RE: Do I have to understand the material?

[Mike West <Mike -dot- West -at- oz -dot- quest -dot- com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Plato

> As usual we're all nitpicking over detials. So lets make this 
> nice and simple:

> 1. Do I have to understand the material I am documenting.
> 
> Yes, if you want to be a good writer. The only way to write 
> authorative material is to have authorative knowledge. 


Let's assume that what Andrew meant was "details"
and "authoritative." 

The notion that technical writers need to be 
subject-matter experts in areas other than 
technical communications is perhaps not a 
peculiar one. But I am accustomed to hearing it 
far more often from people outside our profession; 
for example, from pointy-haired bosses and their 
multifarious ilk.

Of *course* you have to understand the material
you're working with. That's what the "research" 
phase of writing is all about -- that and understanding 
your audience and their requirements. But your 
object in all this is not to become an "authority" on 
the subject-matter. 

I think a useful analogy is that of the teacher, or 
the journalist. Your goal is not to prove how smart 
you are, but to help others understand -- to give 
them information they need.

The best teachers I had in life were not good 
teachers because they were "authorities" in some 
field or other. They were good teachers because 
helping people learn was an intrinsic need for them; 
a passion that flowed in every vein and cell of their 
being.

The most successful technical communicators I 
have known (looking back over 20+ years in the 
field) were people with a passion for learning and 
helping others. What made them uniquely qualified 
for technical communications was this passion 
combined with an "authoritative" knowledge of 
*their own profession* -- writing, editing, handling
technical subject matter, instructional design, 
information delivery.

 
> 3. But all I do is rearrange text, edit, and apply styles.
> 
> You're not a writer. You're an editor. 


This is a specious distinction for several reasons.
First, most technical writers have to be their own 
editors. They need, therefore, an in-depth 
understanding of editorial practice. Second, I know 
of no-one who gets paid to do nothing but 
"rearrange text, edit, and apply styles." Those are
only a few small bits of what editors get paid to do. 
Either Andrew Plato is inventing straw men to knock 
down, or he has worked in some peculiar 
organizations. 

Andrew Plato can throw away his style guides 
and let his editors clean up his messes if he likes, 
but I think it is bad advice to give to newcomers.

Here's my advice -- which I guarantee to be as
useful or as useless as anyone else's advice ever is.
Life is short. If you want to become an "authority" on 
something other than your chosen profession, choose
something worthwhile. French wine. Northern Italian
cooking. Jazz piano. T'ang dynasty pottery. Taking 
care of the rainforest. I'll stop there, but feel free to 
continue the list according to your own passions.

Michael West
Melbourne, Australia


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Want to support TECHWR-L? Get shirts, bags, hats, clocks,
and more from the TECHWR-L Store. All proceeds support TECHWR-L.
http://www.cafepress.com/cp/store/store.aspx?storeid=techwhirl

Check out the new release of RoboDemo, our easy-to-use tutorial software.
Plus, buy RoboHelp Office in August and save $100 with our mail-in rebate.
Get details and download free trial versions at http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com 
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com 
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit 
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.