I have not read the book but I have heard Erin speak, and I do find the high/low context dimension to be very powerful in explaining a great many things. I don't see how it applies all that well to this one, though, other than perhaps explaining one way in which something can come across as dense or cryptic. Specifically, you could use it to say that a text is embedded in the context in which it was written, and so for example what is not said can speak louder than what is said.
But I don't see how it explains differences in what is expected of a listener/reader/learner. I may very well just be missing it.
As Erin explains in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oYfhTC9lIQ, the question is how much context the speaker can assume that the listener has. In a low context culture, the speaker assumes that the listener doesn't have much shared context. And therefore it is on the speaker to be explicit. In a high context culture, the speaker can assume that the listener will fill in a lot from that shared context. And it is on the listener to do so.
But I don't see how it explains differences in what is expected of a listener/reader/learner. I may very well just be missing it.