While I am a writer in general, and a technical writer specifically, I don’t talk about the craft of writing very often. Yet I feel somewhat compelled to state that I don’t necessarily agree with the assertion that you cannot become a technical writer by instinct alone. I have no formal training in technical writing, yet I am a technical writer. (And a well-paid one at that.) While it’s true that you cannot intuit the craft in a vacuum, studying other technical documents, solving technical problems in your field–e.g. programming if you’re a technical writer for the software industry–and having a strong grasp of plain language and the scientific method can get you pretty far.
I wrap the ability to communicate clearly in with the idea of “plain language” because communicating effectively is as much about what you leave out as what you leave in, and is audience-dependent. Ever ask someone who understands a complicated idea *really* well to explain it to you? Most of the time they can’t do it well because they get bogged down in the details. In this respect, good writers have as much in common with good teachers as they do with their engineering counterparts. What to leave out is something that many writers struggle with daily, myself included, and takes practice to master. No amount of instruction can teach it, and I think it’s a pretty bad idea to confuse instruction with education and/or ability.
I realize that credentialism exists, and I find it sad that one of the items on an HR person’s list of requirements to check off is a Bachelor’s degree. Yeah, it works in my favor because I have one, but it’s hardly the best arbiter of ability and suitability for almost any job.
Rian, I agree that you do not necessarily need a degree in tech writing to become a good tech writer and that you can teach yourself how to do it, if you have a basic command of English.
I for example followed that route. My original degree is in Sociology. But I always loved technology, and I enjoyed explaining it in simple terms. So with some attention to what to leave out (as you put it so well) as well as what to include in, and by paying attention to basic rules of Plain Writing, I eventually figured out how to write procedural prose.
I think you can probably be more successful in painting or a similar art form by relying on pure instincts than in tech writing. There are still a lot of stuff that you need to figure out rationally and cognitively even if you have strong instincts. It still comes down to careful intelligent work habits, rational thinking, and learning from one’s past errors. And I have a feeling you’d agree with that assessment. Thanks again for your contribution. Ugur
While I am a writer in general, and a technical writer specifically, I don’t talk about the craft of writing very often. Yet I feel somewhat compelled to state that I don’t necessarily agree with the assertion that you cannot become a technical writer by instinct alone. I have no formal training in technical writing, yet I am a technical writer. (And a well-paid one at that.) While it’s true that you cannot intuit the craft in a vacuum, studying other technical documents, solving technical problems in your field–e.g. programming if you’re a technical writer for the software industry–and having a strong grasp of plain language and the scientific method can get you pretty far.
I wrap the ability to communicate clearly in with the idea of “plain language” because communicating effectively is as much about what you leave out as what you leave in, and is audience-dependent. Ever ask someone who understands a complicated idea *really* well to explain it to you? Most of the time they can’t do it well because they get bogged down in the details. In this respect, good writers have as much in common with good teachers as they do with their engineering counterparts. What to leave out is something that many writers struggle with daily, myself included, and takes practice to master. No amount of instruction can teach it, and I think it’s a pretty bad idea to confuse instruction with education and/or ability.
I realize that credentialism exists, and I find it sad that one of the items on an HR person’s list of requirements to check off is a Bachelor’s degree. Yeah, it works in my favor because I have one, but it’s hardly the best arbiter of ability and suitability for almost any job.
Rian, I agree that you do not necessarily need a degree in tech writing to become a good tech writer and that you can teach yourself how to do it, if you have a basic command of English.
I for example followed that route. My original degree is in Sociology. But I always loved technology, and I enjoyed explaining it in simple terms. So with some attention to what to leave out (as you put it so well) as well as what to include in, and by paying attention to basic rules of Plain Writing, I eventually figured out how to write procedural prose.
I think you can probably be more successful in painting or a similar art form by relying on pure instincts than in tech writing. There are still a lot of stuff that you need to figure out rationally and cognitively even if you have strong instincts. It still comes down to careful intelligent work habits, rational thinking, and learning from one’s past errors. And I have a feeling you’d agree with that assessment. Thanks again for your contribution. Ugur