Being a fill-in-the-blank writer restricts you.
Yes, there are varieties of writing – there is a big difference between what and how you would write for a technical manual and marketing material – but, if you are writer, shouldn’t you be able to do both? Styles may differ, but the fundamentals are the same.
I can see making a distinction between fiction and non-fiction, but beyond that I don’t see a benefit in identifying yourself as a specific kind of writer. In fact, it strikes me as detrimental. If you’re a “technical” writer, don’t be surprised if you’re not asked to work on marketing material. You are, after all, a humorless geek. You won’t be able to infuse your words with the vitality and charisma that is required.
Similarly, if you are business or marketing writer, you won’t be looked to for technical writing because, in this case, you exist in the world of diaphanous language and hoo-hah. You lack the seriousness for the exacting, impersonal text of technical writing.
Modifiers box you in. I don’t want to be in a box.
Honestly, one of the fun aspects of writing is the variety. In my case, I’ve written greeting cards. I’ve also written RFP responses. And I’ve edited technical manuals. And written radio ads.
Why would I want to be in a box?
In the end, I believe a writer should be able to write all these different types of writing because the process is the same: gather the information, including identifying who the audience is, and then start writing. If it’s a kind of writing you haven’t yet done, study examples of it to get a sense for the style and format – then decide whether or not to follow it or whether there is a better way. (The former is usually the way to go, but not always.)
Writing the same old thing gets boring. Writing that is diverse is exciting. That’s why when I refer to myself as a writer, I don’t use modifiers.
Follow Writelife on Twitter
