Coded Logic,
I used the world "commentary" as a traslation of the word "midrash." In Judaism the Book of Enoch is a midrash or interpretation/commentary on the brief reference to Enoch in the Torah, as well as on the 33rd chapter of Deuteronomy. It is set in the narrative device of a parable, and like the parables of Jesus the stories therein are discussing cherished religious teachings by way of illustrations.
I recall the ideas the Watchtower had regarding the Bible canon, but I'm Jewish. (I was born into a Sepharic Jewish family, my parents passed, I was left in the hands of an aunt who was a JW who got me into the religion when I showed fear of a possible WWIII as a teenager, but my Jewish culture never washed off entirely.) Our concept of Sacred Scripture isn't really one which involves the idea of a Biblical canon as you are speaking of, as the JWs know it, or even as used by Catholics and Protestants. The idea of canonization is a concept introduced by the Marcion heresy that I mentioned in my first post on this thread (please read that so I don't have to repeat it unnessarily).
While Jews will use the term "canon" in English these days, the books which make up the Tanakh as well as Midrash like Enoch are not included or rejected into "canons" on the basis of such Christian concepts like inspiration as they see it. But it is hard to translate to many Christians what our collections are, how they developed, and why some books are a part of certain collections while others are not. I've read entries on Wikipedia and in Christian academic publications which are totally incorrect on the subject of a Jewish "canon" because many Christians just won't wrap their heads around any other possible concept. If you really want to understand Scripture and the way it is accepted by Jews, you must abandon the concept of Christian canonicity. There was even a time when a hypothetical model of a Jewish canon was taught by Christian scholars, claiming we closed our canon in the first century. Of course this has been rejected by evidence among modern scholarship as it never happened.
A Biblical canon requires Church authority to define it and place it's stamp of approval on it. There is no such thing in Judaism. No one knows how or when the collection of books were fixed. While some Jewish sects used some books as authoritative, none have ever claimed that Judaism is based on any form of writ outside the Ten Commandments. Some sects and/or rabbis did not care much for certain books. But Enoch is neither rejected or accepted in any official form among Jews. Our collections are mostly divided by language and era.
There is even a movement among Jews to reclaim the New Testament as a Jewish work. Despite the polemic which is often found therein, Jewish scholars are re-examining these texts as a product of Christians who were mainly Jews. Currently a version of the NRSV New Testament has been released along these lines known as "The Jewish Anotated New Testament." The reason this is possible is that the concept of "canon" is not one that has a shared understanding between Jews and Christians.
As such the Book of Enoch is not viewed as unreliable the way Christians do if books don't meet their criteria. The Book of Enoch is as useful as you make it, at least as far as Jews are concerned.
To quote Yoda: "You must un-learn!"