I'll preface this by saying that I believe this book is intended for middle-, upper-middle-, and upper-class students who graduated from Ivy League or top-tier private colleges. One of my main critiques was that it doesn't adequately address low-income students, students of color, students who are the children of immigrants, or first-generation college students on these campuses. However, I do think that the mentality that Deresiewicz describes in the first two chapters is a common one on "top-tier" campuses like my own, especially amongst middle-, upper-middle-, and upper-class students. In fact, that's where the strength of this book lies: its accurate description of and willingness to talk about the very real problems that plague these particular students on these campuses. The impacts on mental health are very real, and cannot simply be brushed off or ignored. At the same time, these issues are not the only ones that exist on college campuses, and are exacerbated for those students I know who struggle to eat or house themselves or obtain school supplies during the semester while also struggling with the mental health implications of being on a high-achieving campus. Deresiewicz does not do a good enough job of acknowledging this.

On top of that, I think that there were a good many parts of this book that assume that all students in the middle-, upper-middle-, and upper-class categories come from generational wealth and are white, some things that are, at least in my case, not at all true. Firstly, Dereciewicz often argues that students need to study what they love, be that English or History or the fine arts. While he does say that getting a well-paying job is important, that's mostly an afterthought. As a South Asian-American woman with an immigrant single mom, I'll be the first to tell you that getting a job that allows me to support myself is the main reason that I'm going to college, not "self-actualization." Secondly, Deresiewicz's argument that all students need to study the great literature and philosophy of the Western canon, and the Western canon only, was downright offensive. I go to a school that teaches a Great Books curriculum, and while I do love it, I have also come away feeling that I am an afterthought and not at all well read because of the emphasis on dead white men's writing. Additionally, Deresiewicz's ideas that you should attend a school with socioeconomic and racial diversity, and also that the best colleges to attend are small, private liberal arts colleges, seem to run counter to one another. I visited a couple small liberal arts schools when I was in high school, and immediately decided not to apply because of how uncomfortable I was amidst the overwhelming whiteness and exorbitant wealth that exists on these campuses (more so than in the Ivy League, which at the very least gives out need-based financial aid--another thing that Deresiewicz, confusingly, argues against).

I did love the section on the value of the arts (I think chapter 8), and Deresiewicz's discussion of the ways in which literature, music, and painting allow us to capture the whole messiness of human life in a way neither the natural nor social sciences can ever account for. It is an essay that many people, especially those that look down on the arts while enjoying their favorite books and TV shows, need to read. But I think that the discussion of the arts and the discussion of mental health on these college campuses were really the only strengths of this book: Deresiewicz ultimately never tries to understand the perspective of anyone who isn't a white man who comes from generations of wealth and education, and his book is less convincing because of it.