Why destroy Laketown's bridge?

[Macalaure]

It means that Smaug did not like water. So its easy to then see that he would want to be as far away from it as possible. Thus, an attack for the air was his preferred mode of attack and would not land being closer to the water.

Happy now?

You are aware that that quote comes after Smaug found the bridges destroyed? Therefore, it was his preferred mode of attack after whatever mysterious mode of attack he had in mind before. You will find nobody disagreeing on that.

[Sauron the White]

from davem

In what way, then, was he 'foiled' by the destruction of the bridge(s)? The implication is that he couldn't get to his 'enemies' as he first intended - because they were on an island in deep water.

As I have said in several places here, because JRRT does not tell us in what Smaug was foiled in, its all conjecture and speculation. What is my speculation?
Smaug could have intended to destroy the bridge himself for sheer enjoyment and was thus foiled in that plan.
Smaug could have intended to trap fleeing townspeople on the bridge and had hopes of incinerating many with one quick blast and was foiled in that plan.

And, as I have repeatedly said, if it was his intention to go on the island he had ample space on the docks which are clearly even wider than the bridge. He did not do so.

You infer that he intended to cross the bridge to justify the order to destroy the bridges. Even though that order is somewhat silly and poor military strategy against a fire breathing creature who is attacking you from the air.

Its poorly, planned out and poorly written. Burn me at the stake for that. I have no doubt that if this were LOTR, JRRT would have fully fleshed it out so that it made sense.

[McCaber]

I'd rather have a dragon attack from the air where he can only burn. On the ground he can burn the same buildings as from the air, destroy them directly, and feed on the townsfolk.

[Rikae]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

from davem
As I have said in several places here, because JRRT does not tell us in what Smaug was foiled in, its all conjecture and speculation. What is my speculation?
Smaug could have intended to destroy the bridge himself for sheer enjoyment and was thus foiled in that plan.
Smaug could have intended to trap fleeing townspeople on the bridge and had hopes of incinerating many with one quick blast and was foiled in that plan.

And, as several people have repeatedly said, this THEORY completly ignores the second half of the passage.

Originally Posted by STW

And, as I have repeatedly said, if it was his intention to go on the island he had ample space on the docks which are clearly even wider than the bridge. He did not do so.

And you have been repeatedly told why you cannot base such an assumption on the picture alone, especially where the text would suggest otherwise.

Originally Posted by STW

You infer that he intended to cross the bridge to justify the order to destroy the bridges. Even though that order is somewhat silly and poor military strategy against a fire breathing creature who is attacking you from the air.

One thing you forgot to mention - he actually attacked from the air after the bridges were destroyed, and after he was oh-so-mysteriously foiled by this. While the bridges were being destroyed he was getting from point A to point B through the air.

Originally Posted by STW

Its poorly, planned out and poorly written. Burn me at the stake for that. I have no doubt that if this were LOTR, JRRT would have fully fleshed it out so that it made sense.

That's your opinion and you are entitled to it. Excuse me for not burning you at the stake, but I have a five page essay on Browning due yesterday and three misbehaving children to deal with, so you'll just have to go without your martyrdom for the time being.

[Sauron the White]

It is foolish to go back and forth on this since we obviously see this so very very differently. We are repeating ourselves over and over again.

I do not see things your way. I do not see these things the way that you do. I do not make the same assumptions that you do. I do not make the same inferences that you do. You are willing to make jumps in reason and supposition that I am not willing to make. Where you see sense - I see nonsense.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

It is foolish to go back and forth on this since we obviously see this so very very differently. We are repeating ourselves over and over again.

I quite agree - you have repeated your standpoint often enough to hammer it firmly into the heads of all other members. Others have valiantly attempted to make points for other views. All that can be said has been said. Only one thing is lacking - humour! Several posters have attempted to add a light-hearted, friendly tone of conversation, unfortunately without success in getting the general discussion away from embittered battling.

How about if I move this thread to the Mirth forum so that it loses the rancour?!

[The Sixth Wizard]

Ummm...would Hobbitish underwear be described as briefs?

I think they would wear more in the way of "shorts".
*artificial laughter*

Of course, hobbit women would be wearing their "smalls"!
*raucous artificial laughter*

Esty:

YES!

[alatar]

I'd like to thank whomever posited the observation that Smaug may not have wanted to attack the city entirely from the air, but as there was no bridge or boat to get him to the city, he was forced into plan B, namely to burn the city and hope that the treasures therein would somehow be salvageable. He may even have let some persons go, as they would do the hauling for him for cheap, and when the treasures reached the shore, later he could gather them up along with a snack or two.

Anyway, I finally figured out how the bridge was brought down, and had to look no further than LotR. What aquatic creature was typically found living outside dwelling places which existed that could rip down large wooden structures in seconds? Why, it's the Watcher in the Water!

Why couldn't the Laketown persons, like the Morian orcs, have entered into contract with a cousin of said creature? It could feed on any garbage or other stuff dropped down to it, and in return it would guard the bridge. Surely you didn't think that Bard and a few stout fellows were all that protected the town?

When Smaug appeared, the creature could have easily thrown down the bridge and then hid in the safety of the deep water, 'cleaning up' those Laketown persons that were 'sinkers.'