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:(Fwd) Re: Using Humor Judiciously From:Sue Heim <sue -at- RIS -dot- RISINC -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 21 May 1996 08:35:03 PST
I checked with Greg, and he really wanted his reply to go to the
entire list, so... here it is!
...sue
-------------------------
Sue Heim
Research Information Systems
Carlsbad, California USA
Email: Sue -at- ris -dot- risinc -dot- com
------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 17:31:06 -0700
From: Greg Taggart <gtaggart -at- fiber -dot- net>
Organization: Taggart Company
To: Sue Heim <sue -at- RIS -dot- RISINC -dot- COM>
Subject: Re: Using Humor Judiciously
Sue Heim wrote:
> Eric wanted to know:
> > I'd be interested in hearing comments from anyone
> > about judicious use of humor in documentation
> > or books. <snip>
> > I know I'd rather have some humor in a book I
> > buy, but wouldn't want it in the "documentation"
> > for a product. What do the rest of you think?
> I absolutely hate humor in documentation for software and/or hardware
> products. Even tho I write manuals for a living, I still want to be
> able to pick up someone else's manual and find what I want without
> having to wade thru "funnies." I think humor has a place in the
> "dummies" books, as Eric stated, especially if it can make a
> hard-to-learn topic more fun. Otherwise... ugh! Of course, this is
> only my personal preference (I always feel as if I'm being "talked
> down to" when I read user docs with lots of humor or cartoons in
> 'em)...
> ...sue
> -------------------------
> Sue Heim
> Research Information Systems
> Carlsbad, California USA
> Email: Sue -at- ris -dot- risinc -dot- com
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Post Message: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
> Get Commands: LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU with "help" in body.
> Unsubscribe: LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU with "signoff TECHWR-L"
> Listowner: ejray -at- ionet -dot- net
I understand what you're saying and agree with it to a point.
However, it is also true that I've sometimes felt ignored by the
technical writer when I pick up a software manual to read. Instead
of "talk[ing] down to me," they talk past me, over my head, and around
me. (For those that don't know me -- and that would include all of you --
I'm relatively new to the computer world, but aging quickly and well, I
hope.)
I'm an attorney by education and have read some pretty incomprehensible
writing in my day (and have probably authored my share). I find way too
many software manuals impenetrable. Having said that, I want to stress
that I'm not sure I could do better. However, if software manuals are no
place for humor, they at least ought to be interesting and engaging. (A
good rule of thumb: The less technical writers write like a social
scientist, the better they are communicating.) There, have I offended
everybody?
I'm not ever sure this was worth two cents.
Greg Taggart
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Post Message: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
Get Commands: LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU with "help" in body.
Unsubscribe: LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU with "signoff TECHWR-L"
Listowner: ejray -at- ionet -dot- net
