Metareferences and Intertextuality.

[A_Brandybuck]

Originally Posted by davem

'I always felt something ought to be done about the peculair Anglo-Saxon word ent'. Note, not 'something could be done' but ought to be done.

I have used this quote already in the Chapter-by-Chapter-section, but it is helpful here, too.
This is from a footnote in Letter #163.

Take the Ents, for instance. I did not consciously invent them at all. The chapter called 'Treebeard', from Treebeard's first remark on p. 66, was written off more or less as it stands, with an effect on my self (except for labour pains) almost like reading some one else's work. And I like Ents now because they do not seem to have anything to do with me. I daresay something had been going on in the 'unconscious' for some time, and that accounts for my feeling throughout, especially when stuck, that I was not inventing but reporting (imperfectly) and had at times to wait till 'what really happened' came through. But looking back analytically I should say that Ents are composed of philology, literature, and life. They owe their name to the eald enta geweorc of Anglo-Saxon, and their connexion with stone. Their pan in the story is due, I think, to my bitter disappointment and disgust from schooldays with the shabby use made in Shakespeare of the coming of 'Great Birnam wood to high Dunsinane hill': I longed to devise a setting in which the trees might really march to war. And into this has crept a mere piece of experience, the difference of the 'male' and 'female' attitude to wild things, the difference between unpossessive love and gardening.

Tolkien describes en detail, where the word ent came. He also described, that he included them 'unconsciously'. Thus he included them not deliberately. Not until with hindsight he knew, where they came from.
But davem's conclusion could fit still. That have to do with Tolkien style of writing. The story came often from his mind 'unconsciously'. I cannot explain that very well, but I hope you will understand.
davem said, that he did create the ents, because it fits an Anglo-Saxon mythology. Tolkien was very interested in all kinds of mythologies and old Anglo-Saxon literature. So he read a lot and knew a lot. Regarding the style of writing, his mind could have included the aspect of trees marching to war 'unconsciuously' based of the experiences he had with the literature. Not until after that he noticed what he had done.
The key-aspect is here, his style of writing. He wrote all down without knowing, where it came. He often said, that the story has developed itself.
Hope you understand what I wanted to say. ;-)

[Gurthang]

I understand perfectly. Tolkien didn't think about putting stuff like trees marching or Atlantis(Numenor) into his writings. They were just sitting in the back of his head, and then came out into the story. When the story was being composed smoothly, the influence of other works he had read came out.

Tolkien was a master at this. He soaked up all the good parts of Macbeth, Atlantis, Beowulf, the Edda, and countless other works, and used what he had absorbed to write a really beautiful tale. I agree that he was a master of both metareference and intertextuality, and that's what keeps us in ME. When we read it for the first time, the story wasn't something we'd seen before, but it still seemed... almost familiar.

One thing I'd like to bring up is that there comes a point when some people look at writings and say, 'Hey that looks like....'. Immediately rumors of plagiarism fly. There is a rather fine line between plagiarism and metareference, and its a pretty big deal when an author crosses it.

Tolkien never came near that line, but still used metareference extensively. That's why we love LOTR so much, it sort of brings all the best together.