Double Vision (Foreigner song)

In an interview, vocalist Lou Gramm explained the origin behind the song: "'Double Vision' was a song that was written in about late 1977 just before the Double Vision album came out. ...A lot of people think it's about being intoxicated or being high. When we were recording that song before we had the title, the New York Rangers hockey team was playing the Philadelphia Flyers and one of the big Flyers guys bumped into the Rangers' all-star goalie [John Davidson] and knocked him down and they had to take him out of the game because he was experiencing double vision."^[4][5][6] Gramm similarly stated:^[7]

I was a season ticket holder for the New York Rangers and they were playing the Philadelphia Flyers in the Stanley Cup Finals. While we were recording, I had an eight-inch TV taped inside my vocal booth with the volume turned all the way down. While I was singing and recording, I’d keep my eye on the screen. Then, whenever we stopped, I’d turn the volume up a little bit. On one occasion, the play had stopped when Dave Schultz from the Flyers skated in front of John Davidson, the Ranger’s goalie, gave him an elbow and knocked him out cold. The trainers helped Davidson off the ice and the Rangers wound up putting in the second-string goalie. Every so often, the announcers would come on and say they were waiting for word on the condition of Davidson. Finally, the announcer said, “The trainers said they don’t think Davidson will be back tonight. He doesn’t have a concussion, but he is experiencing… double vision." That’s when I said — “That’s it!”

According to the New York Rangers website, the incident actually took place in April 1978 during a hockey game between the Rangers and the Buffalo Sabres. The game announcers repeatedly used the phrase "double vision" which then inspired Foreigner to use it as the song's title.^[8] The single is certified RIAA gold, selling one million copies, prior to the reduction of gold certification standards that occurred in the late 1980s.

Rolling Stone critic Ken Tucker suggested that the title phrase seems to suggest that "all the pent-up frustration and rage felt by the narrator [due to his romantic agony] has found its pernicious outlet in a sort of ocular apoplexy."^[9]