I'm typing a second paper for a history class, and in my first paper, the professor criticized my opening introduction, but when I go back to look at it, I'm not sure what he meant. Lately I've been so unsuccessful with typing papers, I'm questioning everything I type. Hopefully someone can help me with this.
Anyways, my most recent paper, I had to read an article by an author named Brands. So when I was introducing my paper, I wrote:
"In reading Brands' essay, American national interest has three main components..." to which the professor wrote: "Rule No. 1: Write for a general audience. I know who Brands is....your roomate[sic] may not"
At first, I thought he meant I didn't need to mention the author (or title) since he assigned it paper, so he knew what I was referring to, and didn't need to reiterate it in my paper. Now, I'm wondering if he meant I should be more specific. Should my introduction have been: "In reading H.W. Brands' 'American Foreign Policy', American national interest has three main components..." So I would be mentioning the author's full name, as well as title of the article.
Another example, the book I had to read for this next paper is called An American Ascendancy by Michael Hunt. So when I type this paper, should I reference the full title and author in the introduction? This seems like an elementary question, but I've been doing so poorly on papers lately, I need to reexamine what I'm doing wrong.