[Attalus]

To quote the article that I linked to, above: "But if a figurative reading is unsupportable, and a descriptive reading leads to absurdity, how, then, the dilemma to be resolved? By distinguishing, as Tolkien always does, the Balrog's own form from the zone of shadow and terror it carries with it: What it was could not be seen: it was like a great shadow, in the middle of which was a dark form, of man-shape, maybe, yet greater; and a power and terror seemed to be in it and to go before it. (FOtR) The Balrog itself is never said to have wings or an actual ability to fly. It is the Balrog's shadow which appears like wings. The "figurative" camp concede that the shadow of the Balrog is mutable: after all, the figure of speech only makes sense if the shadow actually reached out like wings and then spread from wall to wall. In this they are right. They go wrong only when they insist that the description refers to the size, general motion, and menacing terror of the shadow, but not to the particular form it took."