Why destroy Laketown's bridge? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Sauron the White · 04-04-2008, 05:47 AM

A picture says a thousand words.
Thank you to davem for supplying that drawing of Laketown. It does two things to reinforce my point:
1- the bridge is no flimsy thing supported by ropes. It is on strong and thick pillars. And like davem says, it looks like it is not easily destroyed without yet another litany of assumptions about many thing not visibe in the picture or written about in the text.
2- the area of the docks between the water and the buildings is indeed much wider than the actual bridge itself. Given the thinness of Smaug (again based on the other JRRT painting) he could have just as easilly landed on any of that docking space as opposed to that bridge. Which is what I have been saying from the very beginning. Smaug did not need the bridge if his intention was to land and go house to house.

I do think that if this passage had been written for LOTR, it would have been longer, more fully developed and the detail much crisper and clearer. JRRT would have explained what Smaugs intentions were, and perhaps explained why it ws necessary to thrown down and destroy the bridge. JRRT was such a superb writer that I have no doubt it would have made perfect sense.

Having said that, THE HOBBIT was written on a far different level and that type of explaination and detail was simply not there. As a result, we get a rather confusing couple of lines that are open to various different meanings.

Rikae · 04-04-2008, 05:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

1- the bridge is no flimsy thing supported by ropes. It is on strong and thick pillars. And like davem says, it looks like it is not easily destroyed.

It doesn't look easily thrown down, to be sure. For that matter, Smaug looks entirely too long and thin for a flying creature.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

2- the area of the docks between the water and the buildings is indeed much wider than the actual bridge itself. Given the thinness of Smaug (again based on the other JRRT painting) he could have just as easilly landed on any of that docking space as opposed to that bridge.

Several people have already said Smaug's plan was probably to cross the bridge, not to land on it.

The Sixth Wizard · 04-04-2008, 06:00 AM

I'd think that Smaug wouldn't want to land on the walkways around Laketown because of their possible flimsiness and the likelihood of him falling in or touching the water. At least he knew that the bridge could hold heavy objects that were carted across every day...

It may also be *gasp* not a very good picture...

Rikae · 04-04-2008, 06:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Sixth Wizard

I'd think that Smaug wouldn't want to land on the walkways around Laketown because of their possible flimsiness and the likelihood of him falling in or touching the water. At least he knew that the bridge could hold heavy objects that were carted across every day...

He probably could also maneuver much more carefully on foot than he could in landing - so, land on solid ground and walk across the bridge.

Macalaure · 04-04-2008, 06:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Sixth Wizard

It may also be *gasp* not a very good picture...

Apart from the problems already mentioned, note that in the text Tolkien talks of bridges, while this Laketown only possesses one. The prof probably didn't have pedantic accuracy in mind when he drew this.

Rikae · 04-04-2008, 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Macalaure

Apart from the problems already mentioned, note that in the text Tolkien talks of bridges, while this Laketown only possesses one. The prof probably didn't have pedantic accuracy in mind when he drew this.

Indeed (that's my point in babbling about "10 feet above ground level" etc.)
I love Tolkien's illustrations - their style and feel is delightful - but this wouldn't be the first time one seemed to make something in the text impossible (I can't remember which, but I know I've looked at one of his drawings before and thought "but that's not accurate! It's not like that in the book!")

Rune Son of Bjarne · 04-04-2008, 06:07 AM

I don't know much about throwing down bridges, which is weird as it is what we Danes do best. . . but I have read about several cases where massive bridges was thrown down relatively quickly. Now this is a wooden bridge, this definitly is an advantage if you want to throw it down, but we have a hughe problem. . . We cannot know how the bridge was cunstructed, the fact that there is a lot of pillars tells us nothing of how strong the bridge was.

Burning bridges on the other hand, at that I am an expert!

About Smaug landing on the docking area or whatever it is between the houses and the water: Indeed it looks like there is plenty of space at the part closest to us, but if you look where it is level with the bridge it is actually quite difficult to say how broad any of the things is.

To reach a final conclution on this matter we really need to know about Smaug and Lake Towns siezes and Smaugs flying abilities.

04-04-2008, 05:47 AM	#1
Sauron the White Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 903	A picture says a thousand words. Thank you to davem for supplying that drawing of Laketown. It does two things to reinforce my point: 1- the bridge is no flimsy thing supported by ropes. It is on strong and thick pillars. And like davem says, it looks like it is not easily destroyed without yet another litany of assumptions about many thing not visibe in the picture or written about in the text. 2- the area of the docks between the water and the buildings is indeed much wider than the actual bridge itself. Given the thinness of Smaug (again based on the other JRRT painting) he could have just as easilly landed on any of that docking space as opposed to that bridge. Which is what I have been saying from the very beginning. Smaug did not need the bridge if his intention was to land and go house to house. I do think that if this passage had been written for LOTR, it would have been longer, more fully developed and the detail much crisper and clearer. JRRT would have explained what Smaugs intentions were, and perhaps explained why it ws necessary to thrown down and destroy the bridge. JRRT was such a superb writer that I have no doubt it would have made perfect sense. Having said that, THE HOBBIT was written on a far different level and that type of explaination and detail was simply not there. As a result, we get a rather confusing couple of lines that are open to various different meanings. Last edited by Sauron the White; 04-04-2008 at 06:55 AM.

04-04-2008, 06:00 AM	#3
The Sixth Wizard Shade of Carn Dûm Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Stuck under a rock in Valinor with Ar-Pharazon. Posts: 480	I'd think that Smaug wouldn't want to land on the walkways around Laketown because of their possible flimsiness and the likelihood of him falling in or touching the water. At least he knew that the bridge could hold heavy objects that were carted across every day... It may also be gasp not a very good picture...