The concept of the midlife crisis is well known today, but originally it was thought to occur at around the age of 35.

Naomi Wynter-Vincent, assistant professor in Innovation and English at Northeastern University in London, has been examining the origins of the midlife crisis and questioning whether the 60-year-old idea still stands up to present-day scrutiny.

The term was coined by Elliott Jaques, a Canadian psychoanalyst, social scientist and management consultant who moved to Britain after the Second World War. He first defined it in a 1965 paper, Death and the Midlife Crisis, published in the International Journal of Psychoanalysis. Drawing on the lives of creative figures such as Dante and Renaissance artists, Jaques argued that their productivity or style of work often shifted between their mid- to late-30s.

Over time, the phrase entered popular culture, often associated with sudden career changes or extravagant purchases, such as sports cars, as people reassessed their lives.

In a recent presentation at the Haunted Modernities, Present Pasts and Spectral Futures conference, hosted by Falmouth University in Cornwall and co-sponsored by Northeastern University, Wynter-Vincent revisited Jaques’ theory. She noted that Jaques was influenced by the biblical notion of a lifespan of “three score years and ten”, which placed midlife at about 35.

She explained that while Jaques admitted it would not necessarily occur precisely at that age, the definition feels outdated in 2025. Many people now delay starting families, buying homes, and even retirement, meaning that 35 is no longer viewed as the midpoint of life.

However, Wynter-Vincent also highlighted weaknesses in Jaques’ argument. His data relied heavily on the lives of “great men” rather than empirical studies, and his work largely ignored women, whose careers may be shaped by factors such as child-rearing or perimenopause. She also stressed that there is little robust evidence to prove the midlife crisis as a universal phenomenon.

What intrigued Wynter-Vincent most, however, was Jaques’ interpretation of creativity at midlife. He argued that younger creativity was often raw and immediate, while midlife creativity, shaped by an awareness of mortality, became more deliberate and “sculpted”. This, he suggested, was a more mature and thoughtful form of expression.

Today, even the assumption that life has a natural limit is being questioned. Figures such as Bryan Johnson, the American entrepreneur behind the Don’t Die movement, are investing millions in anti-ageing regimes. Russian President Vladimir Putin has even claimed that advances in organ transplant technology could make people “younger, perhaps even immortal.”

While Wynter-Vincent doubts that such extreme cases align with Jaques’ theory, she argues that there is still value in his ideas. Rather than viewing midlife solely as a crisis, she suggests it can bring a deeper sense of purpose and creativity. Recognising limits, she says, does not necessarily diminish life, but can instead make it more meaningful.