The Midlife Crisis vs. The Midlife Awakening: Why He Bought a Porsche While You Started Therapy
When a driven woman hits midlife, she tends to turn inward — toward therapy, toward meaning, toward honest reckoning. When her husband hits midlife, he often turns outward — toward new cars, younger attention, and the frantic churn of external fixes. This post explores the clinical reality of the male midlife crisis and the female midlife awakening, why they diverge so sharply, and what it means for the marriage caught in between.
- The Saturday Morning Divergence
- What Is the Midlife Transition?
- The Clinical Science of the Middle Passage
- How the Male Midlife Crisis Shows Up in Driven Women’s Marriages
- The Illusion of the External Fix
- Both/And: Holding Compassion Without Absorbing the Chaos
- The Systemic Lens: What Culture Refuses to Tell Men About Aging
- What Healing Actually Looks Like From Here
- Frequently Asked Questions
The Saturday Morning Divergence
It’s a Saturday in October, and Iona is standing in the kitchen at seven-thirty in the morning, still in the clothes she slept in. She’s forty-four, a litigation partner at a mid-sized firm, and she’s been in therapy for two years. Not crisis therapy — growth therapy. The kind where you arrive with a notebook and leave understanding something new about why you’ve been running on empty for the better part of a decade. She pours her coffee and reads the sticky note she left herself the night before: You don’t have to fix everything today.
Her husband, forty-seven, pulls the tarp off the vintage car in the driveway. He bought it three months ago without telling her. Sixty-two thousand dollars. He’s wearing a jacket she’s never seen before, slim-cut, the kind marketed to men twenty years younger. She watches him through the kitchen window, the way you watch something you’re trying to understand but can’t quite translate.
He hasn’t mentioned the car purchase in therapy — partly because he quit therapy six weeks ago, calling it “a lot of talking that doesn’t go anywhere.” He’s been staying out late on weeknights. He’s started using phrases like “I just need to feel alive.” He looks at Iona’s therapy books on the nightstand with something that reads like contempt.
In my work with clients, what Iona is living through is one of the most disorienting experiences a driven, ambitious woman can face in a marriage: the moment she realizes she and her husband have hit the same developmental threshold and responded in opposite directions. She’s going in. He’s going out. And the gap between those two trajectories is widening every week.
This post is about that gap — what it means clinically, what it costs relationally, and how to navigate it without losing yourself in the process.
What Is the Midlife Transition?
Midlife is not a cliché. It’s a developmental imperative — a structural pivot point in the arc of a human life that has been documented across cultures, generations, and clinical frameworks for as long as people have been paying serious attention to how human beings grow.
Daniel Levinson, PhD, developmental psychologist and researcher at Yale University, spent years conducting the longitudinal research that became The Seasons of a Man’s Life. Levinson mapped the midlife transition as a passage typically occurring between ages 40 and 45, in which a person must confront what he called the gap between the Dream — the vision of life we form in young adulthood — and the reality of the life we’ve actually built. This confrontation is not optional. It comes for everyone, whether they’re ready or not. The question is only whether a person meets it consciously or acts it out unconsciously.
What Levinson found is that the midlife transition requires a person to grieve what didn’t happen, integrate parts of themselves that were suppressed in service of the first-half-of-life agenda, and begin the re-authoring of a life oriented toward authenticity rather than achievement. It is, in his framing, one of the most significant developmental tasks of human existence.
A developmental period identified by Daniel Levinson, PhD, developmental psychologist and Yale University researcher, typically occurring between ages 40 and 45, during which an individual must reconcile the gap between their youthful Dream and their actual life. This transition requires grieving unlived possibilities, integrating suppressed aspects of self, and reorienting one’s life toward greater authenticity. Levinson identified it as one of the most significant developmental passages in adulthood.
In plain terms: Around forty, something shifts. The script you wrote for your life in your twenties stops fitting. You can either sit with the discomfort of that — let it crack you open and point toward something truer — or you can panic and reach for whatever seems to promise a shortcut back to feeling young. That choice shapes the entire second half of life.
The concept also has a companion term that has become cultural shorthand — the “midlife crisis” — which was not invented by pop psychology. It was coined in 1965 by Elliott Jaques, PhD, Canadian psychoanalyst and organizational theorist, based on his clinical observation that many of his patients in their late thirties and forties experienced a profound disruption in identity, purpose, and sense of time. Jaques described the crisis as arising from the first conscious confrontation with personal mortality: the realization that more life has been lived than remains. He observed that the way a person responds to this confrontation — through depression, acting out, or genuine creative re-engagement — determines the psychological trajectory of the second half of life.
What neither Levinson nor Jaques could have fully predicted was the pronounced gender split in how this transition plays out in contemporary marriages: driven women tending to channel it inward, and many men defaulting to the behavioral patterns that now define the cliché.
The Clinical Science of the Middle Passage
The most clinically rigorous framework for understanding what’s happening when a man hits this threshold comes from Jungian analysis. James Hollis, PhD, Jungian analyst and author of The Middle Passage: From Misery to Meaning in Midlife, argues that the midlife transition is fundamentally an invitation to individuation — Jung’s term for the lifelong process of becoming, as fully as possible, the particular person one actually is. The Middle Passage, in Hollis’s framing, is the point where the first-adulthood persona — the identity assembled to meet parental and societal expectations — can no longer hold. It begins to crack under its own weight. And when it cracks, what’s underneath is often terrifying.
Carl Jung himself, the Swiss psychiatrist and founder of analytical psychology whose collected works span decades of clinical observation, wrote extensively about the second half of life as the stage where the psyche demands honesty. The things suppressed in youth — vulnerability, tenderness, the unlived life, fear of death — begin to assert themselves. Jung observed that people who refuse this reckoning don’t coast comfortably through midlife; they act out, regress, or become rigid. The psyche’s demand for integration doesn’t go quiet just because it’s being ignored.
A term used by James Hollis, PhD, Jungian analyst and author of The Middle Passage: From Misery to Meaning in Midlife, to describe the psychological crossing that occurs when the first-adulthood persona — built to satisfy external expectations — becomes inadequate to contain the full self. The Middle Passage demands that a person grieve the unlived life, confront mortality, and begin constructing an identity rooted in authentic inner authority rather than external validation.
In plain terms: The person you became in your twenties to survive and succeed was never the whole of you. Midlife is when the rest of you shows up and asks to be let in. You can open the door (awakening) or you can spend a decade trying to nail it shut (crisis).
Richard Rohr, Franciscan priest and author of Falling Upward: A Spirituality for the Two Halves of Life, writes about this same threshold from a contemplative tradition. Rohr argues that the first half of life is necessarily about building a container — identity, career, family, status — but that the second half of life is about discovering what the container is actually for. He observes that men, in particular, are culturally trained to keep building the container indefinitely, and that when the container no longer satisfies, many don’t know any other move. They build a different container.
What links all of these frameworks — Levinson’s developmental psychology, Hollis’s Jungian analysis, Jung’s analytical psychology, and Rohr’s contemplative theology — is a shared clinical observation: the midlife transition is not a malfunction. It’s a threshold. And the man who buys the sports car and starts texting someone twenty years younger isn’t broken. He’s frightened, and he doesn’t have the internal language or the relational scaffolding to do anything other than run.
A concept developed by Carl Jung, Swiss psychiatrist and founder of analytical psychology, referring to the lifelong psychological process through which an individual integrates all aspects of the self — including those previously suppressed, denied, or projected onto others — to become as fully as possible the particular person they are. Jung viewed individuation as the fundamental task of the second half of life, requiring a willingness to confront the shadow, acknowledge mortality, and release the first-adulthood persona.
In plain terms: Becoming yourself — the whole of yourself, including the parts you buried — is the actual work of the second half of life. A man who can’t do that work doesn’t just stagnate. He tends to create chaos, because the unlived self makes demands whether or not you’re willing to hear them.
Understanding this framework matters enormously when you’re the woman sharing a house with a man who is clearly in the throes of this transition. Because it means his behavior, however destructive, isn’t random. It has a structure and a logic, even when it looks like chaos. And understanding that structure is the first step toward responding to it with both clarity and appropriate boundaries rather than simply absorbing the wreckage.
How the Male Midlife Crisis Shows Up in Driven Women’s Marriages
In my work with clients navigating this terrain, a handful of recognizable patterns emerge so consistently that I want to name them explicitly. Not because naming them is the same as solving them, but because many driven, ambitious women have spent years wondering whether they’re imagining things, overreacting, or somehow causing what they’re watching unfold.
You’re not imagining it. Here’s what the male midlife crisis actually tends to look like inside a marriage.
He becomes hyper-critical of your aging while ignoring his own. This one is almost universal. He comments on your body, your face, your energy level — often with a contempt he’d deny if you named it. Meanwhile he’s dressing younger, investing in his own appearance obsessively, and measuring himself against men half his age. The double standard isn’t incidental. It’s a projection: he’s terrified of his own aging and he’s found it easier to locate that terror in you.
He resents your growth. If you’re in therapy, reading, building, becoming — his resentment will find ways to communicate itself. He’ll dismiss your therapist as someone “putting ideas in your head.” He’ll mock your books. He’ll call your boundaries “changes” said in a tone that makes it clear he means “problems.” Because your willingness to look inward is a standing indictment of his refusal to do the same. Your growth is a mirror, and he doesn’t like what he sees.
He creates financial or social chaos. The sports car is the meme, but the reality is often more corrosive: a sudden business venture funded with shared assets, an obsessive new hobby that consumes entire weekends and significant money, a social world that excludes you and tilts toward people twenty years younger. These aren’t just hobbies. They’re infrastructure for a different life he’s auditioning without telling you he’s auditioning it.
He oscillates between contempt and neediness. One week he seems to want out of the marriage entirely. The next week he’s clinging, wanting reassurance, acting as though if you could just love him in the right way, everything would settle. This oscillation is exhausting and disorienting by design — not intentionally, but structurally. The crisis itself creates this push-pull. He doesn’t know what he wants. He knows he’s in pain and he doesn’t know where the pain is coming from.
Iona, from the opening, lived all four of these patterns simultaneously for fourteen months before she was able to name them clearly in our work together. She came in convinced she was the problem — that she’d grown “too much,” become “too independent,” pushed him away. It took sustained clinical work to help her see that what she was watching wasn’t a reaction to her growth. It was his own developmental crisis finding her as its nearest target.
If you recognize yourself in any of this, I want to offer you what I offered Iona: your growth didn’t cause this. You may have made his crisis more visible by contrast, but the crisis belongs to him. Understanding that distinction is not a small thing. It’s the beginning of the ability to respond rather than react.
The Illusion of the External Fix
The fundamental clinical problem at the center of the male midlife crisis is this: it is an attempt to solve an internal problem with an external solution. The pain is real — the existential weight of unmet longings, the confrontation with mortality, the hollow feeling of a first-adulthood identity that no longer fits — but the interventions are aimed entirely at the outside.
New car. New body. New clothes. New attention. New project. New affair.
None of it works. Not because the things themselves are bad, but because they aren’t addressing the actual source of the pain. The void isn’t in the driveway. It’s not in the mirror or the inbox. It’s in the refusal to do the internal work that the Middle Passage requires. James Hollis, PhD, writes about this with characteristic precision: the crisis is what happens when a person tries to solve a spiritual and psychological problem with a consumer solution. The problem doesn’t care.
“Tell me, what is it you plan to do / with your one wild and precious life?”
Mary Oliver, “The Summer Day,” from New and Selected Poems
The reason I use this particular quote in this context is that it’s the question the Middle Passage is asking — the question that, when it arrives in mid-life, can crack the first-adulthood persona open into something larger. A man who can sit with that question, who can let it in rather than drown it out, is a man who can navigate the passage toward awakening. A man who can’t sit with it reaches instead for the external fix — the purchase, the affair, the crisis — as a way of generating enough noise to avoid hearing the question at all.
For the driven, ambitious woman married to this man, this is the central heartbreak: you can hear the question. You’ve been sitting with it, working with it, letting it reshape you. And he’s in the driveway polishing a car. The asymmetry isn’t about intelligence or care. It’s about psychological availability — and right now, he doesn’t have it.
That doesn’t mean he never will. But it does mean you can’t wait indefinitely, and you can’t lend him yours. Understanding the dynamics of the outgrown marriage is part of giving yourself the clarity to make honest decisions about your own path.
Both/And: Holding Compassion Without Absorbing the Chaos
Here is where I want to offer the Both/And framing that I return to again and again in my clinical work, because it’s the only framework that’s actually honest about what this situation requires of you.
It’s entirely possible to understand what’s happening to him — the existential terror, the poorly resourced response, the developmental crisis he didn’t ask for and doesn’t know how to navigate — AND to refuse to have your life dismantled by his response to it. These two things are not in conflict. They’re not even particularly difficult to hold simultaneously once you’ve named them clearly.
Compassion is not the same as compliance. Understanding his fear is not the same as absorbing its consequences. You can hold genuine empathy for what he’s going through and still say: I will not agree to remortgage the house. I will not pretend not to notice this. I will not minimize what your behavior is doing to our children. I will not put my own growth on hold to manage your regression.
Nisha knows this particular Both/And by heart. She’s forty-six, a cardiologist, and she’s been navigating her husband’s midlife crisis for almost two years. She told me once, in a session, that she spent the first eighteen months trying to be both his therapist and his wife — trying to hold space for his pain while also holding the household, the children, the finances, her practice, and her own grief. “I thought if I understood him well enough,” she said, “I could help him through it.”
The shift came when she realized that understanding what was happening clinically didn’t mean she was responsible for fixing it. She could see his crisis with clarity, name it with compassion, and still hold firm limits about what she would and wouldn’t allow into her home, her finances, and her emotional life. “I can feel sorry for him,” she told me, “and I can also protect myself. Those aren’t opposites.”
That distinction — between compassion and responsibility for outcome — is the one I want to leave with you from this section. You don’t have to choose between understanding him and protecting yourself. The Both/And framework says you’re allowed to do both at once. In fact, doing both at once is the only genuinely sane response to what you’re living through.
If you’re navigating this and need a structured framework for understanding your own patterns inside this dynamic, Fixing the Foundations — Annie’s self-paced course for driven women doing relational repair — addresses exactly this terrain.
The Systemic Lens: What Culture Refuses to Tell Men About Aging
We can’t look at the male midlife crisis without looking at the cultural infrastructure that creates it. Because this isn’t just a story about individual psychology. It’s a story about what our culture teaches men to value, how it prepares them — or catastrophically fails to prepare them — for the second half of life, and what it costs when that preparation is absent.
Our culture constructs male value almost entirely around what are fundamentally first-half-of-life currencies: physical strength, sexual vitality, professional dominance, earning power. These are all things that peak early and decline with age. The cultural message, absorbed from boyhood, is that a man’s worth is highest when he is young, strong, earning, and desired. There is almost no cultural counter-narrative about the value of wisdom, depth, mentorship, relational presence, or the kind of authority that comes only from having faced the interior life honestly.
This means that when a man reaches the midlife threshold and begins to feel those currencies depreciate — when his body changes, when younger men are rising around him at work, when his libido shifts, when mortality becomes not theoretical but felt — he has no map for what comes next. He hasn’t been handed one. The culture that trained him to perform virility and invulnerability doesn’t offer a graceful exit ramp into depth. It offers him the illusion that he can perform virility and invulnerability a little harder, a little longer, with a little more product or money or novelty, and the depreciation won’t catch him.
Richard Rohr’s framing in Falling Upward is useful here: most cultures offer elder figures — men who have crossed the second threshold and carry genuine wisdom about the second half of life. Modern Western culture has largely dismantled the structures that created and honored such figures. The result is a generation of men hitting midlife with no initiatory framework, no cultural permission to grieve what’s ending, and no roadmap for what a meaningful second half of life could look like beyond “do the first half louder.”
Your husband’s crisis is not just his personal failure. It’s also a structural failure — a failure of the culture to hand him anything useful when he arrived at this threshold. That doesn’t excuse the damage his behavior may be doing in your marriage and household. But it contextualizes it in a way that might allow you to be angry at the right things: not just him, but the system that sent him into this passage completely unprepared.
The executive coaching work I do with ambitious women often includes exactly this kind of systemic analysis — because understanding the water you’re swimming in is how you stop drowning in it.
What Healing Actually Looks Like From Here
If you’re in the marriage that’s been described in this post, I want to be honest with you about what I’ve seen across years of clinical work with women in exactly this situation. There are paths through. But they require clarity about what’s actually in your control and what isn’t.
You cannot initiate his awakening. You can invite, encourage, and point. But the Middle Passage is intrinsically an inside job. He has to decide to walk through it. No amount of excellent articles, perfectly delivered ultimatums, or strategic patience on your part will substitute for his own willingness to be honest with himself. Accepting this — really accepting it, not just intellectually but in the body — is genuinely hard, and it’s the work that needs to happen first.
You can protect your own psychological, financial, and relational stability. This means getting your own clinical support if you don’t already have it. It means ensuring your finances have appropriate protections. It means not putting your own growth on hold while you wait to see what he decides. Your midlife awakening doesn’t pause for his crisis. If anything, his crisis makes your own grounded development more urgent, not less.
You can hold the space with a clear-eyed time horizon. Many of the women I work with find it useful to give the situation a private time boundary — not necessarily an ultimatum delivered to him, but an honest internal reckoning: how long am I willing to do this? What would I need to see change for that answer to shift? This is different from issuing demands. It’s about your own clarity, your own self-respect, and your own willingness to stay engaged versus the actual limits of what you can sustain.
Couples therapy is worth attempting — with the right framing. Not as a repair project for the marriage, but as a structured space where the reality of what’s happening can be named in the presence of a third party. Some men who are deeply defended against self-reflection will engage in that context in ways they won’t in private conversation. Some won’t. But it’s worth knowing which one you’re dealing with. You can explore working with someone through a complimentary consult.
Know the difference between a man in a temporary crisis and a man who has chosen avoidance permanently. The Middle Passage, as Hollis notes, can last years. But there’s a difference between a man who is struggling, occasionally awful to be around, and ultimately moving — however haltingly — toward greater honesty, and a man who has decided, whether consciously or not, that the crisis life is the life he wants. The first is painful. The second is a different kind of decision entirely, and it warrants a different kind of response from you. If you’re trying to understand which you’re facing, the honest guide to loving someone you’ve outgrown speaks directly to that question.
You’re not required to make any decision today. But you’re also not required to make your own awakening smaller so that his crisis can take up more room. You deserve the full expansiveness of your own second half of life. The question worth sitting with — the question the Middle Passage is asking both of you, in different ways — is what that life actually looks like, and whether it’s one you can build together or separately.
The Strong & Stable newsletter returns to exactly these questions week after week — in the quiet, honest way that tends to be most useful when you’re in the middle of something this complex. If you’re not already there, it might be worth joining.
Whatever you’re carrying from what you’ve read here — I want you to know that driven, ambitious women have sat with exactly this question, this marriage, this divergence, and found their way through. That doesn’t mean the path is easy or that the outcome is guaranteed. But it does mean you’re not navigating something impossible, and you’re not navigating it alone.
THE RESEARCH
The patterns described in this article are supported by peer-reviewed research. Below are key studies that illuminate the clinical territory we’ve been exploring.
- Jennifer J Freyd, PhD, Professor of Psychology at the University of Oregon and originator of Betrayal Trauma Theory, writing in Journal of Trauma & Dissociation (2005), established that betrayal trauma—trauma perpetrated by someone the victim depends on—is associated with greater physical health problems and psychological distress than stranger-perpetrated trauma, because victims must often remain cognitively unaware of the betrayal to preserve the necessary attachment relationship. (PMID: 16172083). (PMID: 16172083)
- Patricia Novo Navarro, MD, psychiatrist at Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Barcelona, writing in Revista de Psiquiatría y Salud Mental (English Edition) (2018), established that over 25 years of research confirms EMDR’s efficacy for PTSD and its recognition as a WHO-recommended first-line treatment, with proposed mechanisms including working memory taxation and reconsolidation of traumatic memories during bilateral stimulation. (PMID: 26877093) (PMID: 26877093). (PMID: 26877093)
- Alexandra Comeau, MA, researcher in trauma-focused therapy at Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard, writing in Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy (2024), established that an online group-based IFS intervention for PTSD showed strong feasibility, acceptability, and promising reductions in PTSD symptom severity in a diverse urban community mental health population, supporting IFS’s potential scalability. (PMID: 38934934) (PMID: 38934934). (PMID: 38934934)
Q: How long does a male midlife crisis typically last?
A: Daniel Levinson’s research identified the midlife transition as typically spanning three to five years in its most acute phase. James Hollis’s clinical work suggests that the full Middle Passage — from initial disruption to meaningful re-orientation — can take longer, sometimes up to a decade, depending on whether and when a man begins engaging the internal work. For men who consistently avoid that work, the crisis behaviors can persist indefinitely, becoming a chronic pattern rather than a temporary passage.
Q: Is my growth and increasing independence making his crisis worse?
A: No — and this is one of the most important things to get clear about. His midlife crisis is not caused by your growth. What your growth does is make the contrast more visible. When you’re doing your internal work and he isn’t, the gap becomes harder for both of you to ignore. He may blame your changes for his discomfort, but the discomfort was already there. You didn’t create it. You’re just no longer providing cover for it.
Q: What’s the difference between a midlife crisis and a midlife awakening?
A: Both emerge from the same developmental threshold — the confrontation with mortality, the inadequacy of the first-adulthood identity, and the demand for a more authentic life. The difference is entirely in the direction of response. A crisis is an external response: buying things, chasing novelty, running from the interior confrontation. An awakening is an internal response: entering therapy, renegotiating values, building genuine depth. Both are painful. Only one actually leads anywhere.
Q: Should I try to convince him to go to therapy?
A: You can extend the invitation once, clearly and without pressure — naming what you’re seeing and why you think it might help. Beyond that, pursuing therapy is something only he can decide to do. Sustained pressure tends to activate defensiveness, which is the opposite of what you want. What you can do is get clear about what you need from the relationship and what you’re willing to continue tolerating in the absence of change. That clarity — held internally, communicated honestly — tends to be more effective than ongoing persuasion campaigns.
Q: Can a marriage actually survive a severe midlife crisis?
A: Yes — but only under specific conditions. Survival requires that he eventually engages the internal work the Middle Passage demands: genuine therapy, honest self-reflection, and a willingness to grieve the first-adulthood persona rather than simply replace it with new props. It also requires that you’ve been honest with yourself about what you’ve been willing to tolerate and why, so that any decision to stay is a genuine choice rather than a default. Marriages can come out of this stronger. But they don’t do so accidentally, and they don’t do so on your labor alone.
Q: Why does he seem to resent my therapy and personal growth?
A: Because your willingness to look inward holds up a mirror to his refusal to do the same. A woman in genuine therapeutic work carries a kind of authority that is difficult to dismiss, and he knows — on whatever level of awareness he’s currently functioning — that what you’re doing is the work he’s avoiding. Resentment is often the form that shame takes when it can’t be tolerated directly. His contempt for your growth is less about you and more about what your growth makes impossible for him to ignore.
Related Reading
Hollis, James. The Middle Passage: From Misery to Meaning in Midlife. Toronto: Inner City Books, 1993.
Levinson, Daniel J. The Seasons of a Man’s Life. New York: Ballantine Books, 1978.
Rohr, Richard. Falling Upward: A Spirituality for the Two Halves of Life. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2011.
Jaques, Elliott. “Death and the Mid-Life Crisis.” International Journal of Psychoanalysis 46, no. 4 (1965): 502–514.
Jung, Carl Gustav. “The Stages of Life.” In The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche, Collected Works, Vol. 8. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1960.
WAYS TO WORK WITH ANNIE
Individual Therapy
Trauma-informed therapy for driven women healing relational trauma. Licensed in 9 states.
Executive Coaching
Trauma-informed coaching for ambitious women navigating leadership and burnout.
Fixing the Foundations
Annie’s signature course for relational trauma recovery. Work at your own pace.
Strong & Stable
The Sunday conversation you wished you’d had years earlier. 20,000+ subscribers.
Annie Wright, LMFT
LMFT · Relational Trauma Specialist · W.W. Norton Author
Helping ambitious women finally feel as good as their résumé looks.
Annie Wright is a licensed psychotherapist (LMFT #95719) and trauma-informed executive coach with over 15,000 clinical hours. She works with driven, ambitious women — including Silicon Valley leaders, physicians, and entrepreneurs — in repairing the psychological foundations beneath their impressive lives. Annie is the founder and former CEO of Evergreen Counseling, a multimillion-dollar trauma-informed therapy center she built, scaled, and successfully exited. A regular contributor to Psychology Today, her expert commentary has appeared in Forbes, Business Insider, Inc., NBC, and The Information. She is currently writing her first book with W.W. Norton.
