Moore's
critics take aim
The authors shed
light on the controversial writer-director's shortcomings, but commit similar
offences themselves
Adam Daifallah
Montreal Gazette
Saturday, July 31,
2004
Michael Moore
Is a Big Fat Stupid White Man
By David T. Hardy and
Jason Clarke
ReganBooks, 256 pages, $32.50
Michael Moore is in the news a lot these days. The radical filmmaker has made a
remarkable metamorphosis from oddball leftist rabble-rouser to pop-culture
icon. His political films - documentaries is too charitable a term - make more
money than most star-studded
It should come as no surprise, then, that a book has been written dedicated
solely to the purpose of discrediting the left-wing firebrand. In Michael
Moore Is a Big Fat Stupid White Man, David T. Hardy and Jason Clarke
attempt to paint Moore as, well, a big fat stupid white man. The authors, who
run separate anti-Moore Web sites, fall far short. (Indeed, considering the
amount of money Moore is making, he is anything but stupid.)
Moore's work has been scrutinized before and many critics have exposed his
excess. Moore twists facts to suit his predetermined thesis, and this book
casts light on a significant number of them. He cuts and pastes from interviews
to alter or misrepresent his subjects' intent. He demonizes his opponents and
looks only at one side of the story.
Problem is, this book falls into the same trap as Moore. It is not elegant or
well-reasoned. It is not high-quality prose. Rather, it is page after page of
shrillness, histrionics and over-the-top invective.
This book's extreme and polarized rhetoric is emblematic of the current tenor
of U.S. politics. The level of public discourse is in decline because of
pundits like Moore on the left and Ann Coulter on the right. Debates now come
down to who can launch the wittiest salvo, not who can put forward the best
ideas. This book, like so many other new releases on current affairs, reads
more like talking points for a high school debate than serious journalism.
This type of writing doesn't win converts. A colleague of mine recently
remarked that Fahrenheit 9/11 won't change the pre-existing
inclinations of anyone who watches it.
If you hate Bush and oppose the war in Iraq, you'll come out feeling the same
way, perhaps even more passionately. If you support Bush and agree with the
war, you'll find every single factual inaccuracy and gross exaggeration and
finish feeling better than ever about the liberation of Baghdad.
As pioneer of the new politics and punditry of insults, Moore is one of the
worst offenders. His films (of which I have seen two, Fahrenheit 9/11
and Bowling for Columbine, his anti-gun jeremiad) are intellectually
dishonest and, in some cases, unethical.
The authors do a decent job shedding light on some of Moore's worst offences.
They present evidence to refute some of Bowling for Columbine's
fallacious claims. The authors call the film "as manipulative as
totalitarian propaganda." They rebut Moore's written works, particularly
the recent Dude, Where's My Country? And they poke holes in Moore's
phoney everyman image, painting him instead as a narcissistic scapegrace. (For
example, despite Moore's attempts to sympathize with the plight of the Average
Joe, he actually owns a $1.9-million condo in New York City and a $1.2-million
summer home in Michigan.)
Michael Moore Is a Big Fat Stupid White Man is amateurish. It appears
to be a slapdash congeries of mini-essays pasted together with little attention
paid to flow or sequence. Chapters move back and forth from first to third
person and it is riddled with repetition and cliches.
Given Moore's now significant influence in the political debate, a serious and
thoughtful criticism of his shoddy work would be valuable. Unfortunately, Hardy
and Clarke miss the mark.
Adam Daifallah is a member of the National Post editorial board.