Jabberwock
One of my favorite authors is Lewis Carroll - although I’ve been fascinated by his work since childhood, it was studying the Philosophy of Language at the University of Pittsburgh that really laid the foundation for my affection for the author of Alice in Wonderland, Through the Looking Glass, and less well known books such has his The Game of Logic. Carroll was actually a Mathematics professor and a logician and his work is loaded with allusions to the way in which we take language for granted. Naturally, examples from his whimsical stories found their way into my professor’s illustrations, coming as they did from the British philosophical tradition.
What does all this have to do with Technical Communications? Quite a lot, actually. Technical editors are constantly required to edit and revise pieces that they don’t fully understand - or even have much information about. That’s part of the game. For example, suppose you received this gem to turn into something readable:
Naming and Referencing Conventions
Arrow elements are labeled but not named. Names for box elements are optional. Names can be assigned to box elements (states, data-stores and module) as desired. Boxes can be left unnamed if they are not referenced in an expression and their name is not important for the clarity of the specification. Box names can be non unique. However, two box elements with the same ancestor cannot have the same name. Box elements with the same name are distinguished from one another by preceding their names with their ancestors’ names until their hierarchical path is unique.
Here we have something that sounds, well…- like something right out of the Through the Looking-Glass. Compare with this poem that Alice discovers in a book:
`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
“Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!”
He took his vorpal sword in hand:
Long time the manxome foe he sought –
So rested he by the Tumtum tree,
And stood awhile in thought.
And, as in uffish thought he stood,
The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame,
Came whiffling through the tulgey wood,
And burbled as it came!
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back.
“And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!’
He chortled in his joy.
`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
Poor Alice! - when she first reads the poem she is alone and has no help from anyone - she reads it assisted with nothing but her own native interpretation of the poem. Beyond that, Alice’s reaction to the poem is what most experienced technical writers eventually learn to say:
“It seems very pretty,” she said when she had finished it, “but it’s RATHER hard to understand!” (You see she didn’t like to confess, even to herself, that she couldn’t make it out at all.)
How typical - none of us likes to admit that we don’t understand half the stuff we’re required to write about - but that’s part of the game. However, even more important than that minor cover-up, is the fact that experienced writers realize that in order to get the job done, they have to develop a healthy sense of “tolerance of ambiguity“. if they want to complete the assignment before the product is actually released, they must look the other way when it comes to trying to fully understand everything they are writing about - there are some things that will always be beyond the writer’s grasp. Next time, we’ll look at what we CAN do with pieces like this, other than pretend to understand them.