Clear Windows

Photo from
Andersen Windows

I teach writing at the college level. Not creative writing (though I have taught creative nonfiction… once). I teach expository writing, persuasive writing, professional writing, technical writing, writing about science, research writing, just about any other kind of writing – and I am in the process of working with every department on our campus to develop writing goals for their majors. So when I say something like “clarity in writing is important,” I have a bit of expertise behind me.

Clarity isn’t a simple concept. Each of us says and does things that we think are perfectly clear but that others find confusing. Clarity involves cognition and perception, as well as the contexts in which texts are both written and read. At a minimum, a writer has to know the audience and the situation if she has any hope of being clear.

Now for the irony: Our windows aren’t clear. We are one or two steps from a Purchase & Sale Agreement, but we’re stuck on the windows (yes, our windows are stuck, too).

Problem 1: Casement vs. Double-Hung
As long as we were picking and everything was equal, I wanted double-hung, tilt-wash windows. Carl did some research and found that Andersen 400-series is worth the investment. So we put that in our addendum of changes to the specs and plans fairly early in the process. In response, we heard about problems with sizing and getting the Andersen brand (to which we said “equivalent is fine”), but we didn’t hear anything about a requirement that the windows be casement until a few days ago. And even then, I thought that the requirement only referred to the windows on either side of the picture window we’re putting in place of the fireplace.

It has taken about four or five email exchanges for Carl and I to understand that the reason Gary, Mike’s realtor, has been saying “casement windows,” instead of double-hung, is because the builder’s plans list casement windows. I am guessing that this means that the plans would have to be significantly altered if double-hungs were used.

If someone had said, “Look at the plan. See that box in the upper right corner. Look at the list there. They almost all say casement. If you want to have double-hung, here is what would have to happen…,” then I would have understood much sooner.

Sometimes it’s helpful to speak in short, simple sentences, even to those of us who work in language all the time. Remember what I said about context? In this context, I am out of my depth. I have research expertise, but I don’t know house-building lingo, my ability to read a floor plan is amateur, and I don’t know what to be on the lookout for. With just a bit more information, I could have understood the problem.

I still don’t know for sure why the windows can’t be changed out, but at this point, I’m ok with casements. I just want windows that work and that I can clean relatively easily (not that I clean windows often, mind you). Carl has decided he’s ok with this, too.

First problem solved.

Problem 2: 400-Series vs. Energy Star
We have been told a number of things about the 400-series windows. The most recent is that Andersen doesn’t make casement windows in the 400 series. Color me very confused, since I can find that information easily online.

As a replacement, we’re told that Andersen has an “Energy Star” line that will be used. The upcharge is $10,000. Now, I’m not only confused, but I’m also bothered.

My understanding is that all Andersen windows are Energy Star efficient. The company has had the certification for more than 10 years. And there is no “Energy Star” line. A-Series. E-series (E for “Eagle”). 400-series. 200-series. 100-series. No “Energy Star” series. Or, more accurately I believe, all Energy Star.

In our face-to-face meeting, Mike said he normally uses the 200-series. The 400-series is one step up, and that’s what we want. If we’re not getting that step up, I’m not interested in paying an upcharge.

I am certain that the problem is confusion, not an attempt to get something past us. Neither Mike nor Gary has struck me as that kind of person at all. So I’m back to clarity.

I sent an email to Gary saying the Problem 1 was solved, but asking for clarification on Problem 2. In that email, I tried to lay out my confusion as clearly as possible. I haven’t heard back yet, so I don’t know whether I succeeded.

If Gary doesn’t understand, though, I will have to try again – because the onus for clarity is mostly on the person trying to communicate.