TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Quoting Robert Plamondon <robert -at- plamondon -dot- com>:
> That's neither here nor there, unless you'd care to assert that the
> traditional Harlequin romance is extremely short and written at a
> fifth-grade reading level for some reason OTHER than catching a mass
> audience that includes many marginal readers.
The fact that they're light reading may have something to do with it, too. As I
like to tell developers who don't see the need for a more well-designed GUI,
just because someone can lift 500 pounds doesn't mean that they want to do so a
dozen times every day. Or to apply the analogy in this case, just because
someone reads at a post-graduate level doesn't mean that they always want to do
so.
(I wonder if there's not a basic difference in orientation. I consider clear,
simple expression a virtue. It's the lack of the thought, not the language that
makes these books unmemorable so far as I'm concerned. However, you seem to
assume that it's usually oriented at less skilled readers)
> The books are very short.
Even so, when I worked at a book store, I noticed several readers who would
consume thirty or forty per week. Even if you assume that three or four
Harlequins would be the same as one more serious novel, that's a fair bit of
reading.
--
Bruce Byfield bbyfield -at- axionet -dot- com 604-421.7177
