#david rawle

[cinematicjourney]

Song of the Sea (2014) | dir. Tomm Moore

[movies-to-add-to-your-tbw]

Title: Song of the Sea

Rating: PG

Director: Tomm Moore

Cast: David Rawle, Lucy O’Connell, Brendan Gleeson, Fionnula Flanagan, Pat Shortt, Jon Kenny, Lisa Hannigan, Colm Ó’Snodaigh, Liam Hourican, Kevin Swierszcz, Will Collins, Paul Young

Release year: 2014

Genres: family, fantasy

Blurb: After their mother’s disappearance, Ben and Saoirse are sent to live with Granny in the city. When they resolve to return to their home by the sea, their journey becomes a race against time as they are drawn into a world Ben knows only from his mother’s folktales...but this is no bedtime story. These fairyfolk have been in this world far too long, and it soon becomes clear to Ben that Saoirse is the key to their survival.

[sayhowdycountrycritters]

I was thrilled to be at the second stop of the Gillian Welch & David Rawlings “Woodland Tour”. An amazing show with two sets & three encores of new songs, old favorites, beautiful harmonizing and David Rawlings’ phenomenal guitar playing. Doesn’t get any better.

[slackville-records]

Gillian Welch and David Rawlings What We Had" Live at Newport Folk Festival July 27, 2024

All my world is changing

I don't know where I'm going

Apartments rearranging

The beggar winds are blowing

Seems like ancient history

You were sleeping I was driving

While you were lying next to me

I'd scan the blue horizon

I used to dream of something unseen

It was something that I thought I wanted so bad

But now I only want

What we had, what we had, what we had

What we had, what we had

What we had, what we had, what we had

What we had was unspoken

It flowed like wine like music

What we had is broken now

Though we thought we could never lose it

I used to dream of something unseen

It was something that I thought I wanted so bad

But now I only want

What we had, what we had, what we had

What we had, what we had

What we had, what we had, what we had

What we had, what we had

What we had, what we had

What we had, what we had, what we had

[guessimdumb]

Lou Rawls - I Fell In Love (1964)

Here's Lou Rawls with some swinging, buttshaking R&B for Valentine's Day! That's Earl Palmer on drums.

[doomandgloomfromthetomb]

Gillian Welch - St Luke's, London, England, August 4, 2004

A new Gillian Welch album?! Why not, it's only been like 12 years since her last collection of originals. Though the forthcoming Woodland is actually billed as a Gillian Welch & David Rawlings record — so does this even count? Who cares, it'll be great to have some new material out there. These two do things their own way, at their own pace, and that is an admirable quality.

As we get ready for Woodlands, let's go back 20 years to a very nice BBC programme, filmed during the Soul Journey era. I saw Gil and Dave a bunch during this time and they were always incredible, often conjuring up the full force of a rock band with just their voices and two acoustic guitars.

One of the highlights here is the beautifully enigmatic brooder "The Way It Will Be," which wouldn't show up on an album until much later. I can remember hearing them play this one several times back then and being desperate for a recording; for many years, this BBC performance was my go-to version. A total knock-out.

[potterantiques]

via

[chicinsilk]

US Vogue April 1, 1954

Dovima in a new pink top hat and spruce green princess dress; small gloves; pearls and diamonds in silver settings in the moonlight. Hat, by Dior-New York; cotton and silk dress by Adele Simpson; Dawnelle gloves. David Webb jewelry, Max Factor “Creme Puff” makeup, “Riding Hood Red” lipstick.

Dovima en chapeau haut de forme d'un nouveau rose et robe de princesse vert épicéa ; petits gants; perles et diamants dans des montures argentées au clair de lune. Chapeau, par Dior-New York ; robe en coton et soie d'Adele Simpson ; Gants Dawnelle. Bijoux David Webb, maquillage Max Factor "Creme Puff", rouge à lèvres "Riding Hood Red".

Photo John Rawlings vogue archive

[rolloroberson]

Gillian Welch - The Way it Goes

[bradgeigerbillboardmusicawards]

[upperswampmonkey]

Gillian Welch & David Rawlings – Wind and Rain (Audio)

[jennpelly]

Both Rawlings and Welch talk of a moment that decided their partnership, a month or two after leaving Berklee and moving to Nashville in 1992. They were sitting in Rawlings’s kitchen. Knowing they had a shared interest in duets, they started noodling around on their guitars and singing the classic “Long Black Veil.” They instantly sensed the bones of something good, potential they honed until it was fully realized. Rawlings tells me, “If you have the same North Star as someone, and if you’re trying to walk in the same direction, something will click.”

[leguin]

i am out of remedies at least i'm not a liar somewhere in my memories i held my head much higher

[crowleys-bentley-and-plants]

A curious ask for a criminology student. Which is worse: a guilty man going free or an innocent man being sent to prison? Why?

oh anon i will never shut up now i love this question. prepare for the biggest word vomit you have ever seen lol

okay so first, this question is very vague, because what is the guilty man guilty of? stealing something once isn't as bad as murdering hundreds of people for example (to give an extreme example lol). same goes with the innocent man, going to prison for a couple of years is far less severe than being sentenced to life for something they didn't do (not gonna include the death penalty because firstly my country doesn't have it and secondly im fundamentaly against it)

however, if we take a general view grounded in ethics and principles of justice, many legal scholars and philosophers (such as William Blackstone who famously said "it is better that ten guilty persons escape than one innocent suffer") argue that sending an innocent person to prison is worse. i tend to agree with this because i think the legal system should prioritize protecting the rights of individuals, especially when it comes to something as severe as taking away someone's freedom. the foundation of justice should be built on the principle that it’s more important to avoid harming innocent people than to ensure that every guilty person is punished.

a wrongful conviction doesn't just harm the individual, it also weakens the moral authority of the justice system itself. when the system makes such errors, it undermines public confidence in its fairness and reliability, which can have a ripple effect, causing people to doubt its ability to deliver justice in future cases.

on the other hand, allowing a guilty person to go free could endanger public safety. it can also lead to a sense of injustice for the victims and society as a whole, who expect the legal system to hold wrongdoers accountable. additionally, when a guilty person is not punished, it could send a message that criminal behavior doesn't always have consequences, potentially encouraging more lawbreaking. in this sense, the legal system fails to fulfill its duty to maintain order and deter future crimes.

ultimately, i think it depends on the values we prioritize: protecting society at large or protecting the rights of individuals. both outcomes are harmful in different ways, but for me, the wrongful imprisonment of an innocent person strikes at the heart of what justice is supposed to stand for. a justice system that fails in this regard loses its legitimacy, and without that foundation of fairness, the system itself starts to break down.

if you take both extremes, so a mass murderer going free against an innocent person being put in prison for life, then i think it's definitely the innocent person going to jail that's worse. after all, in many legal systems, the principle of "innocent until proven guilty" emphasizes that it is better to err on the side of letting a guilty person go free than to risk imprisoning the innocent. but if you start thinking about a mass murderer going free vs someone being put in prison for idk 6 months, then the situation becomes more complex. while the mass murderer being free clearly represents a greater immediate threat to society, the question still hinges on how we value individual rights versus collective safety. i think most legal professionals would argue that collective safety in this case is more important. like Jeremy Bentham said "the greatest happiness of the greatest number is the foundation of morals and legislation." from this view, allowing a mass murderer to go free would be a serious failure of the legal system, as it would likely lead to more harm to society and further endanger innocent lives.

which is true of course, but a justice system that consistently prioritizes security over fairness risks becoming oppressive. if the system starts to wrongfully imprison individuals, even for short periods, in the name of protecting the public (the "better safe than sorry" argument), it could create a dangerous precedent. this could lead to abuses of power, where innocent people are routinely sacrificed for the perceived greater good, eroding public trust in the system over time.

so yea i believe that prioritizing the protection of the innocent is critical. if a legal system loses sight of that, it risks sacrificing its moral authority in the name of safety, leading to deeper systemic problems in the long run

disclaimer: this is just my opinion, you dont have to agree with me. i would love hearing other point of views but please be respectful about it

[dollarbin]

Nickel Bin #20:

Gillian Welch and David Rawlings' Hashtag

A week or so back I reveled in the untapped and humble greatness still to be found in this duo's second Bootleg collection. At the time I promised to dedicate my future self to their new record, Woodland.

Well, I encountered that future self yesterday while moving a little less than half of my sprawling record collection around my house; my son's gone back to college so I'm claiming a corner of his bedroom as my own for the fall. Here's the current state of affairs:

Anyway, maybe it was me missing them, or maybe it was getting my hands on all my old titles, or maybe it was the 100 degrees and rising temperatures beating in on our unairconditioned home, but I played Woodland through twice yesterday and each time I got to Hashtag, a mostly Rawlings number in his thoughtful, here's-something-I've-been-meaning-to-tell-you guise, sung with his increasingly trademark quaver, I burst into tears.

How about those yearning strings? How about the harmony coming in on "when will we..." Man, I'm tearing up again!

As he ages, Dave's voice increasingly sounds wise and soulful to me; twenty or more years ago, in the rare initial moments when he sang without Gillian, Rawlings vocals struck me as sophomoric and pimply. Gillian's voice was rich, strong and unique on one day one: they both knew it, so her name, face and singing graced their records. But something exciting is happening for them now; Dave's coming into his own.

I should have seen this coming. After all, his cut off take of Dylan's Abandoned Love from the duo's Covid cover toss off record made his rising confidence and tone clear.

Hashtag was apparently written for Guy Clark, a guy they once opened for, who penned for Jerry Jeff Walker and many others one of the greatest songs of all time.

But the song could just as well be for John Prine, Gordon Lightfoot, Tom Petty or Johnny Cash; five, ten or twenty years from now they could dedicate to Neil, Bob, Joni or, gulp, Lucinda.

And us? When will we become ourselves? I don't know. But I'm gonna wipe these tears away and go get to work on it right now.