The Lord of the Bible?

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by The Only Real Estel

A stop sign in the road means ‘stop.’ If I decide it does not, that doesn’t change it.

Well, in Quebec (Canada), a decision was made which runs against decisions in many other countries. Stop signs in Quebec, unlike in France, read 'Arretez.' The Province of Quebec did decide to change it.

More seriously: Language has many functions and fulfils many needs in human society and culture. The form of language used in stop signs, exit signs, washroom signs, technical writing, instructions, legal codes are dependent upon highly important aspects of functions in that context. They are forms of language which attempt to control very highly the boundaries of interpretation--for very important and significant reasons. They operate very differently from literary language.

Literary language, the language of stories, of metaphor, of similes, of poetry, of rock music, of musicals (I would include advertising and political speeches, but they are subsets of this group with slightly different appeals) grants to readers/hearers much greater scope for interpretation, because the context and the purpose is very different. In these uses of language, the significant aspect is the active role of the reader in comprehension. Another way of saying this is that they are reader unfriendly!! They don't do al the work of the reader for the readers, but expect the reader to participate actively in comprehension. This is the high end of language comprehension in terms of how much work the reader must do.

My point here is simply to point out that language operates to satisfy many, many needs in human communication. What works with "reader friendly" language (informational/instructional language) does not necessarily work with "reader challenging" language. In Tolkien's work, I suggest that we are dealing with the literary end of human communication, "reader challenging" language, that end wherein Tolkien himself granted the greatest and most essential freedom of interpretation. For very moral reasons.

[The Only Real Estel]

Originally Posted by Bethberry

Literary language, the language of stories, of metaphor, of similes, of poetry, of rock music, of musicals (I would include advertising and political speeches, but they are subsets of this group with slightly different appeals) grants to readers/hearers much greater scope for interpretation, because the context and the purpose is very different. In these uses of language, the significant aspect is the active role of the reader in comprehension. Another way of saying this is that they are reader unfriendly!! They don't do al the work of the reader for the readers, but expect the reader to participate actively in comprehension. This is the high end of language comprehension in terms of how much work the reader must do.

I entirely agree. The 'stop sign' is but an example. I also entirely agree that Tolkien's work is a work in the 'literary language' you speak of. He left many things up to the reader, the reader's imagination, etc.

I am certainly for reading books in a literary sense also. Take in all you can, feel free to interpret, whatever you like. But I am quite sure Tolkien had his own meaning behind his works, despite his decision to leave much of the thinking up the reader.

And that is what "literary reading" does not change.