A person from almost any field of academia could obtain a degree in professional writing, and finding a definition for a field with this amount of flexibility can prove to be a challenge. Many argue over the semantics and inflection of the term technical writing, with some focusing on the technical aspects while others focus more towards writing. As Jo Allen says, "...We cannot seem to agree on the parameters of the discipline" (70). I would argue that you cannot view these two parts of the term separately, but instead need to analyze them together. If you only analyze a single term, you are losing a great deal of context that makes the field of technical writing so dense for those who jump into it. Yes, you could choose to view the field as a specific and restricted form of writing, or as a technological form of writing, but this blanket statement takes away from the strengths of the field: cooperation.
The field of technical writing the melding of two separate disciplines, one involving technology and the other involving humans. The technical aspects allows humans to go beyond simple literary and physical analysis, but the technology would be pointless without the human element of writing. As Carolyn Miller said in regards to Aristotle's notions that science is beyond human intentions and emotions: "The most uncomfortable aspect of this non-rhetorical view of science is that it is a form of intellectual coercion: it invites us to prostrate ourselves at the windowpane of language and accept what Science has demonstrated" (18). Science and technology do play large roles in the technical writing field, but classifying technical writing as exclusively technology, as per David Dobrin, is undercutting the limits of human knowledge and understanding. On the reverse, however, simply having humans write would not classify a piece of technical writing. This bare necessity would more than likely just classify as writing, or possibly literature. Technology gives extra tools to those who choose to write technically, and human imagination and emotion gives shape to this cold technology while putting forward information in a context where it can be understood by a mass audience.
My internship with Integrity Home Care and Hospice provides a unique perspective into this notion of balance between the technical and the biological. To put it bluntly, a computer with the right programs and processing power could do the entirety of my job. I take numbers from one system, combine them with numbers of another system, and then put forward the final results into a sheet that will be sent up the chain to people with more power than myself. However, a computer that would be capable of this feat would not be able to understand what it's doing. I understand that my information is being translated to be interpreted, and as such I can manipulate formatting, add images, and otherwise follow common elements of style in order to present the information to people who can then understand it and spread it. A computer would simply layout the information as cleanly as possible in several rows of 0s and 1s, and a human by themselves wouldn't be able to handle this level of information on such a large scale or on such a short time frame. Beyond moving and presenting data, I also write instructional materials on these processes. These manuals are designed for those with no knowledge of the processes, and are geared for those who will follow me in my position so that I don't have to physically train them. Computers do not have this awareness, and certainly couldn't create a training manual geared towards an audience. It's a weird symbiotic relationship between man and technology that makes technical writing unique, and that is why people from both a technological and a humanities background can succeed as professional and technical writers.
No comments:
Post a Comment