Michael Moore and the Rhetoric of Documentary

242 Pages·2015·2.23 MB·English

by  Thomas W. Benson

Michael
Moore
and the
Rhetoric of
Documentary
Edited by Thomas W. Benson and Brian J. Snee
Michael Moore and the Rhetoric of Documentary

Michael
Moore
and the
Rhetoric of
Documentary
Edited by Thomas W. Benson and Brian J. Snee
Southern Illinois University Press
Carbondale
Copyright © 2015 by the Board of Trustees,
Southern Illinois University
Chapter 2 copyright © 2015, Jennifer L. Borda; chapter 3 copyright
© 2015, Christine Harold; chapter 6 copyright © 2015, Edward
Schiappa, Daniel Ladislau Horvath, and Peter B. Gregg; chapter 8
copyright © 2015, Kendall R. Phillips
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America
18 17 16 15 4 3 2 1
Cover illustration: The sign reads “The Facts Don’t Lie: Moore ’04”
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Michael Moore and the rhetoric of documentary / edited by Thomas
W. Benson and Brian J. Snee.
pages cm
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-0-8093-3407-0 (pbk. : alk. paper)
ISBN 0-8093-3407-0 (pbk. : alk. paper)
ISBN 978-0-8093-3408-7 (ebook)
ISBN 0-8093-3408-9 (ebook)
1. Moore, Michael, 1954 April 23—Criticism and interpretation.
2. Documentary films—Political aspects—History and criticism.
3. Motion pictures—Political aspects—United States. I. Benson,
Thomas W. editor. II. Snee, Brian J. editor.
PN1998.3.M665M525 2015
791.4302'33092—dc23 2014034578
The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements
of American National Standard for Information Sciences—Perma-
nence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1992.
Contents
1. Michael Moore and the Rhetoric of Documentary:
Art, Argument, Affect 1
Thomas W. Benson and Brian J. Snee
2. Laughing through Our Tears: Rhetorical Tensions in
Roger & Me 25
Jennifer L. Borda
3. The Big One That Got Away 54
Christine Harold
4. The Many Moods of Michael Moore: Aesthetics and
Affect in Bowling for Columbine 74
Brian L. Ott and Susan A. Sci
5. The Conversion of Lila Lipscomb in Fahrenheit 9/11 101
Thomas Rosteck and Thomas S. Frentz
6. The Phenomenal Text of Michael Moore’s Sicko 119
Edward Schiappa, Daniel Ladislau Horvath, and
Peter B. Gregg
7. The Ghosts of Michael Moore’s Future Past; or, The Many
Failures of Slacker Uprising 147
Davis W. Houck and Joseph Delbert Davenport
v
vi Contents
8. “I’m Sorry to See It Go”: Nostalgic Rhetoric in Michael
Moore’s Capitalism: A Love Story 170
Kendall R. Phillips
Bibliography 193
Contributors 221
Index 225
Michael Moore and the Rhetoric of Documentary

1. Michael Moore and the Rhetoric of
Documentary: Art, Argument, Affect
Thomas W. Benson and Brian J. Snee
T
his book is a collection of original essays by scholars and
critics who undertake a film-by-film critical analysis of the documenta-
ries of Michael Moore. These close readings of the films illuminate the
contributions of Moore to the art of rhetoric and to documentary, analyze
the progressive political arguments of the films, and explore how Moore
cultivates affect and sentiment not simply to arouse support but also to
bring a radical perspective to life as thought and feeling.
Michael Moore has contributed to a renewal of documentary by re-
sponding to historical change and opportunity, as the earliest practitioners
would have understood. John Grierson, a founder of the documentary
idea, wrote in 1942, “The materials of citizenship today are different and
the perspectives wider and more difficult, but we have, as ever, the duty of
exploring them and of waking the heart and will with regard to them. That
duty is what documentary is about.”1 Michael Moore’s own adventure in
“the materials of citizenship” and “waking the heart” introduced changes
that over a quarter of a century have challenged the roots of documentary.
Brian Winston has argued that Michael Moore “liberates documentary”
from the “burden Grierson laid on the documentary,” while suggesting
that Moore’s films raise additional questions about their own fundamental
value as political argument:
The burden Grierson laid on the documentary was to pretend that his
films were reports on the news pages, as it were, when in fact they were
editorials for the established order. Moore liberates documentary from
1