Although a big part of my life is working with words, I don't process them.
In the past I have used most of the major word processors -- Microsoft Word since version 3.0, several Lotus programs, Open Office, and some of the old DOS-driven oldies such as PC-Write and Leading Edge. I've fooled with Google Docs. My computer has AbiWord on it, but I seldom use it.
Sounds almost blasphemous, especially for a writer. Why wouldn't I be interested in a word processor that does everything, checks my spelling and grammar, offers tips with that little animated paper-clip dude, and makes my coffee?
Although I'm cheap, it's not a matter of cost. AbiWord and OpenOffice are free. It's not because I use an old, resource-challenged computer -- my word processor doesn't eat that many CPU cycles. And it's not because I don't know how to run the software -- not with my background.
Part of it is simplicity, but the biggest issue is flexibility. Very little of what I write finds itself on a printed page. If you do much work with a computer, you might find this to be true yourself.
Most of my writing shows up in the blogs I keep. Some will be sent as email. Quite a bit of it stays on the hard drive, as notes to myself. It's a very rare occasion when I'll need to print something. Maybe a business letter to someone who does not have a computer or email (all three of them), occasionally song lyrics or lists for some of my musician friends, and that's about it. I don't even own a printer, and I don't plan to get one any time soon. If it wasn't for all of my on-the-go notes written out on yellow legal pads or index cards, I'd have a paperless office.
There was a time when word processors were the greatest thing since the toilet seat. But those days are gone, and that breed of software is fast becoming passe.
OK, so how do I write?
On the computer I use a text editor. Think of Notepad that comes with your Windows installation -- and that's a poor example of an editor. There are no font settings to mess with. There is no spell check. It's just text. Chances are your files will be saved with the .txt suffix, which is a magical word in these parts.
Try this sometime. Send someone a document as an email attachment, written with your favorite word processor. Is your recipient able to read the thing when he gets it?
If he has the same version of Your Favorite Word Procesor as you do, then there's no problem. But if you wrote it in, say, OpenOffice 2.x and he only has Microsoft Word or OpenOffice 1.x, there may be a problem. He may or may not know what that .ods suffix means when he's used to .doc or .sxw, and there will be translation headaches. Back in my word processing days, I'd let the reader know what word processor I used and maybe include instructions on how to convert the document, but most people won't do that.
With a .txt document, there is no translation issue. Something written in .txt can be read and edited by any word processor without any effort at all. It can be uploaded into a blog, added to a Web site, or filed away. And without all the font parameters and formatting, the document takes up less space on your hard drive and takes less time to upload.
But don't I miss the spell checkers and other fancies?
Not really. Your spell checker merely determines whether a word is in the dictionary. OK. So you meant to type "from" and got "form" instead. Your spell checker is not human, it knows nothing other than whether the word is in the dictionary. It will miss that error, but your reader probably won't.
While spell-checkers are a marvelous convenience, I believe they do not help writers write. The software does all the work; it becomes less necessary to edit the document. Or at least that's the perception. In truth, with all these conveniences, Americans have regressed in their ability to spell, to write, to communicate.
What's worse, a WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get) word processor forces the writer to pay attention to how the document looks rather than what is being communicated. If anything, the whole process is bass-ackwards. When you write, you think about what you're trying to say first, then worry about how it looks. At least that's the intention.
After I'm done writing the document, I'll decide what I want to do with it. If it's for print, then paste it or open it in a word processor or LaTeX formatter. If it's going into an email or in the blog, I'll just paste it into Gmail or ScribeFire, whatever I want. Old-time computer operators call this the "workbench" approach -- get it written first, save it, then format it. If this sounds like an extra step, that's the idea. You're taking off your writer's hat and putting on your typesetter's hat, and those jobs should be separated.
On my Linux box I'll use one of several word processors. The one which I used for this blog entry is MetPad, a variation of the old "vi" that gives me all the mouse usability and a sackful of keyboard commands (and I find the commands a lot faster than moving my coffee cup out of the way to get to the mouse). But I'll also use Geany, Nedit, or several others.
Windows users may find themselves considerably behind the curve when it comes to text editors. I mentioned Notepad, and it's horrible. The default setting gives you no word wrap (a function I insist on), but if you hunt around in the menus you should be able to find it. Your Windows box may have WordPad, which is a lot more useful. I recommend that one. Or if you can get Scite, that's even better.
Part of why there's so much more choice among text editors with Linux users is because many of us are programmers. I myself am not, but I've written a few small shell scripts to automate a few functions and did a lot of work with home-brewed .bat files back in my DOS days. Text editors are designed more for programming, but don't let that throw you.
You can use those same industrial-strength text editors to write a letter to Grandma. Or dash off a short blog entry. Or maybe your next million-seller novel.
You might not even miss your word processor.