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.
Subject:I am in wrong field (was Re: I am Tech Writer) From:Mitch Berg <mberg -at- IS -dot- COM> Date:Fri, 7 Feb 1997 10:13:31 -0600
I have two problems with this subject:
1) While "status" is not a vital part of my life, the absence of it (or
its' corollary, respect) is getting old. Let's face it - at most
organizations, whatever our title, we have a level of status somewhere
between office temps and boat people. The stereotype of the tech writer
(often a fair one) is that we are, by choice or by job description
primarily oriented toward sitting in the corner, head-down, cranking out
"documents" - the communication equivalent of calling music "product".
When one approaches engineers with ideas about enhancing the system
design, usability or human factors, the fact that I AM a "tech writer",
or any other such term, is an albatross around my neck - and overcoming
it has been the hardest thing I've had to try to overcome in my career.
2) Yeah, I prefer "Tech Writer" to "TechComm", or worse - any term
descended from the root "Document". Why?
Pete Kloppenburg wrote:
> Now, just to stir the pot a little more, if I were forced at gunpoint
> to renounce the title "writer", I would have to pick the term
> "documentation developer". At least in the software industry, it
> describes very well what we do.
This is a personal quirk - long before I got into TechComm, I had an
irrational loathing of all words descended from the root "Document". I
can listen to fingers screeching on the chalkboard all day, but all
words derived from "Document" make my skin crawl. (Not a great problem
for a tech writer to have, huh?). I write around the D-word at every
opportunity. You will find the word in NONE of my deliverables! It's
overly generic, overused, and not at all clear in most cases. Why call
something a "Document", when a more descriptive term (Reference, Guide,
Manual) no doubt exists?
Less personally, when applied as part of a job description, to me,
"Document..." implies that one's career is focused on the "development
of documents" - in other words, someone who cranks out generic pieces of
paper. It's analogous, to me, with calling a cook a "food product
processor", or calling a musician a "purveyor of musical material".
Would you call a surgeon a "human tissue reassembler"?
Call me anything - Tech Writer, Info Developer, even Ex-Convict for all
I care. If you put any variant of "Document" in my job title, I'll yakk