John Denvir

It's important to note that the innuendo here is not that Bush is an "evil" man, only a slightly silly one. But when this image is played against those of the victims of his policies in the second half of the movie, a feeling akin to disgust sets in.

I AM NOT REALLY A PRESIDENT,
BUT I PLAY ONE ON TV

by John Denvir

I think all the discussions about whether Michael Moore's arguments in Fahrenheit 9/11 are valid or not miss the point. Moore is not a lawyer; he's a filmmaker. We would demand factual accuracy and logical consistency from a lawyer, but films deal in images, not logic, and attempt to affect our views at a deeper level of human experience.

If we try to reduce the Moore's film to a logical argument, it's less than wholly convincing. Do we really think that the primary reasons for the invasion of Afghanistan was the building of an oil pipeline or an opportunity to divert attention from the Saudi royal family's connections with 9/11?

Yet I would claim the film is a complete success in its larger purpose of undermining Bush's credibility as a political leader. Moore accomplishes this through the magic of images, cleverly juxtaposing hundreds of pictures of Bush, the smug rich kid, with hundreds of other images of the everyday Americans (and Iraquis) who have paid a terrible price for his both his arrogance and his ignorance.

The portion of the film on Saudi Arabia may not effectively tie the sheikdom to 9/11, but it does allow Moore to show through use of film clips that supposed "regular guy" George Bush is actually a rich boy who likes to "pal" around with members of the Saudi royal family. It turns out that the present Saudi Ambassador to the United States, Prince Bandar, is an old friend of the Bush clan, even to the point of having been given the nickname "Bandar Bush" by the family. Not many Reagan conservatives will feel comfortable with that image.

But Moore's most damning images are of Bush himself. For instance, we often see him in costume: cowboy, weekend golfer, fisherman, hunter, and, of course, the famous Tom Cruise "Top Gun" outfit. But three images in particular are particularly effective. One, of course, is the now famous shot of the President in golf regalia who, after urging leaders of all nations to aid in the war against terrorism, turns to the camera he thinks is turned off and says "Now watch this drive." A second is a scene where we see Bush informed by an aide that the second World Trade Center has been attacked. He does nothing for seven minutes more presidential than watch as a group of first graders read a children's book. One senses FDR had a different reaction to hearing of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Finally we have a frontal shot of the President as he is made up before a televised speech. He appears to be playing an eye contact game with the someone behind the camera. "Goofy" is the adjective that comes to mind.

It's important to note that the innuendo here is not that Bush is an "evil" man, only a slightly silly one. But when this image is played against those of the victims of his policies in the second half of the movie, a feeling akin to disgust sets in. First, we see the civilian casualties in Iraq as Iraqui mothers cry for vengeance against the American bombs that have destroyed their homes and killed their children. Then we see the effect of the war on American soldiers who were injured there and now vow to fight to make sure Bush is not re-elected. But most affecting of all is a long sequence showing the grief of a working class Michigan mother who had encouraged her children to enlist in the military to serve their country and advance their careers. We now see her read from the last letter sent by her now dead son condemning the war that made him go to Iraq for no good reason. The mother's raw grief and anger incarnates Moore's fundamental accusation. How could we have allowed this superficial man wreak such havoc with the lives of decent Americans?

Is Fahrenheit 9/11 fair? Not in the least. Does it add to the national debate? You bet it does. It gives new meaning to the phrase "the personal is political," meaning now that we should look beyond the Bush's abstract claim to "fight terrorism" to see how this product of privilege's policies have affected ordinary Americans.

Posted July 15, 2004

Would you like to comment on this article? Please submit your comments here.