Elizabeth Crawford

Professor Tocantins

TA 207 Final Paper

26 November 2019

Family Philosophers: Fences

Act 1 scene 3 in August Wilson’s Fences is about the war of different philosophies

raging within an African American working-class family. Within this scene, Troy is a hardened

father who has not only seen the brash reality of the world but also recognizes the foolishness

within the context of reality. His perception of the world is absence of emotion and self-worth

defined by hard work. This philosophy calls upon the history of demeaning servitude endured by

African populations during slavery and documents the emotional trauma suffered by this

population. In opposition to his harsh belief system, his son is full of emotion and hope. With the

eagerness of a child, Cory relies upon other’s opinions and emotions to fuel his own actions. This

philosophy of hope and naivety regarding the ways of the world absent of the inherent flaws in

society displays a Caucasian-American sense of foolishness.

In this scene, Cory asks his father if he likes him only to be rebuked by the reality of hard

work and sacrifice. Zora Neale Hurston’s characteristics are relevant in the discussion of these

opposing philosophies and help dissect the root of the conversation occurring between father and

son, and how they are experiencing this discussion.

The first of these characteristics is metaphor which can be seen in the James Earl Jones

representation of Troy. When Cory first asks if Troy likes him, Cory breaks the wood he was
using to fix the fence in response to the question. This choice represented the broken covenant of

silence between father and son about discussing approval and worth in each other’s eyes. The

actors are clever in how they use the viewpoints to shape their bodies in response to each other.

While James Earl Jones has a broad chest and painful stare, the actor who plays Cory seems to

quiver with the break of the wood. As this duo enters this conversation for the first time, the

argument is already decided before it is started. The metaphor of breaking the broke the silence

between these two men about philosophy and divided the norms of this family. It is this moment

and the men’s reactions that sets the tone for Troy’s opinion and Cory’s response to the

conversation.

In Cory’s eyes, this scene is more than gaining hearing that his father “likes him” but

trying to elevate himself dependent upon his father’s opinion. When Cory repeatedly asks for

this confirmation, he is seeking adornment. In both scenes, Cory is a bright eyed and childish

young man. His will to adorn is not out of dignity and sense of worth but it is about getting the

gold star and affirming what he holds to be true. This lack of understanding and pestering

questions demonstrated flaws within his philosophy and illuminates his need for education and

discipline.

As alluded to before, both men represent very distinct philosophies in this play. While

Cory wants to break free of society’s understanding and excel with his father’s well wishes, Troy

knows that that wish is not important or relevant to success. This is best captured through the

asymmetry of these two men during the second scene as the men face off. Denzel Washington

points towards the heavens with a broad chest and looks up as he yells at his son while Cory

seems to sink into himself and looks down. The direction of their eyes indicates how they see the

world. While Troy sees success as a hard climb, Cory views it from the top looking down like a
man accomplished. The asymmetry of their bodies shows the ending of the scene and the

affirmation of the values they have coming into it. The victor stands strong and looked upon his

beliefs and teaching moment with satisfaction while the loser is defeated and sinks into himself,

reminiscing on what he believed. The shape of their bodies and movement of their eyes tells the

audience all they needed to know about this scene and the struggles of these two men.

In conclusion, these moments of metaphor, will to adorn, and asymmetry dictate the

battle of philosophy taking place on the stage. The philosophy of success is the crucial

disagreement between these two men and revolutionizes how they treat one another. With their

silence broken and their philosophies clearly stated to each other, there is a rift in the relationship

but a hope for understanding between these men going forth.