Week 6: Post 2

See, for me it's so hard for me to understand why you would create a document that was ambiguous or that the audience could not understand. What purpose would it serve? Perhaps I am too narrow minded, but I suppose I view it in the same way some people consider writing certain books, like O.J.'s If I Did It. What would be the point in that? I guess what I'm trying to say is that if every document ever produced has a purpose, then it should meet the criteria of the expected audience. You don't go to a football game and expect a baseball game to break out, why would I expect my new phone manual to be littered with pretty colors and designs. I promise, once it has served its purpose it is going back in a box or in the trashcan never to be seen again. Why would a designer spend so much time on aesthetic visuals then?

With that said, I do agree with making things aesthetically appealing, and I'll even agree that the visual does not need to be entirely representative of the context. What I argue is that the overall presentation, specifically the text should be the main focus in technical documents. what I cannot understand is why you would want to make the context itself ambiguous. You read a novel for a challenge and enjoyment, you read a technical document with purpose and efficiency in mind. In regards to the idea about the Enron report having had the voices of the board of trustees heard, I completely agree with that, but that too would have been with purpose to aid the reader. There is a time and a place to challenge the audience, technical writing is meant to aid and assist.