Throughout my writing, one significant way in which I tried to generate inquiry was by focusing on a part of a conversation I want to further explore and drawing the audience's attention to it. When discussing the conversation around John Hersey's Hiroshima, it was a straightforward to assume the text would be criticized by people who disagreed with the text's core belief that killing innocent people is wrong, but it seemed important to also note that someone might agree with that core belief and agree with many of Hersey's points, but still have criticisms of his text.
This is most directly focused on in response assignments such as Reading Response 2, since one of the goals was to find a direction in which to continue my research for the topic.
Excerpt from Reading Response 2:
In comparison, this drawing of attention to criticism is less emphasized in the final version of Paper 1, since it is not the focus of the analysis. In the paragraph describing why the article might not have changed people's minds, criticism received by Hiroshima from an anti-war perspective is mentioned as a relevant factor, but not one that is certain to have reduced its impact.
Excerpt from Paper 1 Final Draft: