Technical Writing

Yes, it does actually.

Just because you're smart, or you understand science well, doesn't mean you can write.

In fact, MOST smart science types are absolutely horrific at writing. If you tell them to write a brief 10 page outline of how a car works, they'll send you a 50 page document with the first page calling you an idiot for thinking it's possible to briefly describe how a car works, then the other 49 pages will be rambling about how the natural logarithm works with electricity, interspaced with jokes nobody gets about battlestar galactica or something.

I'm not exaggerating by the way.

This is why technical writers exist. They're there to formulate dork's ideas into a coherent, easily understandable form.l

>>9190104
As a succesful STEMfag, I can tell you most actual STEMfags (at least at respectable universities) aren't usually even that into shitty sci-fi. The one who work and/or study in really good STEM departments actually tend to be pretty /lit/ when it comes to their tastes in art.

>interspaced with jokes nobody gets about battlestar galactica or something

lmao

>the other 49 pages will be rambling about how the natural logarithm works with electricity,

>>9190123
and?

Most literature profs I know can't write for shit either. Being into lit, and being able to write are pretty different things.

Check out the critique threads here, for starters.

>>9190104
Being able to write a concise microwave manual = next Hemingway?

>>9190141

It's not really the same thing, but you can definitely take some lessons from hemingway's sparse style if you want to learn to write technical.

By the way, MOST companies don't actually hire technical writers, which is why most microwave manuals you'll read are awful, and are written by somebody who doesn't even understand english.

>>9190104
Not sure of the validation here, but I laughed more than once. >>9190129

>>9190004
Yes.
No.

it's a different skill set, being able to simplify complex(ish) systems and processes into brief, simple ideas. most STEM folks sperg out and either ramble on for far longer than what's necessary or speak on a level too far above layman's terms.

I eat lunch with one of the technical writers at work pretty regularly.
He has a degree in English, and used to teach High School English.

So I guess it does require some "talent", or least know-how.

literary talent is less useful than some journalism training. if you can apply the inverse pyramid lead to a text, that makes it more readable than throwing in obscure literary references, metaphors and intertextuality that shows you've read Shakespeare.

Kind of unrelated but when I feel hopelessly disconnected from someone's technical explanation of something I like to pretend they're having a psychotic break and elaborating on something completely unreal

Is technical writing ever bad? Ex: Sheldon.

How do you tell a robotic bf that "I want to insert my reproductive organ into your vagina and have coitus with you" is not sexy? How do you explain to those who speak, think, and write solely in technical terms?