me, I think that an issue that is impossible to avoid if we are talking about the rural economy or the island economy is housing. I realise that we are not the housing committee, but it is an example of areas that we cannot avoid because we do not have an economy in some parts of the country if we do it anywhere for people to live. For me, I think that that would be the observations that I would make. We probably just need to clarify if we have opportunities to do more holistic cross-cutting looks at some of the economic issues that affect island areas and other areas that are affected by the population, which we in power can make these areas or we might need to negotiate with another committee about it. I absolutely agree. Although there may be three members who are islands in the truest sense coming from Galway and Western Fife, we often feel like we are an island as well. Housing is certainly an issue with us. There may also be some remit when it comes to the rural-based enterprise agencies, such as Highlands and Islands, and the South Scotland Enterprise Agency. We need to look at that as well. Rachael Hamilton, can I move on to you, please? Thank you, convener, and congratulations to both you and Liam McArthur. I am slightly unclear about where our remit will lie, but looking at some of the legacy papers I am very interested in pursuing the Food and Farming Future Policy agenda. It is very important that farmers know where they are going and that they have a direction. I think that our committee could very much be looking and scrutinising at what the Scottish Government is bringing forward, and that might lie quite nicely with post-EU legislative competence and other issues surrounding that landscape. Obviously, the big thing for us is going to be COP26, and I think that that is how we feed into that in terms of our remit in the committee. The responsibilities that will be expected of agriculture in Scotland do part of that net zero solution or part of their role that they play in reaching net zero, including emission targets. I think that it is also important that we look at the if it is our remit to look at the DEAR Act and DEAR and GRIS legislation. Obviously, there was a slight issue that BASC had raised with regards to the way that people in agriculture, rural workers, are being treated. I think that that is an important aspect that we should be looking at. One thing that interests me greatly was the review of the salmon farming inquiry. I was not part of the committee at that point, but I think that it would be worth looking at how progress has been made in terms of some of the voluntary code of conduct and other aspects that the committee raised previously. Another aspect that I think is going to be really important is marine biodiversity. I think that we should be looking at that. Finally, wildlife protection. I also think that it is very important that the point that Alasdalen raises about the island communities—again, I do not think that housing is really our remit, but it is about rural life and that takes into account some of the work that we did in the last committee with regard to the ferry inquiry and connectivity. There is a lot to go on, as you say, Finlay. I think that we have got our work cut out, but I am really looking forward to contributing to the committee and working with all the fabulous clerks that we heard from this morning. Thank you very much. Rachel, can you now move on to Arran, please? Thank you, convener. From the work of the Wreck Committee on Rural Economy and Connectivity, things stood out to me, of course everything. My colleagues have already said quite a lot of what I would agree with, but I will just emphasise a few things and pick up something. Absolutely, whatever form of food bill, good food nation or whatever comes forward, I think that is absolutely important. The salmon aquaculture, I would like to look at that again. I am quite concerned about the direction of travel there. As well as the inshore fisheries, I think that that is really an important piece of work that we need to look at, maybe some restoration of limits. As well, I would like to pick up crofting. I feel like there is some work that we could be doing there in terms of derelict crofts and supporting the work of the Crofting Commission to bring more land back into use where we have so many people who actually want to have and work crofts. Of course, there is always going to be climate change plans. I am keen to look at anything to do with climate change. In terms of the work of Eclair, I think that that was the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee. Things that stand out for me there is how we look at a green recovery and while responding to our twin emergencies of climate nature. I would also like to look at land reform because I think that that underpins so much. It is part of what underpins the housing issue that Alistair Allyn referred to. Of course, COP26 as well. I just want to say that I am not an islander. I would maybe love to be, but I do live ruraly. That is why I chose to be on this committee. I am on the local government, housing and planning committee. The reason that I asked to be the green spokesperson for these areas before getting on these committees was because at the heart for me is the issue around rural depopulation or repopulation and making sure that we have places for young people who want to stay and places for affordable housing for people who are coming to provide services—much needed services—to our rural community. For me, community is at heart and we need to make sure that it is people and land and the environment altogether. Thank you very much. Thank you for that and congratulations on your convenership. It is great to meet the rest of the group in this session. I would like to pursue the UK Internal Market Act, how that will affect farm funding. The Brexit implications on devolution and how that will affect the rural economy. The future rural policy, what that will look like. I absolutely agree that the farming community needs to have a degree of certainty. As you and I both know, farming is not about tomorrow or the day after. It is about a generation in front of us, so we need to get some kind of certainty on what that looks like. The good food nation bill, as it was, I would certainly like to see us looking at that again. Food is not just farming. I am interested in it, it is farming, it is food, it is the environment, it is the rural and the population, as Ariane was just talking about. All of those things to me are utterly connected. Women in agriculture is something that was looked at in the last session and I think that it is something that we should pursue further. The progress that we have made has been okay, but I think that we could make a hell of a lot more progress in encouraging more women to get involved in agriculture and actually running the businesses, because they are more than capable of doing it, as we have witnessed in numerous occasions over the past two or three years. In short, fisheries are vital. We have an absolute dual in the crown, and we really need to be protecting digital connectivity. We all know that the problems with digital connectivity are even in urban areas, let alone what it is like in the rural constituency. It is really like us to try and investigate how we bring together two disparate groups. Rachel talked about how the rural population feels as though they are not represented in this Parliament. I have written some support in support of the gamekeeping fraternity on Twitter and was immediately bombarded from the other side. I am saying the other side at this stage because we currently are two sides of an argument. I would like to find some way of bringing them together, because the two of them should not be mutually exclusive. There has got to be a way of making those two separate groups come together and work out what is the best way to protect the raptors, to protect their environment, but not at the expense of losing rural jobs, which are vital to stopping rural depopulation. There is a whole interlink of stuff going on there that I am keen to have a look at. Transport requirements. I live in Persia, but even we have transport problems in Persia, so it must be an absolute torture journey for people like yourself, then away from the deep borders or up in the highlands and islands. Housing, as I say, even in Persia we have rural housing problems, is something that we need to look at across the border. If that is not enough to be gone on, I am quite sure that there is more that we can find. Thank you very much, Jim. I appreciate that. Certainly there is a lot of food for thought, excuse the pun, but I think that just your contribution alone just gives us an indication of the remit that we have. Jenny Mental, welcome, Jenny. Can I ask you for your comments, please? Yes, thank you, Finlay. Congratulations on your convenership and also to Liam as well. I am really looking forward to working with everyone across the group and also the fantastic experts that the Parliament provides us with. Finlay, I would just say one thing. I actually think that RAIN is probably the most appropriate title for this committee, because without RAIN we would not have the wonderful green Scotland and blue Scotland that we actually have. Like everyone has said, this is a fantastic committee. It has such a wide remit. Just as I was reading the legacy papers, I represent Argyllin Bute, as you know, and I feel that Argyllin Bute takes so many of the boxes on it as does the rest of rural Scotland. I will not repeat what everybody else has said, but, like Alasdair, living on an island, I absolutely understand the housing, the de-population, the ferries, the connectivity. That is the same in rural, remote, Argyllin Bute as well and rural, remote Scotland. I think that there is some fantastic work that has already been done that we can grow on. We have talked a bit about food and the Scottish brand that is food. There is wonderful research done there. We are talking about absolutely great, really top products. Can we look at that across the rural economy for other industries, perhaps fabric and use it as well for tourism, so widen out the fantastic research that is being done there? What Ariane was talking about is that the one thing that I wrote down as well is communities, and we absolutely have to recognise the importance of our rural communities. We have to recognise the input that farmers, fishermen, crofters and aquaculture all put in, but we have to get the right balance with the environment, with all those organisations. I also cannot not say land reform as well. That is something that I think the community has to work. This group has to work very clearly together. Just finally, Ariane said it, and I just wrote it down as well. People in the land are in this together, and we need to get through it together. It is a huge remit. It is very exciting and loads of work, but I am very pleased to be part of it. One of the things that I picked up from the two legacy documents was how we gather the evidence and the lived experience. We have all got lived experience. We really need to make sure that we get out into our communities to ensure that we are gathering as widely as we can from people's lived experience and what they know about their communities. I am glad that you mentioned that. Kate Smith, who we briefly met in the briefing session from the participation and community team did a fantastic job for the clear committee in the last session, making sure that we did not just get the opinions of stakeholders or, if some people like to call it, opinion holders, but it was a broad selection of people who had various different opinions on the topic matter. I am looking forward to working with Kate Smith to ensure that we do exactly that and get a broad spectrum of opinions from right across our communities and stakeholders. Can I now move on to Karen Adam? Welcome, Karen. Much like my colleagues here, I am really excited and looking forward to being a part of this committee. I am representing a very coastal and rural community. I will definitely be interested in fishing and fisheries. It was Rachael Davies who picked up on marine biodiversity. One of the recommendations from the clear committee, which was really important, was looking at an integrated approach in regard to scrutiny. Having that holistic outlook towards that would be really helpful and beneficial moving forward with all aspects of marine biodiversity. I am particularly scrutinising the outcome of the post-EU exit negotiations between the UK, EU and other coastal states. Particularly its implications for sustainable fisheries in Scottish waters is really important. On engaging with debates on human rights, I am looking at the relevance to the environment on that and considering how our committees may be best to scrutinise any forthcoming human rights legislation. For the rural economy and connectivity committee, within that legacy report, what I really picked up on was—I think that Jim touched on this—the women in agriculture. Particularly looking at the work that the task force did and working on what they have already done and taking their suggestions forward and continuing with implementations of that digital connectivity transport, particularly Covid implications. The pandemic has had significant impacts on agriculture, fisheries and aquaculture. We need to be definitely looking at what we can do in regard to our recovery and making sure that we get big off in the right foot with that. Housing particularly has been brought up and I agree with that. Keeping a young workforce in the area is often brought up. If we can find ways, we are such a large remit, but everything is very much connected. Having that holistic approach towards transport, broadband connectivity and making sure that there are jobs for our young people and all parts of the committee and everything that I am really looking forward to getting stuck into. It is such a huge remit. It is hard to know where to start, but I am really looking forward to it. Thank you very much, Karen. Last but not least, I hope that I do not pronounce your surname wrong. It is great to be here this morning. It is a really exciting committee with a huge remit, seemingly endless and so much potential. I am really excited to be a part of it. I represent the north-east region, which I think others here represent constituencies in that region. Like so much of the rest of Scotland, it has an abundance of natural heritage. It is really beautiful but we struggle with infrastructure to make it a fantastic place for people to grow up in and stay. I see a lot of potential with this committee to look at what we can do to make rural and coastal areas of Scotland vibrant. We are looking at connectivity in terms of digital infrastructure as well as transport, which has already been mentioned. We are looking at jobs around food and agriculture and exploring workers' rights in those areas and supporting farmers and business owners to diversify and restore nature, which, hopefully, will elongate businesses anyway. There is huge scope. So much has already been mentioned, much of which I agree with. I am excited to get started. The key thing for me, as Arianne said, is looking at how we can move forward policies that benefit and work for nature, people and the land and having that holistic, integrated approach, which benefits all of that. I am going to make some comments, but if anybody would like to make a further contribution, if you put an R in the chat box, I will call you in and we can turn your mic on. The last 15 minutes have certainly given us a wake-up call about just how much work we have got to do. We could be the lead committee when it comes to Scottish Water, NatureScot, MarineScotland and deeper. In itself, there is quite a bit of work to do to ensure that they are working efficiently and scrutinising the work that they do. We have touched on aquaculture. That was a major report in the last session that both the Clare and the Rural Affairs Committee worked on, which had a huge amount of public interest. There may be a need for a look at the wild salmon population or the freshwater environment on a broader scale with non-native invasive species and so on, which is having an impact on our biodiversity, which, as we all know, is in crisis, along with the climate change crisis that we face. Some of the mitigation plans that the Government has at the moment will probably need to look at forestry planting to try to hit our net zero targets and what the implication on forestry planting is on our natural environment as a whole and peat restoration. We touched on the blue recovery, marine carbon, so not just freshwater environment but our seas around our coast and to look at what is happening to species decline and that goes hand in hand with our inshore fisheries, so possibly a bit of work to do there. Of course, as Jim touched on, we have past colony cap reform, but we are looking at rural payments and new rural policies and how that will tie in potentially with land use strategies, the local land use strategy and the new groups that have been set up to look at land groups and how farming and environmental issues can be taken forward on that. The on-going implications of Brexit, and I am glad that you touched on the Parliamentary Discuity, what our role is when it comes to the UK internal market and the animal welfare and food standards in future trade deals. A crofting crown estate, there is a huge amount of work in animal welfare. I think that some of the members of the previous committees, when they put the legacy papers together, must have had a good idea that they were not going to be coming back and serving on those committees because they have certainly given us a massive workload. I think that it is really important that the work that we do is communicated to everybody, not just inside the Parliament but into our communities to get as much engagement as possible. Certainly, the clear committee in the last session was particularly good at that. Ariana, can I bring you in again, please? Thank you, convener. Yes, we certainly have a lot. I just wanted to pick up because you brought forestry up and I want to pick something up because I think that we have a fantastic opportunity not only with looking at forestry in terms of carbon capture and biodiversity but also how can we grow trees, because forestry is a long-term vision as much as agriculture? How can we grow the trees and, therefore, the timber that we could be building houses in Scotland from? How can we grow trees that we can be making added value products? Where is the investment for added value fibre manufacturing plant or something like that in rural Scotland? Are there in the south or up by me? We could hangle over that, but I think that there are some tremendous opportunities to start to look at. As we move away from oil and gas and all the products that are made from oil and gas, we need to start thinking about how we make them out of things that we can grow in Scotland. I would love us to have a first look at that as well. I just want to come back in and underscore women and agriculture. I am right there. I really want to support looking into that. I have met some amazing women pioneers and I think that we need to do the work to open the doors and support more into the sector. I could agree with you more. I think that that could be built around the wider issue of succession planning when it comes to farming businesses. I was involved with the young farmers for many years and it was an issue a way back then, 30 or 40 years ago it must be now. Succession planning was an issue and we did not look specifically at women and agriculture, which I think was a failing back then, so there is quite a bit of work to be done to see how our future generations of farmers and the entrepreneurial behaviour in farming tend to come from the young people. Not always, I do not want to be ages, but we certainly need to pay due regard to how agriculture is going to develop over the short term and absolutely the long term. Rachel, can I bring you in, please? If we had no idea how we would be shaping what we would be taking forward, because Arianne makes the point there about specific aspects that she is interested in and we all have, indeed, this morning. However, if we look at the umbrella subjects such as the future of food and farming policy that, without a doubt, brings in procurement, and procurement is an issue that would be pursued through, for example, the good food bill, it would not necessarily take into account where stocks of timber are going and whether those could be used, indigenous timber could be used to make houses, but it is all part of the big procurement tent and I wondered if you had any idea as to when we might get a bit of direction as to how we take the subjects that we are interested in and our remit. Good question, Rachel. We have got a big task ahead of us, not just on the remit, but also tying that down. In the previous committees, the huge remit inevitably resulted in, in some areas, us only scratching the surface of the topics that we were engaged in and not scrutinising properly, so we have to be aware that there are some topics that we have to focus on more than others, but that will be part of the work programme meeting that we have, hopefully, at the end of August, just before we come back formally in the Parliament, and the clerks have put a lot of work to do to try and pull together some suggestions for the work plan for us to discuss it at that meeting. Again, we will need to clarify exactly what the remit is and where it crosses over with other committees. Jim? That is crossing my line, just when I was talking about forestry and we were talking about the perception of the rural community feeling as though they are left behind by the central bell Scottish Government, which I disagree with, but it is the conflicts that we have. I absolutely get that we have a need to tackle the climate emergency. Planting trees is definitely recognised as being one of them, but it is 18,000 hectares of trees per year in the right place, with the right kind of trees. That is probably more important than getting numbers. It is trying to bring the conflicts that we currently have and bring people together so that we can actually talk about it in a balanced way so that we can find the right solutions. There is something here for all of us to get a result out of. When I say a result, I mean something that everybody is happy with. We can continue to keep the rural population where they are and working and we can continue to hit our climate change targets. It does not have to always be in a conflict way. I would really like us to focus on how we bring those issues together so that we actually find proper solutions rather than just making it a political football. Absolutely. If you look back at the work that the clear committee and the rural affairs committee did, the committee worked very well together to look at how we came to the best solution. That involved compromise from each side, but we had very few votes and very few divisions within the committee. Our committee reports were very consensual, so I would like to think that, going forward, the evidence that we are able to gather from stakeholders will be able to work in a very joined-up manner to try to get the best policies, the best laws, best solutions for everybody. In some cases, that will involve compromise, but I am sure that we will be able to get to the best solutions. Unfortunately, only after 10 or 15 days today, we could probably talk for the next week about the remit and set an out what we think we need to achieve over the next few years. However, if the members agree, we will discuss the initial work programme at an informal business planning event towards the end of the summer recess. My preference would be to try and get the members into Parliament physically rather than virtually. Unfortunately, because of the Covid restrictions and where we are at the moment, we are going to be unable to have an away day, which is always a fantastic team-building opportunity, so we can speak to each other formally and informally and try to get to know each other a little bit better. We are not going to be able to do that before the Parliament reconvenes in September, but hopefully we can have a face-to-face business planning meeting sometime towards the end of August. If everyone is in agreement, the committee class will be in touch with members regarding the arrangements around that informal planning session and it will be organised to pay due to the guard to the restrictions that will be in place at that time. However, if there are no other comments, I would like to thank you all very much. Once again, I am absolutely looking forward to working with you all. What I believe will be the best committee in the Parliament, so not only do I have the best constituency, I have now got the best committee, I am delighted to go into the recess on that basis. Thank you all very much and I look forward to your hard work and I am getting to know all better when we have our next meeting. I bring this meeting to a close.


A common solution to unfulfilled sexual desires is watching porn. It has been mentioned and encouraged by many psychologists and therapists. While it may work for some people, for others it can lead to a problem. Porn addiction. But why do certain people get addicted to porn? What are the root causes? Let's take a look. 1. Loneliness and escapism Before we get into the scientific stuff, let's take a look at why people get hooked on porn from a social perspective. What's behind this behavior? Well, think of it as a coping mechanism, sort of like how people turn to sweets and junk food when they're feeling down. People use porn for a temporary distraction from life's challenges and loneliness. But this isn't a healthy way to deal with your emotions. It's like trying to beat loneliness or sadness by diving into something that doesn't really fix the root issues. What makes it even trickier is that pornography can give you highs and lows, moments of intense excitement followed by times when you feel pretty low. These ups and downs can create a cycle that makes you crave that next high and can be hard to break free from. People often get into this because they're dealing with complex emotions or don't have a support system they can rely on. It's a way to escape, even if it's only for a little while, from the emotional rollercoaster that life can sometimes be, to chasing the dopamine high. Okay, now before getting into the more scientific aspect of this topic, let's clarify what addiction is because when most people hear the word addiction, they naturally assume it's drug addiction. Porn addiction is a real problem and it's not exactly the same as drug addiction. The American Psychological Association defines addiction as a state of psychological or physical dependence, or both, on the use of alcohol or other drugs. Typically, this term is used when speaking about substance abuse, but the definition extends to behavioral disorders, which include sexual behaviors. But why would someone become addicted to porn? Great question. This brings us to our third point, three, developing tolerance. People can become addicted to porn because it triggers a pleasurable feeling in the brain. Over time, they need more explicit content to get the same feeling. Some turn to porn as a way to escape from problems or loneliness. It can become a habit and even make people feel worse about themselves. In other words, people develop a tolerance. People get addicted to porn, but they also develop a tolerance for it, just like they do for drugs, which leads to a consequent reduction in pleasure every time they use it. When this happens, they need to watch more and more porn than ever before to feel the same high. So, what does this mean for porn addiction? Let's continue. 4. Too Much Dopamine Dopamine is a brain chemical that affects how we behave with others, but too much of it for a long time can change how we act and make us more likely to get hooked on certain things. In other words, a lot of dopamine can cause negative social behaviors. So, what does all this science have to do with porn addiction? Watching porn makes the brain release more dopamine, which can affect our behavior. If someone's brain can't regulate dopamine well, it can make things even harder. Several factors, including genetics, environmental stress and mental health conditions, can make it difficult for someone to control their brain's dopamine levels. This brings us to the next point. 5.   Some people turn to porn when they're feeling down, and it can become a habit. But why does it become a problem? It's because of two chemicals in your brain. Dopamine and serotonin. We've talked about how dopamine plays a big role in addiction. Now, let's look at serotonin.  That's why people often feel calm and relaxed after having an orgasm. In fact, the French even have a fancy name for it. They call it la pitié mort, which means the little death. 6. Hypofrontality What's hypofrontality? Well, hypo means less. So, hypofrontality means your brain's front part isn't working at its best. This part is like your brain's manager, for decision-making, memory, learning, and how you act with others. Why does it matter? Some studies say that when people are dealing with depression or other mental health challenges, their brain's front part can shrink a bit. There was even a study in 2011 that checked if this affects how people deal with porn addiction. They found out that, yes, it does. It's like your brain's boss isn't working right, and it can change how you deal with things like porn. 7. Traumatic brain injury in an early life stage Believe it or not, severe brain injuries, especially in early life, can indirectly lead to porn addiction.  They might have a lower interest in sex, or sometimes the opposite. They want it a lot. What they do to find satisfaction can include sex, self-pleasure, or even watching porn. In most cases, people recover from these issues after a brain injury, but not everyone does. Tell us. Were you shocked by some of these causes? Did we miss any other causes that could have been included? Comment below. Also, your support in viewing our content means a lot, because it means the work we do can keep impacting more people. So if you found this video interesting and want to support us in exploring more psychological topics, do consider liking this video and leaving a comment. And as always, thanks for watching.


Good morning. Thank you for coming out of what started as a rainy Sunday. And maybe the sun will be out. We have the PA system on. We don't really need it in the size room, but it's an able domestic feed. We are a live streaming event on howlown.com slash TV. Thank you to Howlown for having us. That would basically work now. I, uh, let's get on with it. Welcome to the TV feed and the interview. Dr. Jackson, why don't you come to the conversation with our honoring Dr. Martin. That's what Donald's done in the past, and I've done a couple of things. That they go on a little too much like the previous one. Tell me about your boyhood, what's the first thing you wrote. And then what happened is the same thing is said in the presentation, I decided to take a slightly different path and sort of roam all over a number of areas that aren't chronological. I'm sure Donald will talk about some of these studies. I hope he will. But I hope he will cover some territory that we can tell you tonight. So I wanted to start asking Donald the question that involves a person who we all knew. Some of you know, I think he was the third person honored here while Bob Anderson. Many of us knew him. And Bob Anderson played a very interesting, significant role in Donald's career. And I wanted him to talk a little bit about that. I'm happy to do that. I went to art school. I was at Purchase College. I was a digital arts major. And I was very lucky to encounter wonderful men who were influential to me in different genres. And when I was a visual artist, I knew a man who used to be a jailer who was a sculptor and a printmaker. And Abe knew of my interest, my growing interest in playwriting. Because I had begun to write plays while I was an undergraduate at Purchase. I was 20 years old when I did my first play. And Abe was fascinated by my interest in it. I was very supportive of it. And one day he said to me, do you remember that Robert Anderson? And I said, of course, of course I remember that. Because Bob Anderson was a pianist, simply because he was an icon of American play. Of course, I was aware of it. I never sang for my father, which in its case was also quite an age ago. And I said, of course. He said, would you like to meet him? I said, yeah. So Abe orchestrated this meeting with me and Bob in Bob Sutton's place of apartment. I was so thrilled to be in the presence of an actual living, breathing, producing playwright. This would have been 1976 or 2007, something like that. And I was just so thrilled to be in his company. Bob was remarkably open to generous, with his time, with his anecdotes. He went out for coffee at the same dinner. He was a really sweet generous man. He had this wonderful story to tell. And then he's, at the end of this encounter, he said, would you... You know, I left him my agent. His agent was for legendary organ music. And I wasn't gonna pass that out. So he gave what he would, some of my early, early plays to me. And then he arranged to bring me to her. He was having a breakfast with the queen. And she was really lucky to me, considering that I was just this Fisher writer that Bob had taken under his wing. And, you know, she called me Deer and Darwin a lot. And he's also... So the purpose of that meeting was in the production. With Bob talking to her a little bit about the plays. And then she was going to call me once she read it. And Bob warned me that when she calls people on the telephone, she never says goodbye. She only means up to call me. And that was a crucial piece of information. Because she came up with it. I knew enough to take the person. But you're just... I'm only giving you that anecdote as an example of the kinds of experiences that a senior writer is a junior, not even junior, but a pleasure writer that needs a role. It makes you feel like a part of a tradition. It's part of an ongoing conversation. Yeah, and I've read, as you know, I've read some of the letters that Donald has given his papers to Yale. I didn't give him his papers. I wasn't going to make you sound personary. And I've read some of the letters that Bob wrote to you in the early years of your career. He went to see new plays and frequently would write you a letter about the Black people. Yeah, well, but it was constructive critique. And he was basically an appreciator of them. He was. I'm working on it, and Jeff, you see a Michael Wetter here at the birth of the plan about to say that it's a cold resting place. Which, it was just a feeling. It was an exercise. I read the two related ones, one of which was written with three words and was spoken by a homeless man. And it wasn't terribly long. Was he a good writer? And Bob really looked on. I don't remember his name. I remember he sent me a letter. And he always typed. What do you mean by that? And he wrote, and his response to the rest of this was really wild man. A very Bob kind of thing to say. A man who wore ties to all occasions. And he didn't get it, but he also, you know, he didn't denigrate it. He just kind of scratched his head with it. And then I think when I had a success in New York with collected stories, he wrote me this rapturous, this was 20 years ago, rapturous letter about how, thank God he's finally written a well-made book. It would probably be a good point here to ask you how you passed it on. In other words, how you, and now as a somewhat senior playwright, your role was to Bob Anderson to other players. It's, well, you know, as I said, I was very, very privileged to have wonderful men, you know, older men who fostered me as a young artist. Julius Nielke was one of these. Jay Nielke was the only teacher of dramatic literature at purchase. It was, you know, a course of playwright. And when I had this hitch to write for me, it was still kind of disneyed to me. It was Jay Nielke's office store that I knocked on to ask if he would sponsor me on a playwright. And Jay accepted me, the proposal was lacking. We met every week and I wrote ferociously for that semester, I was part of that. And at the end of the semester, there was an evaluation panel in the program. And there was a portion of this forum that was, do you recommend that this would continue in the school? And Jay wrote in capital letters, yes, with about six explanations. And that was an incredibly seminal moment for me. To get that kind of business evaluation. And that is something that I share with my students. I learned that there was no point of being a little older with young people or even a spectacle of where they might go. But if you suspect that there's talent there, by all means share that suspicion with them. It is so meaningful. So that because I have people like Jay, I have Jay, my art school mentor, who embraced young talent. It really provided me with searching about it as a role model, as a teacher. I've been teaching for 45 years now. Some of those years were taught what to expand teaching at the drama school, just a few years. But primarily I've been teaching under-graduates and female teachers at the department. So how, aside from the mentor aspects of teaching, has teaching helped you as a player? I think it continues to stimulate me. I, on my syllabus, I wrote the talk about it. And when I teach these plays, if you want to read them this year, and I get to bacteriously experience what's going on with those plays, which is the next step into experiencing something for the first time. You can't ever really replicate it all. Quick, through teaching you can to get to touch on what it was that excited me the first time. So I teach. I teach mostly contemporary American English plays, and I end the term with Alton. And it's always very thrown through to the unique use of students to these plays that they may have been exposed to as younger students, but may not have a future to be sent to the drama school. I read in an interview that you once gave that somebody asked you, what are the highlights of your career work? And you said one of the career highlights was writing the introduction to our town. Absolutely. And Donald and I share a wilder interest I have to admit. And could you talk a little bit about why it's a career highlight and what you value so much in that play? Well, you know, my wife and I saw a bit of great emotional production. I think it was in, you know, in the 80s. It's baldy gray. It's baldy gray as per state of mind. The only scene was the alley. And it was stunning. It was an absolute stunning play. I think that's available on some sort of video. It is. With Eric Stolz and Alton and me. I believe that's the one. And I have been exposed to Alton as a high schooler, and I had seen student productions, and I was very hoping, and very sort of sentimental, Norman Rockwell, and Americana. And when I saw that great emotional production, he was devastated. And I went home and I looked at my copy of that, and of course I had. Well, I wanted to see what Greg had done differently with you. What have you caught? What have you changed? Nothing. I changed. That was the lesson. And to be exposed to something to a work of art like Alton, which is truly fine, when you're too young to appreciate its greatness, there's a gift to be had in that. Because you can rediscover a great work of art many times during your life. When you were at different points in your own journey, and you have different points of reference to relate to the work of art. So I guess my affection for Wilder was known to Tappin Wilder, he actually was born. And Tappin Wilder, who's become a friend of the white man, invited me to be part of Supposing the Gale. You must be the Gale. John Ware. John Ware and Keith Wren, and I was thrilled to be a part of our discussion. And then shortly thereafter, the Wilder plays were going to be reempted by Parker Collins. All of the work. The entire canon of Wilder. His lesson in novels and all of the plays were being reissued. And he wanted part of Tappin's pitch to Parker Collins with it. Each of these volumes would be introduced by a different contemporary way. And Tappin told me one day, and he said, I want you to write me a production to the skin of our teeth. And I said, I want you to be the screenwriter. It's not one of my favorites. And I reread it, and I thought, I shouldn't write a business production. It's a whole local business production. It's much more something that she would have been influenced by than I. So he said, oh, what a great idea. And I said, well, I guess I should talk myself out of the job. Well, you know, I was going to ask you if you wanted a new avatar. I said, yes, I would love to do an avatar.  And of course, I clutched, like, paralyzed. I'm not going to do this. I am not worthy. But I did find a way into it, and I'm very proud of that introduction. And I've seen emails all the time to comment on that introduction. But that was really such a validated moment to see. To even have my being in the same breath with while it was an extraordinary experience. To go back to the beginning, do you think there's some relationship of, I don't know whether you remember this, but when Wilson started as a visual artist, a number of writers had started with it. And I wonder whether you see any relationship between your origins as a visual artist and now as a writer. I don't know. I always thought visually. I like looking at pictorial guidelines rather than written instructions. When I imagine you play, sometimes it's just a person sitting and a person standing. But I think that's something always to visualize what the configuration of people on stage might be. I do know that the approach that I take to writing is very similar to the approach that I take to drawing. And that is, and that was my main pursuit as an artist. Drawing and practice is not good.   And that's very much the approach that I take to play. I start out with very messy, very full first drafts. And then I pull back into the drafts. It's almost as sculptural. John Hollanford said at one point that he, when he first began writing plays, he had a great interest in the posters. I was going to ask, you have that visual sense. You have said once that some of the plays come from the feeling of disgust. Disquiet, I'm sorry. Sorry about that. Well, Bobby said, I don't think it was original with him. I think he was quoting somebody else. He said, write about what bugs. And that's very similar to this. But where do the plays come from? Is it always a feeling of disgust? Can you think of a character? I'm sure it's different with different plays, but can you talk about some of the plays and where they come from? Well, they come from all different places. That's the thing. When I'm talking to young writers and my students, they say, how do you get ideas? Well, the idea is sort of present themselves. And they present themselves in the form of something you can't stop thinking about. Which is not the same as having an idea. And, you know, we've been with friends for 35 years. And at the time that I was writing we were not friends. And we were suddenly experiencing a phenomenon of couples like us who were suddenly imploding all around us. We were just approaching one another in a firestorm. And just enduring and being kind of mystified and gobsmacked by what was happening around us, I decided it wasn't funny. So many couples that we were part of our social lives that we somehow can be there forever in the same role, they were suddenly gone. And that's where it's been a defense to me. Something like something like the stories that came out of a couple of things they converged Debbie and I made yesterday but I think I'm about to tell the story that I was going to tell you in private. Which is that two incidents occurred that contributed to collective stories which is that an older woman writer and a younger woman writer. And I knew it was going to be a two-handerer and I knew it was going to be a kind of generational study about influence and surrogate parenting and all of that. And I became very fascinated by a controversy that was raging in the literary world that involved the short story writing David Leavitt and Steven Spender The Poetry of the Moon David Leavitt is a I don't know if you don't know maybe he's in his 50s David is an outlet for a homosexual writer who decided that he was not only for words of his name, not halfway he decided that he was going to take a chapter from Steven Spender's What a Biography And a veil rendering of a love affair that Spender had during the Spanish Civil War But because of the constraints of the mores at the time it was not a very candid picture according to David Leavitt So what he did was he wrote a novel called I think it's called Wild English Slap I think he's with the Robert Kennedy book John Kennedy Why This is Wild Which is already for somebody else Anyway, and in that novel Leavitt was very explicit in the sexual relationship with Steven Spender who was still alive took terrible objections to this and took Leavitt's Courtney and succeeded in getting portions of the novel excavated in the same month in our past year Anyway, I was really fascinated by some of the aspects of this story And around the same time I experienced my own kind of skirmish with a writer I had wanted Arthur Miller I wrote and played Mr. Miller took exceptions who I would write and play and he was very rejected I believe he's never read it but his agent began to make very bellicose noises and in fact told me that this would have been on 1989 that he can't believe that he produced this play and they called me I said why don't you just change the title of this play I said, I'm not changing the title of this play The title of the movie the play is about the influence of Miller's play on me and might also be Don Mitchell, an 11 year old boy who is exposed to that facility for the first time which in my case was the television production of E.J. Kovner and George C. Williams which had a profound effect on my little psyche because I think it's a bright little book before I recognized my family and it was terrifying I felt very guilty about it and my way of assimilating that was to write a musical a parody of Jefferson's called Willy with an exclamation I really did that then years later years and years later when my father died and I was telling my wife stories of my childhood and I realized that I had more family stories to mine and it involved a certain chapter in my childhood growing up in the housing project my father was a salesman I had one of two sons doing that and I began to write a play that took place in 1965 when I was 11 years old and the death of a salesman was a presence in that apartment I just could not shape it so in my attempt to write about it how could I not acknowledge the influence of the world I had to otherwise it would have been disingenuous it would have been unfinished so I decided I was going to use my monobiography in that I would have a 11 year old Mitchell write a musical comedy version of Death of the Second Whole Movie except we would get to see it so what comes out of Death of the Second Whole Movie is after a horrifying encounter between a believer at salesman's father and his older son who was just in Bar Mitzvah the father has to negotiate a way to get the Bar Mitzvah money that the boys swore that day in order to pay for the Bar Mitzvah something the old boy didn't know was part of the movie and it's a caramel scene and it becomes a really cataclysmic moment in the life of my baby family and the only place to go actually I wasn't into song so there's a ten minute musical that I wrote with David Shire I did the lyrics of the music of this little capsule of really it burst out of this it burst out of this the climactic scene in the second half anyway Miller was a qualified very ideal I don't even know how to be new but David was killed by Miller who really dismissed it other reviews were kind of extraordinary but he knew how to be new and kind of dissolved it a couple of reviews after that Lin Meadow produced I'm not only for this because I'm still actually interested Lin Meadow produced Sinon 3 a play that began in South West Africa and in Frank Richie's review of Sinon's scene he referred to Mr. Marnie's last Darren in the play The London Family Rich was not the N.F.H. critic he did but in his review of Sinon's scene which was a raid and which was transformed it was the great time that I hooked at The London Family in three years earlier with the use of the word Darren and there was this sudden illusion about the play and Lin Meadow said to me the morning after this crime comes over in the silence and you don't know what to think about it when you want it again so it was done in 1993 Lin herself directed it to U of 3 on a center across those steps with Christine Borenstein and Peter Friedman on the main stage of the N.F.H. Sinon Center it was an exclusive production that was going to be produced Lin received a letter from Arthur Hill that said this is a pretty standard of paraphrase because I never read this multiple times he said when you produce this the first time and this is what he said when you produce this the first time I thought it would simply go away that you were producing it again and I find it unconscionable that's pretty harsh pretty harsh coming from a man I admired his work I admired his work so much to me but it was quite a stunning work so I'm telling you that very personal story as an illustration of the kind of disquiet that produces a quiet because what happened was with the convergence of my own experience with influence and David Webber's experience with influence and David I don't know I feel like maybe just to share through the trade sector between those two things I got a play out and a play on their product but I couldn't have written and I think if I hadn't been felt that low by Sinon I had admired it well I think now is the time I've just gotten a call from the M. Tom Checkout at least on your case I was going to ask you apropos of collected stories and also apropos of Coney Island and Christmas what's the Grace Paley thing that you seem to have going because a lot of people have seen in collected stories that that older writer I mean this is unfair they have suggested that they are a certain resemblance to the who I knew I don't know is there an interest there sure yeah I discovered Grace Paley in high school I love Grace Paley's stories what was notable about Grace that I quoted this for one conversation I had that she told me about she she only worked for school she never wrote a novel she never took that step and I found that a really fascinating thing and she was utterly a piece of the world she was not played by and I I thought that was a really interesting trace in a character I was playing so that if if I borrowed from Grace she was a teacher she was a certain generation she was Jewish and she only worked short stories aside from that I didn't know Grace at the time I only sort of knew the CD that I'm describing to you so that when I was creating a role of Grace Paley but produced in Lisa Morrison a budding novel and what would that do in the dynamic of a mentor who carved out a niche for herself in a very specific genre who then produces something that is aspiring to that which she has never viewed of others that was the Grace Paley isn't she a I don't know from young Christmas it's based on a Grace Paley short story called The Loudest Voice and coming out of the Christmas can out of a discussion I have with my great dear friend Bill Kates who I met with Kevin Platt he also bought my handkerchief yes and directed I know something about it and Bill he called me one day and said how do you like to write us a Christmas show? I said Bob it's nice to report you're working for a Christmas show I said if I'm going to write you a Christmas show it's going to be a Jewish Christmas show and he said Grace and I said what am I going to do with that I accepted this commission for a Jewish Christmas show and I got an idea I remembered what was one of the thunderbolt moments I remembered a short story by Grace Paley The Loudest Voice and it was set in Depression era and in it Shirley Brown was the first generation American is chosen by her drama teacher to be the voice of Jesus in the school play because she had the loudest voice and it's a very slender story but I thought what a delicious Christmas show was so until I accepted this commission from my friends because that's okay and the other directive I got from Gilbert you know if you want to put an ice skating rink I want this to be big of course it's gotten one production in life but anyway when I rediscovered The Loudest Voice it was one of those adaptation experiences I had every now and then I knew I wanted to do this and I decided to play with the things we made up of adults playing children doing a Christmas party which turned out to be very delicious for actors and but it became a larger play about assimilation and the immigrant culture the American dream and all of that it was because I remember that story she's a great play that's why I wanted to bring her into the conversation she's not exactly also the interesting project there's one online you can find Grace reading The Loudest Voice oh and Grace Perry Grace Perry who I knew pretty well is the epitome of a writer who you should hear reading her work and the voice in her stories is Grace's voice oh it's still some writers have great difficulty reading their own work Grace was wonderful oh and Linda London does does a selective source I want to quote something to you that I heard you say once and so approximate something I believe about theater that I wanted to hear you respond to in behavior and subtext in things that are not said that are expressed through behavior what catches me about that is so many times you see theatrical moments that are not yet that are you could make them a novel could make them a lot of them and so many times playwrights theater people forget that it is what you see it is theater not I'm an English professor but it's not just about language it's about behavior and it's also watching the country house the other night it was wonderful to see so many moments where what wasn't said or what was said didn't by any means cover the whole so is that a conscious thing or do you think it's just more than into your way of writing I think it probably is my way of writing it's something I try to to instill in my students is the importance of conflict that you need conflict and the thing about drama is that people don't always say it except maybe in some way but people often say indirection they go through different strategies to achieve what they want it's not what's spoken of it's what is subversive what is subterranean that is really the story behind the words and I find that you don't always find that much more interesting I often think that writers don't give the audience enough credit that you don't have to spell things out we all do and our daily lives is exactly what you're describing we all recognize it and why aren't we given the opportunity to recognize that on stage we can do it talk a little bit about I mean the Coney Island Christmas story makes me wonder whether there's a different process when somebody assigns you something as opposed to something that you come up with on your own the Gilcate example is one example but you've also done a number of adaptations you've done some screenplays how are those processes all different? I enjoy that it's almost a rescue for my own fortune cycle because I'm able to use my skills as a dramatist in a different way problems often though it's not the same it doesn't mean I don't care about it as much it's easier access to my skills as a dramatist than I do as a playwright and it's enjoyable you know I have accepted commissions over the years that were specific commissions I've also accepted commissions that will be one next book you know with the specific commissions because South Coast Repertory Commission needs to write a play for their theater for young audiences series I used to write Shipwrecked and Entertainment which turned into a very sophisticated play for children so much so that they put them in a deep season on their new stage I've seen it as an adult well exactly that's the thing but it's a play for all ages it's a point that I would not have written had I not received the commission to write a play for young audiences it's the way the play evolved years and years ago Armin Brown at Longwood asked me to write an adaptation for Longwood and I decided to adapt a play by Sean Hatch a British classic for Sean Hatch called God Adventures which was from 1906 and I had read that music through my friend Susan Wilson who asked me to help her with a play about a Jewish project that was turned into century and in my research for Susan many many years ago I came upon a play called God Adventures which is about a Jewish prophet who in in his basement has a prophet and upstairs he has his 217 year old brother but what he doesn't know is that his 17 year old brother is having a lot of love affairs with one of the girls in his stable a shunting play a shunting play because it was imminent of nice and exotic culture anyway so Armin commissioned a play and I decided I wanted to try one of them I never would have written that you know my take on it was very different I said it in America in 1903 and it's a very different kind of play but my point is that I would not have written that talk a little bit as we talked to people last night about the U.S.S. idea that you have now that's a good example of exactly what they're talking about this is so not even half-baked well that's an interesting answer how you went from what it is to what you could do with it you don't mind talking about it well it's only been a streamed line about the American world you don't want to talk about it I think it's in America they're insane but just to be very specific you know can I tell you about a different story that you've already made on Saturday okay that's an interesting example that's out of the Vatican the other project we discussed last night because I know it isn't in the little review which figures in a story that I just said about the obscenity of the trial surrounding this that's only that someone said it was plastic but I just that's coming out a lot it's called the end of the tour and the origin of that is that my manager, my longtime manager David Panthers sent me a book that had come his way although of course you might have been coming yourself a little trick that David Foster was David Lipsky and Cantor sent this to me I should explain that this book although of course you might have been coming yourself is a transcription that David Lipsky has put together a book for one and with five big conversations he had with Wallace in 1996 when he was sent by Rolling Stone the interview was just as intimate as his main focus hit the scene and Cantor sent me this book and said take a look at it if you want to play with it and I started reading it and I got very excited because I saw a movie I saw a road picture and it just excited me from that but I said David I can't afford to write this on spec so we've got to get some seed management and he was able to do it because someone was able to pay me a little bit to write it and the story is basically about these two young men one is 34 David Foster Wallace who will kill himself in 12 years who is to this day a comic figure in American literature and David Lipsky who is a fine fiction and nonfiction writer but was 30 years old and still very much up and coming and Cantor so you can begin to see that there are certain themes that I'm interested in that for me converges where I was sent Lipsky's book and when I did that I became very exhilarated at how to put it all together taking a 300 pages transfer and carving on a matter of it using interviews that I've been through that for David Lipsky to fill in the blanks and to find the subtext because there is no subtext to do with that and the transcript but finding the subtext gave me an amateur on which to fill a story many of the, most of the words in this I can tell you are Wallace's enemies but I hope I've done a subversive enough work of injecting my own transitions and conversations with you so you don't see where Marguerite is beginning to invade me how is writing one-on-one but how is screenwriting different than playwriting? Well screenwriting, in the kind of playwriting I do I aspire to a kind of seamless conversation it's natural I have certain beats that I want to include but I don't want you to ever see the work of Lipsky's beats together I want it to be as seamless as possible so that when we arise and we know how do we get there much of it occurs in the real conversation in film you don't have the same constraints of time that you do on stage because in film if you want to change the subject you cut you're in the next piece you don't have to create the transitions to the next piece because film isn't even there yet and film is also a much less taller medium you really can't sit there for minutes on end although I had a great time with the fact that the editor was telling me to sing which is very unusual you should hire your former Yale student to direct your screenwriting not the same way but you don't have the same narrative constraints you're doing and having your former student as the director publishes an asset because I was going to ask you how faithful have they been to what they've set out to do to present the director's meetings the director at the end of the tour is James Consult he's gotten a lot of attention in recent years because he's directed a movie called Smash with Aaron Faulk and Breaking Bad and then a year or two later another hit of Sundance for the spectacular now with Shannon and William Wallace Teller and Kyle Chandler and James was my student who was 19 and he kept in touch and when I finished the Wallace screenplay I asked my producer to let me send it to him and he responded to the overnight and when I saw the rough cut of the movie last summer I was moved because what I saw on screen was what I wrote and it's not the same as hearing my words it was the movie I wrote you know what I mean at least it really is a different because I saw it in a reference screenplay it wasn't exactly the movie I wrote it's my words but that's certainly not how I saw it let's talk a little bit about the director playwright relationship here we've had the luxury the pleasure of working with one director a great deal of his time what makes that relationship with the Aesolven so good have you experienced situations that aren't so good with the out name games and what okay we've already libeled on the mill or we can deal with it it's not here it's not here you know I'm sort of a serial monogamous because your director your director's not always available so I have to have a few directors on a show and when I have a successful collaboration I want to work with that director what makes this a successful collaboration where I feel that what I'm doing is being served as opposed to being in a person they're being a lack of trust in what I'm in the director's in which case the director feels that he has to encode his own vision on something that he has spent more of a rigorous time with he could sail way easier with somebody like Dan he's been working for multiple iterations of production but he's been working together steadily since the 19th and the thing about Dan and I was talking for the other day in a discussion about the way I was working and the precision in the script of where the overlap occurred and that's something that Mario can do this and you can really to write about it Dan is in this military about this overlapping in the wrong place you gotta hear that word it's Dan gotta hear what word you're coming into soon and we're not hearing the other ones who do it after that slash you know as they're here so the way and I'm using the notation as an example how when you write a play you're really providing a kind of sheet music when you're conducted as a director and with the musicality that exists in some way in most writing you want the director to conduct it faithfully without reinterpreting it but to interpret it for the sake not reinterpreting it for his or her vision so yes Dan is militant about this there's kinds of moments and I cherish that kind of fidelity I seem to be quoting Bob Anderson continually in this session but he used to say these words are tested percent and you know what he was saying is you know if you change them that you're terrible but let's add the final ingredient to the whole thing pretty a couple of things first of all is it fair to say that you are not in your earliest place reading with tremendous enthusiasm but and not the only playwright who has succeeded how does that affect you or did it affect you I mean it obviously affected your livelihood but I'm very delighted and you'll perverse to the trajectory of what you're testing I think it's a good test I don't really have it's really been quite a lot I think that now in my experience of teaching young people despite too much and for this place that early success and I can speak through personal experience that some of the best minds in my generation who experienced early success and we're not able to do the best work because they already were limited I struggled for recognition for a period of years I had the misfortune of having Frank Rich come to review a very early play of mine that he should not have seen and that gave me a very disparaging, very psychically managing review which kind of set the course for the next decade of my career in that when he reviewed 50 children which was kind of a prototypical play for collective stories that turned out I wrote 50 children it was pretty cinematic review for my first film because Frank Rich was such a disparaging review I was kind of shell shocked that my next time which was when Joe Pao could be standing two months six months later and Joe, God, wasn't really much of a play and was really a tremendous champion had great pilots for the play and for me and we were given a chorus for that, a choral it was just a gorgeous experience and Frank Rich really liked it and of course it was quite disappointing because I thought it was going to feed back for it wasn't then a few months after that and mind you my career was filled in at this point because I was getting the recognition in literary offices to release as a writer to watch and to be supported and all of that and what's happening but by 1985 my first production to have theatre was as faithful as one of this picture and this was all my view in the space of about 14 months between 50 children and my third production of what's on this picture and there were so many things going for that the great amount of economists it was mainly about the work very good but it wasn't working and I knew it wasn't working and I also had a strong strong sense of who I was and what my capacity was for yet another rejection because I thought I was certain that I would be able to do that for something I thought wasn't there yet it wasn't good enough so when I was being exposed to the world where it wasn't good enough I didn't have to be kind of suicidal so I did something in a young unproven playwrights for a very reason which is I exercised my problem and I called on the critics which was a huge contributor for them to use it wasn't the most popular decision at Manhattan Theatre Club where I said I don't want to do it which meant we played our subscription run to Manhattan Theatre Club and I feel to this day that if I had left that open I wouldn't be sitting here I don't think I could have recovered from yet another slap I don't think I could have gone to Los Angeles I think I would have gone very long but that isn't the life I'm talking about so I think I'd save my career had you ever learned anything I'd learned about the importance of critics I'd learned about the importance of critics who do they have to tell you they have to tell you well you know you work with but you're a critic of various behaviors about who are the six of them you know when they say you're a critic critics don't close plays for this reason they know and critics certainly can do so yes I do recognize the order of power that's one critic in America whoever it is and are you it's the answer as we said yesterday it's a really sad thing that not only kind of critic in New York sync a play in New York but it can have a tremendous effect on whether that play gets done elsewhere and as we said yesterday elsewhere is where theater is in this country not necessarily in New York that's right you're absolutely right if you don't get that validation in New York for play regional theaters will not look at it on the other hand and this is a young thing that was added in this class about a year and a half ago I played in my old apartment it was just very it's had a very checkered career but it was revived by a young director in New York and had that he did a lovely job for it and I received the best reviews in my career for this very obscure play of mine and a great review in New York Times did nothing to encourage people in New York to get this play zero well as we said I hope that the way Country House was treated in New York doesn't make it harder to do around the country that's a play that you see as we all know I think it's time now to open it up to other questions that you might have now that I've overstepped my bounds with David and with all of the management today I'm sure you know it's not always going to be a big play I heard a great line that we'll always have you I'm sure and I've had some wonderful excuses where it is like a nuclear winter in February a lot of plays from the mad festivals have done extremely well thanks I'm writing a new play that I think is a play I'm not sure yet it's Pages and I'm actually doing my first book of Broadway musical for Father of the Bride there's one with a nice little music and this movie has occupied a lot of money for the last several months now that it's finally being launched Neal Sets I've adapted Joe McChennan's novel Neal Sets as in which we have the fate of which is in television I can say that it's not David yet I don't know I don't know what's going on but I'm very proud of that adaptation I had a wonderful time I don't even know that novel it's a big dense sprawling novel which if you now are familiar with my work you know that I tend to write this chamber piece so being given a book of Neal Sets for Dad which is this piece this huge canvas I hope it will be wonderful I hope they will I don't know either Some of my favorite scenes and stories are in Brooklyn Boy when you have the Eric Weiss character who is having his novel kind of spawned in the screenplay go to Hollywood and have this kind of devastating encounter with his producer who says that he needs to make everything Jewish pray and that he needs to screenplay and then the producer decides I don't know who's an actor but it seems incredible to be David but it's very funny and yet I feel that that's got to come from some experiences that didn't burn yourself in Hollywood and yet when you're talking now about your experience as a screenwriter it seems to really understand the kind of way it comes to being so much more positive I wonder if you can talk about that as a kind of transition or in fact it really was a kind of disillusion in all the centers of more disillusion and experience in your first work in Hollywood Well I mean just to put it in perspective at the end of the tour it was an interplay in the film I received no studio needs whatsoever I used to see my directors and they were all very smart and they all respected the integrity of the script they didn't want to turn into something that positive or shouldn't be When Cyan scene was my breakthrough in 1922 and I was making the rounds I was suddenly having readings and it was really interesting Cyan scene I had a memorable where Cyan scenes about a Jewish American painter who re-encounters the college news and I remember he was a studio secretary who loved my voice my voice and as she said does he have to be a painter? I said she said does he have to be Jewish? and I said he does that's the story what I am telling you didn't go much beyond that but I mean the scene in Brooklyn board obviously but you know the movie is so confounding that yes I did like that my experiences in Hollywood I think are very typical I don't want you to suggest that I be symbol value or ghettoized I don't want you to suggest that at all but for the experience I am still basking the sense of kind of film of being a writer so beautiful it's a wonderful piece of time myself I think the writing screenplay is mainly a little more deep than normal in my playwriting and I don't mean just in terms of the economy of language of incident possibility I think being a writer is my screenplay my film scenes tend to have shape they are not just snippets they are little events that respond to that and I think that part of my work you mean you tend to write film seemingly we should not to say they are not cinematic but you know within a scene I feel like a button I use it by any chance I was actually going to ask a similar question you feel your plays have become more cinematic as it is all the writing things do you feel more I mean I I've seen and read a lot of your plays have they always jumped around in time always jumped around in location in these three ways some of the more recent ones and you always can see this theater as malleable as it I think in the sight of the scene which is a play that does jump around that's what I was thinking that is a relatively recent play 20 years didn't occur I don't think so I don't think I was playing with the temporal quality of the plays so much when I sight of the scene began as a very difficult part to read and what I was doing there consciously was a jumping chronology I just wanted to break scenes and then jump over them it turned out to be very arbitrary and I was just using it I've been practicing and I invented it but then I simplified that idea and the timeline is very judiciously would you say in a situation like that the story the circumstances dictate the form rather than the form not being imposed on the story absolutely and that's something I continually explain in the series how do I explain it everybody is whatever what's the story well I don't know yet well figure out what the story is and then we'll figure out how to tell it but don't come up with a conceit and then try to put a story in the conceit because it's not going to work and I think that those kinds of lessons I think are really valuable are things I've learned over the years and I hope I'm saving people years of their huh we got a question from off of Twitter Ellen Ronnie and she asks what current playwrights do you admire okay it's working the Twitter is working the the I okay why don't we just list them all for a minute naming her's on Annie Baker is Steven Pound Sam Hunter Brandon and there is a phenomenal explosion I'm feeling very optimistic and my past I do think it is just a God and you know each year when I meet my students for the first time and here we are these people looking at their parents and I said why are you here why are you in a playwright like that ladies and yet I'm always heartened by the enthusiasm and passion and this undying interest in what is supposed to be a dying profession so you know I do have something I absolutely do can you teach playwrights no you can teach inspiration you can teach I mean what I'm doing in my syllabus is I share plays as I said that I love and I love talking about and that I was exhibited about and I was first time sure about how to do this and if I can demonstrate to my students what is exciting about this what stimulates me then maybe maybe it begins to serve in the urban sense the possibilities you can't use and so what is the best approach for you when a student comes to play how do you see yourself I mean I think the temptation of academics is always to write play they want what do you see your function I bring you my play you see some talent what do you see your function is in dealing with you if you want to teach yourself well maybe to borrow from a character like David Lee's governor I ask them questions I ask questions I don't what is the event of your play and I don't know and well you need an event and then to describe what is an event you might get an example of what the event is and I may have discussed it for some who are present here that's smaller than you can have an afternoon when I ask what is the event of having an afternoon when somebody will say it's Big Daddy's birthday I go no that's not changing the event is it's Big Daddy's last birthday and the fact that Big Daddy got this diagnosis caught on over the procedures that information and the fact that it's a last data is what infuses that play in such hard states that everyone on the play is rather that's what makes it an exciting play if it was simply his birthday party they would have candles in which it would be better so figure out what is the what is the climate that exists in which the play occurs yeah one of the things I like to say to students is that the play is just about what it's about it's not really in other words it's got to do about more than what it's about and that is another way of saying what you're saying when a long-gauge journey you're not it's not just about a family's day it's about a lot of other things and plays that tend to not work new plays, young plays often about I once saw a play about a minor league basketball team in Ohio before I would see it I said to myself it's a great occasion for a kind of well-turned-out to be about a minor league basketball team in Ohio there's no resonance there's no other subject and that's another way of saying it's not the plot it's not what happens what's behind it that's it yeah curious question one play one play right for the rest of your life who is it one play one play right I'm vicious I guess I would have to that would be one play but then you get to come out yeah I was at part of the drama conference a couple weeks ago and the interviewer at the end of the interview asked 10 questions to which the person David was there and asked him 10 questions to which he could only answer very briefly and one of them was that and the other was what was the first play you saw the first play I saw the first straight play I knew that and that was truly a watershed moment like the first 9 years of my life that came as part of what in family war became what we did all the time which in fact in other languages twice which was to spend a week in New York and see the 9 shows we would take the G train from Coney Island to the state of Chief Hotel in Midtown and that's when the middle class family could afford to go to the theater even if we sat on the last row of the balcony we could get in to see something but that is not true anymore there's no way to do it but her purpose of 1000 phones I had a question about that it's not that I left the theater as a playwright but I experienced life here in the last year there was so many toxic things my little mind made itself it stayed with me and then of course how many years later 30 years later my Broadway premiere also my debacle her gardener sitting behind me on an opening night and when the play was over and it was not a good direction her enormous hands grabbed my shoulder and it was such a thunderbolt and it really was another one of the 10 questions I had to bring down of course I left the sheet back in the hotel was if you had to write or play for a single actor or actress who would it be? well it's so obvious but I would fluctuate cheese cheese I can bring her back to the theater that would be once bold another question was and maybe you already answered this what is the play you wish you'd written in the beginning? oh I see those things I'm trying to think I thought you were going to say that but that's too much I can tell you the first thing that comes to mind is the screenplay when I saw the screenplay in the way it was I loved that movie and I wish I had written the screenplay and I wrote to him about that but I didn't know and I said this doesn't happen to me a lot before and what moved me so much about Noah's movie was the family he depicted this horribly dysfunctional family that he depicted living in Park Slope was the very family I always aspired to be a part of growing up and growing up that's right and so I really wanted that screenplay there's a question from the web how long does it take you to write a play including rewrites? John Gray used to say it took him 53 years to write 60 degrees of separation it really does vary by my friend and colleague Candace Chappelle Candace was present literally present at the creation of a collected story when it was 15 pages and 8 days later I had collected stories and do you use readings to help you? I love readings I rely on readings my friends, Michael and Jeff they're saying that we created a group many many years it was 37 years ago we made each other's work every Monday night for almost a month and a year and that really was my graduate school education learning how to hear the work learning how to respond to the work learning how to filter feedback that you get and learning to be your best friend there's nothing like hearing it I'm always telling young writers if you don't have such a group you must create such a group because if you're going to be a playwright it's not the same as being a fiction writer because fiction will exist in their head plays need actors they need to be given voice otherwise they're not playwrights they're stress so until you can hear it you don't really understand what you have and what I've come to do over the years is I've become much precious about what I have so with that experience I had at some things with Kansas president for collecting stories I will just hear whatever I have when I was working on Timespan still I had 40 pages Bill Kates invited me to the deaf to have a reading of the 40 pages and they weren't even consecutive pages they were just pages out of there and then I had another reading of the first act and another reading of the first draft and another reading of the video so it takes years because my wall would be great to respond to how low does it take but yes I do use these and do you use dramaturgs ever? I use dramaturgs one of my trusted friends and colleagues is Gerard Patch who I've been a success director in many years ago I use a dramaturg How much did the plays change let's say from Evening Rivers or in later stages have you made expensive changes in play or any changes? I do, I certainly have changes because I know I'm a reading aspect of development of my own work most of my work is structural work so I'm not suddenly throwing these things at my own actors I try to remember what you did and it made me very anxious my beloved colleagues put their thumbs on that kind of anxiety I do not it makes me very very anxious I like to have my armatures set on day one however I will have a subsequent production as I did with time stands during the Country House and Birkenburg where we began in California before coming to New York and with time stands still I cut scenes out by the time of that I cut about 40 minutes of that play between LA and New York the Country House I rewrote the beginning of the second half of the play in New York but I didn't attempt to do it while playing in them Have you ever where do those changes come from are they suggested by directors or are they suggested by an actor or Lynn or somebody else everybody yes I love actors I love working with actors just to be a little anecdote in the Country House Eric Lyons played the role of the lawyer and we were in rehearsal and Eric was confronted with his friend Michael who he had never seen in a while he was getting a lot of shit from this mustache and Eric said shouldn't I say something I haven't seen in New York and I said you know I just improvised it so in the rehearsal he said where the fuck did this come from and I said okay into the text there is that's just an example of what a successful collaboration should be like Have you ever I've heard playwrights say this so I'm asking you have you ever been surprised by a performance in other words what kind of character did you create that you don't normally way differently from the way that you had invested in that success Lynn Lyons of Paris to see Brooklyn Boy and it was a very different kind of production it was very French it was the block smoking and it was much more style and yes granted I was nice to be French but I certainly recognized my value and it worked really well to see that I also had the experience of seeing the time stand still in Swedish in Starfighting while I was still working on it and it was very illuminating to see the time in the fine language because I was still coming together I actually put cuts in for the production in Starfighting while I was in Starfighting because when you see you're working in a fine language you go oh she's been quiet don't stay long too much and you know I do have a certain imbalance to you even if you don't have the words you're watching and you hate it and that was really important yeah sometimes you can also feel that the scene has gone on too long when you're not listening to the words and you just realize there's a duration problem any other questions what's our schedule Karen thank you thank you thank you thank you all for coming and most importantly thank you to the independence of the library and sponsor this event this library is a beautiful library that begins foundationing the best small library in America in 2012 we're thrilled to be here thank you


Throughout my life, I've increasingly found that reading scripture in public isn't just about feeding our own spirits and minds. It's about rehearsing the mighty acts of God for God's glory. So let's think together about Mark 12, 33. And first, let's have some tea. This is a fascinating little moment in Mark's Gospel, which Mark has uniquely. Almost everything else in Mark is in either Matthew or Luke or both, but this bit is in Mark and Mark alone. And it contains in the verse immediately after the one I just read a remarkable line from Jesus himself. Jesus saw that the lawyer had answered from deep understanding and he says, You are not far from God's kingdom. And after that, nobody dared put any more questions to Jesus, says Mark. So what's going on? Jesus is talking about the great commandment that loving God with all your heart and mind and soul and strength and your neighbors yourself. These are the great commandments. And normally in the Gospels, when the lawyers come on stage, they seem to be the bad guys. They are the ones who have their own system nicely worked out. They know which way things ought to be done and they regard Jesus as a dangerous upstart teaching folly of one sort or another. But Jesus has got them on this one because they would all agree that the Shema from Deuteronomy 6, Yero Israel, the Lord our God is one and you shall love him, heart, mind, soul and strength. That this is of course central. But this lawyer goes one beyond that because he has lived in a system which says, Yes, we are the people of God. We are gathered around the temple in Jerusalem. That is where God meets with his people and meets with them in grace. But this lawyer sees beyond the daily round of sacrifices in the temple, beyond the regular ritual offerings. He sees that something is going on in the ministry of Jesus which goes to the very heart in a way in which animal sacrifices never actually do. And so he says that to love God like that is worth far more than all burnt offerings and sacrifices. And it's very interesting that at this point that Jesus says you are not far from God's kingdom. Because this passage in Mark 12 of course is part of the sequel to Jesus going into Jerusalem, overturning the tables of the money changers and as we say cleansing the temple though it isn't actually a clean up job. It's an acted parable of the temple's destruction that the temple has had its day and run its course. And this lawyer sees why. Because in the kingdom of God which Jesus is announcing and launching, there is a deeper reality going on. A reality which corresponds to the original intention of Torah way back in Deuteronomy 6 and elsewhere. And that the temple was after all a signpost pointing forwards to a different kind of reality. So that as Israel's God had promised to dwell in the temple to be with his people. So now God is dwelling with his people in the person of Jesus. That is of course central to the gospels. The idea of Jesus as the visible human presence of Israel's God. But then God is coming to dwell in the hearts of his people. So that when they love God with their heart and mind and soul and strength. This is the reality towards which the whole temple and its cult had been pointing. So Mark goes on in the very next chapter to talk about Jesus on the Mount of Olives. Explaining to his followers about the fact that the temple was going to be destroyed. It's part of that larger picture and this lawyer's answer and Mark's presentation of it helps us to see why. This is what God was really intending all along. That human beings would not just go and do something in a building somewhere and then come away again. But that their hearts, lives, souls, strength. And not least their minds would be enlivened by God's presence to do his will in a whole new way. So may God give you grace to love him with heart, mind, soul and strength. So that as the Kingdom of God becomes a reality in the world in general. It may become a reality in your life. Amen.