Today, I REALLY need to decide which college I'm going to. MUST. Is IMPERATIVE. Cannot leave until I do! And what better place to do it than the blog? I shall now make a pro/con list, which will probably coincide with my recap. These two schools are as different as different can be.

AMHERST
PRO:
-Because of its really small size (1600 total), they give a lot of personal attention. The classes are really small and many of them are discussion-based. There are no graduate students, so the professors are all for the undergrads. They have a writing center, where you can go in and people (whose sole job is to help with papers) help you with your writing.
-REALLY nice dorms
-a LOT of financial aid; going there would make it really easy on my parents
-Open curriculum. No GE. Basically, I can take whatever I want, which I both like and dislike. I like it because, obviously, I am sick of science. But I dislike it because I think that it lets students get away with just doing what they're good at and not pushing themselves to explore new things or challenge themselves with things they know they're not good at. But, I know that I could force myself (or my dad will force me) to not just stay with the humanities and social sciences, but to take sciences and maths, no matter how much I dislike them.
-Most people get into their graduate school of choice
-Their music policy: As long as you take one music class, the college will pay for your music lessons for all four years for your instrument of choice. Holy crap!!!
-They basically throw money at you as long as you have a pretty legitimate reason.
-Obviously, good education.
-They really encourage study abroad and give a lot of money for that.
-I really got the sense from talking to all the students that they really push you to try new things. Most people don't do the majors they originally declared, and they're really open with clubs and organizations.
-Because they have the Five College thing, I could take classes at any of the four other colleges around (with good transportation provided) if Amherst doesn't offer anything, such as international relations.
-It's cold, but it's not as bad as Chicago.
-Semester system, which, no matter what Kathleen and the Chicago kids say, is better than the quarter system in my opinion.

CON:
-Location. It's 1.5 hours away from Boston, which isn't bad, but the immediate area is very, very in the middle of nowhere, especially by Southern California standards. I don't think it'd really matter that much to me, since I'm used to staying at home and doing nothing, and it's really easy for me to have fun without clubbing or actually going somewhere, since all I think you need for fun is good company. And because it's rather isolated, there's always something going on. But I do think that by my senior year, I might get sick of it.
-It seemed a little cliquey. The jocks (even though they're division III) and the singers seemed to be on a higher level. Lots of rich, prep school kids, which is what Amherst really is in the end.
-Not very diverse, at all.
-No minors, which is slightly annoying.
-Only 1600 students. Total. It might feel stifling, though they do have the other four colleges within 10 miles of each other, which means that there are LOADS of other students around.
-Cafeteria food is not so happy.
-A lot of people I talked to said that they feel like the students are really passive, as in they don't really get into war protests or anything like that. They like to discuss and argue, but they don't really put their words into actions.

UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
PRO:
-They're nerdy. I am nerdy. They are famous for their intensely academic atmosphere, which I really like. People are happy to sit there and debate Kantian ethics for hours. The professors really make the students work hard, though I don't know anyone from Troy who goes there because I'd really like to know if it's harder than Troy, which I somehow doubt. But yeah, I really liked the intellectual atmosphere.
-The food is better than Amherst's.
-More majors to choose from and they have minors. Bigger school = more options
-The location. Obviously. It's in the South Side of Chicago, which is a rather shady area, but within Hyde Park itself it isn't bad and as long as you're not stupid, it's not that bad. They also have the second largest security force in the world, other than the Vatican. But I mean seriously, it's 20 minutes away from downtown Chicago.. Michigan Avenue. It's so culturally rich and there's so many things always to be explored.
-Because it's in Chicago, there are so many job and internship opportunities. I met a girl who was working for the state attorney of Illinois and another guy who was going to be an associate editor for Penguin Books.
-An EXTREMELY rigid core curriculum, for which they are famous. Fifteen courses, in each of the subjects: humanities, social sciences, math and physical sciences, biological science, language. Though I might begrudge them most deeply, I'm sure after being subjected to them, people really are very well-rounded.
-Very deeply rooted in classical texts. They basically bombard you with Kant and Plato and Locke and all the rest and make you experts, which is really good (but also very difficult.)
-They're not big partiers. Greek life is about 10% and lots of people don't get drunk but still have fun.
-A really good debate team.
-The undergrad population isn't that big: between 4000 and 5000, which is very small for such a big school.
-The campus is absolutely gorgeous... with all that ivy creeping along everywhere.
-The most awesome bookstore ever. :D
-Barack Obama is on staff. :)

CON:
-It is a major research institution, and it is huge. It's got undergrads, grads, PhD students, researchers, two hospitals of its own, museums, etc. Thus, not as much personal attention as Amherst, and though undergrads can take the same classes as grad students, I still think there's probably more emphasis on their grad students.
-They really suck about aid. Grah.
-Dorms and facilities are nowhere near as nice as Amherst's.
-I can always apply here (or somewhere similar) after four years for grad school.
-South Side of Chicago's rather dangerous.
-The campus is HUGE. I felt so lost and confused walking around.
-LOTS OF PEOPLE SMOKE. Yes, petty concern, but it was REALLY ANNOYING walking around unable to breathe.
-Quarter system...

So essentially the question is: small and personal but rural or large and intellectual but not as nice?