It's possible to discuss the artistry of Michael Moore displayed in Fahrenheit 9/11 without talking about any part of the film's politics at all. We can talk about compositions of frames, camera movements, editing, etc., as some viewers have here and elsewhere, but I don't know why you think it illegitimate to talk about the politics of a self-consciously political work of art, evaluating it by a political standard. Wouldn't it be odd to evaluate the politics of Fahrenheit 9/11 solely by an artistic standard, even if it were possible to do so?
If I, as well as almost anyone else including professional film critics, have talked more about explicitly political elements in Fahrenheit 9/11 than artistic means that Moore used to communicate them, that is because the film is not artistically controversial. Don't we all agree that it is well made?
I, for one, don't have any artistic objection to Fahrenheit 9/11 aside from Moore's heavier use of "talking heads" in it than in his previous feature-length documentaries that I have already mentioned in passing.
If you have a lot to say about Moore's film-making prowess from the film studies angle, however, I'm all ears. -- Yoshie
* Critical Montages: <http://montages.blogspot.com/> * Bring Them Home Now! <http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/> * Calendars of Events in Columbus: <http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html>, <http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php>, & <http://www.cpanews.org/> * Student International Forum: <http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/> * Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osudivest.org/> * Al-Awda-Ohio: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio> * Solidarity: <http://www.solidarity-us.org/>