Literary vs. Technical Writing: Substitutes vs. Standards for Reality

Abstract

This article proposes a means of characterizing the difference between technical and literary writing, involving a theory of representation in which these distinct writing types are comparable to distinct types of visual representation. Any difference is only intelligible relative to a background of similarlity, but recent discussions of technical writing emphasize its similarity to literature and ignore significant differences. Distinct types of line drawings replicate the literary/technical contrast in a visual medium. This arises from two factors: 1) the way in which the drawing/text is perceived by the viewer/reader, as a substitute or as a standard; and 2) the predominant type of detail in the drawing/text, iterative or contrastive. Literature is most effective if perceived as a substitute for reality, predominated by iterative detail. Technical writing is most effective if perceived as a standard for evaluating reality, predominated by contrastive detail.