Jump to content

No Line on The Horizon Album Speculation?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 20
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

joshthetree wrote:

no, apparently, you peel the '=' sticker off the album and affix to the forehead then you get scanned in at a show and get in the gold circle
:)

Wow, An Easter egg, if I put the "=" on my forehead that means I could be on stage rockin' with the band..

 

is that cool..

Link to post
Share on other sites

say goodnight wrote:

1. I wrote everything on the album

 

2. Mr Boom played all the instruments at once

 

 

 

WOW, you wrote the whole album, Talented... so the credit goes only by yourself.

 

 

Another List of Speculation:

 

1. Moment of Surrender and Unknown Caller is the story of ME, being a Junkie.(NOT!!!)

2. The Origin of the song Breathe is about Eating Apples and walking around the world naked. lol roll.gif

3. Magnificent is about a Love that is a Dream in your Head.

4. The Person on Time Magazine who Reviewed "No Line On The Horizon" is actually U2's Enemy in the song Cedars of Lebanon

( Rating it as Unpleasant! what a JERK! mad.gif)

 

Post your other speculation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seraphim said: . "Magnificent is about a Love that is a Dream in your Head."

 

Ok..I am off on a tangent (again) :D

 

I always suspected that ALL of U2's love songs are about loves that are "dreams in the head." And, I could never understand why they/he just didnot take the step of making the ideal love real?

 

I think for the lyricist Love may simply be a leap of faith. I have never been much for "faith" in lieu of the verifiable. And, yes, I think allthings...like divinity, love, the sacred, objective ethics, etc...are verifiable, and do not require faith--in fact, faith may actually be a hinderance toapprehension and engagement. (ok...I said I was going to meander down a tangent! Thanks for being indulgent :D )

 

I don't think love requires faith. I think Love is a cooperative and never ending act of creation between people in concert with the universe....it justtakes the will and heart of two AND the Courage AND the CREATIVE ENERGY to get onto the same page and to cooperatively write the never-ending narrativetogether, in order to manifest love as real (as opposed to an article of faith or dream in one's head).

 

And, I never bought into the idea that the passion of love dies over time and what one ends up with is a deeper "love" that embraces restrictions,etc...and exists in a space of comfort -- I honestly think that although this is incredibly common, it is also a crock of sh*t and has more to do with the fearof being alone than it does with love.

 

And I know many will say this view is unrealistic and unsustainable. But, I think they are simply making excuses for having settled for less or for havingremained in a situation that has had the passion seep out of it and are trying to justify that, because justifying and reconciling oneself to one'ssituation is easier and less scary than forging out anew or risking being alone. I think being alone is deeply frightening for many....once one gets beyondthat, it is amazing how much of the universe actually opens up, and what is possible at that point.

 

Well...this all made sense in my head! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

LifeFactory wrote:

Seraphim said: . "Magnificent is about a Love that is a Dream in your Head."

 

Ok..I am off on a tangent (again)
:D

 

I always suspected that ALL of U2's love songs are about loves that are "dreams in the head." And, I could never understand why they/he just did not take the step of making the ideal love real?

 

I think for the lyricist Love may simply be a leap of faith. I have never been much for "faith" in lieu of the verifiable. And, yes, I think all things...like divinity, love, the sacred, objective ethics, etc...are verifiable, and do not require faith--in fact, faith may actually be a hinderance to apprehension and engagement. (ok...I said I was going to meander down a tangent! Thanks for being indulgent
:D
)

 

I don't think love requires faith. I think Love is a cooperative and never ending act of creation between people in concert with the universe....it just takes the will and heart of two AND the Courage AND the CREATIVE ENERGY to get onto the same page and to cooperatively write the never-ending narrative together, in order to manifest love as real (as opposed to an article of faith or dream in one's head).

 

And, I never bought into the idea that the passion of love dies over time and what one ends up with is a deeper "love" that embraces restrictions, etc...and exists in a space of comfort -- I honestly think that although this is incredibly common, it is also a crock of sh*t and has more to do with the fear of being alone than it does with love.

 

And I know many will say this view is unrealistic and unsustainable. But, I think they are simply making excuses for having settled for less or for having remained in a situation that has had the passion seep out of it and are trying to justify that, because justifying and reconciling oneself to one's situation is easier and less scary than forging out anew or risking being alone. I think being alone is deeply frightening for many....once one gets beyond that, it is amazing how much of the universe actually opens up, and what is possible at that point.

 

Well...this all made sense in my head!
:D

 

Wow.. I was moved by your message. Lifeforce..

 

I love this line "I think Love is a cooperative and never ending act of creation between people in concert with theuniverse"

 

Love for that matter is always two couples become one.. the integrity of that combination

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...