I have extremely mixed feelings about this book.

On the one hand, it abounds with a plethora of great lines and passages. I eventually gave up the attempt to jot all of them down because it would most likely clutter up this review post. Those quotes are profoundly affecting, compelling one to engage in deep introspection regarding one's values, principles, and beliefs. Moreover, since the theme of madness in this book, narrated in a style that draws on Biblical references, is one that I can identify with.

However, on the other hand, the structure of this book poses an absolute challenge. It was only when I persisted until the end that the logical flow of this book started to make much better sense. Its disjointedness was wearing me down as a reader to a great extent.

Perhaps that was the intention of the author. After all, madness is indeed similar to disjointedness. But even so, my advice to all those who wish to attempt this book is that it is not easy, and the rewards it offers may not be suitable for everyone. Maybe I will revisit it at another time, and my perspective towards it will have changed.

This is an extremely creative piece of work. Wiesel has masterfully enabled readers to obtain an in-depth and psychoanalytical perspective on the protagonist.

Nevertheless, I had the impression that a significant portion of the content seemed to be included merely to fill space. As a result, the book became uninteresting at several points.

It's as if Wiesel, in his attempt to explore the protagonist's psyche thoroughly, sometimes overloaded the narrative with details that didn't contribute meaningfully to the overall story.

This led to a sense of stagnation and a lack of momentum in certain sections, causing the reader's attention to wane.

Despite this flaw, the creative aspects and the psychoanalytical insights provided by Wiesel still make this work worthy of consideration.

However, it could have been even more engaging if the content had been more tightly edited and focused.

Unreal.

Elie Wiesel is renowned for his Night trilogy, which is penned based on his harrowing experience as a concentration camp survivor. However, somehow I happened to read Twilight first.

Twilight is a far more fluid and poetic work. It features an older man, similar to Wiesel in being a survivor, who embarks on a quest to find his friend, a savior, and his God within a mental institution. In this institution, people believe they are certain figures from the Torah. By engaging in conversations with them while simultaneously recounting memories of his own life, Wiesel delves profound into the soul of this shattered Jewish man.

This book is truly beautiful, fascinating, and heartbreaking all at once. Ever since reading it, I have thought about it a great deal. I'm not entirely sure to whom I should recommend it, but if this brief description piques your interest even in the slightest, I highly encourage you to give it a try. You might be pleasantly surprised by the depth and beauty that lies within its pages.

It took me an entire day to complete this task. However, when I look at what I have accomplished, it feels as if it will take a lifetime to truly process and understand it all.

This experience has been absolutely incredible. The work I have done is so profound and meaningful that I can envision myself reading it over and over again, and each time I do, I am certain to discover something new and valuable.

It's as if there is an endless well of knowledge and inspiration within this piece, waiting for me to explore and uncover.

I am truly amazed by the depth and complexity of what I have created, and I look forward to the many times I will return to it in the future.

Mixed feelings indeed!

I found this to be a frustrating read for a significant portion of the time. The reason being that I was constantly left in a state of uncertainty, not having a clear idea of where the story was headed. Making sense of the narrative proved to be a rather arduous task. However, this was precisely the intended point!

The questions that Lipkin's experiences brought to the fore simply couldn't be answered in a manner that neatly 'made sense'. And the question of 'what about God in all this?' remains unanswerable. It is, therefore, entirely appropriate that it is left echoing throughout the book.

So, despite the fact that it was frustrating and, as a result, not a completely fulfilling read in the traditional sense, it is still a good book. It challenges our preconceived notions and forces us to grapple with complex and unanswerable questions, which is an important aspect of literature.

This story's narration was truly peculiar.

It had such an impact on me that it seemed to throw me off balance, tipping me sideways and causing me to see the world from an angle I had never before explored.

Wiesel's vivid description of his experience surviving the Holocaust is both incredibly powerful and deeply moving.

Through this, he shows the reader that the boundaries between madness and sanity are not as clear-cut as night and day. Instead, they lie in a mysterious realm of twilight, where the line between the two becomes blurred.

The beauty of this book lies in its ability to absorb the reader completely, while also breaking their heart with the harsh realities of the Holocaust.

It has given me a profoundly humbling perspective that I will carry with me for the rest of my life and will never forget.

Overall, this is a book that everyone should read at least once in their lifetime.

SPOILER-FREE REVIEW:

Background: Just as I don't rate autobiographies and only review them (as seen in my review for Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass), I won't rate Elie Wiesel's books either. Instead, I'll review any that I read. The reason is that I don't think I can assign a number to a Holocaust survivor's account of the Holocaust. Even if it seems like a story to me (and this book is fiction), I'm aware that it was his entire reality for many years, and what he endured haunted him for decades. So, personally, I don't feel it's right to rate it like a regular book.

Description: The actual description of this book is quite misleading, so I'll attempt to do a better job. The story follows a Jewish family during the Holocaust. There are numerous time jumps, and the chronology and what's real can become confusing. The main character is technically Raphael, but it's really his entire family (parents, three brothers, and two sisters), along with side sub-stories about people encountered along the way.

The writing style and the way the story is structured make me believe that Elie Wiesel wrote from his heart. He doesn't bother to explain many things and expects the reader to understand. His writing is raw and realistic, without any sugar-coating. The style immerses you in the book, making it seem like non-fiction or an autobiography.

I liked the time jumps and past-present switches, which added to the sense that Wiesel wrote whatever came to his mind. I also appreciate how we can follow so many different characters, and he manages to develop them in just a few pages each.

Wrap Up: This review may seem a bit disjointed as I'm not sure how to review it properly, but I hope it was at least somewhat understandable.

The image of evil unleashed on mankind tormented him deeply.

Whose fault was it indeed? And whose responsibility? The horror on such a vast scale implicated not only man but God as well. Only God, with His omnipotence, could vanquish evil, halt the massacres that were tearing lives apart, and bring an end to the senseless wars. But why didn't He? Could it be that He was on the side of the killers? Raphael firmly rejected that notion. God on the side of evil? It was unthinkable. After all, wasn't He the very opposite of evil? He repeatedly told himself that he would never, ever accept the idea that God could be cruel. Man, in his fallen state, could be cruel, but not God.

He was convinced of this truth. But then, what about the killings in Kolomey? The atrocities committed there were so heinous that they seemed to challenge even his unwavering belief. Yes, that was worse than the concept of a cruel or indifferent God. It made him question everything he thought he knew about the nature of good and evil, and the role of God in a world filled with such suffering.

Oh, this is really good.

However, when it comes to the plot, it seems to chase its tail a little.

You can't help but have the feeling that there was a missed opportunity.

It's as if the story had the potential to go in a more exciting and unexpected direction, but for some reason, it didn't quite reach that level.

The characters are well-developed and engaging, but the plot could have been tighter and more dynamic.

Perhaps with a few tweaks and a bit more冒险 (adventure), this could have been an even better piece of work.

Nonetheless, it still has its charm and is worth reading.

Overall, it's a decent effort that shows promise, but there's room for improvement in the plot department.

I liked everything about this work

except for the lack-of-ending. Elie Wiesel, who is not a mystery writer,

is truly great in everything else. He skillfully weaves in flashbacks

to the protagonist, Raphael's, childhood during the Holocaust

and stories about his family. Additionally, he incorporates modern-day

encounters with madmen who believe themselves to be Biblical characters.

Into their rants, Wiesel weaves insightful Biblical perspectives

and interpretations. The book reaches its climax with an encounter

with "God" and a profound discussion of human suffering.

Overall, it is a remarkable piece of literature that explores

deep themes and emotions, despite the somewhat disappointing

lack of a conclusive ending. However, perhaps this is intentional,

leaving the reader to ponder and reflect on the complex ideas

presented long after they have finished reading.

I can't believe I have given a two-star rating to a book about the Holocaust, especially when it was written by a Holocaust survivor.

A couple of years ago, I read Elie Wiesel's Night. It is basically his account of his experiences in the Jewish ghetto and later in a concentration camp. I cried my eyes out and couldn't stop thinking about what I had read and what this man had survived.

While Night was haunting in its simplistic storytelling and brutal honesty, I thought that Twilight was extremely disjointed and hard to follow. I still have basically no clue who some of the characters were and what the ultimate goal of the book was. I'm still not sure if the main character was insane and experiencing delusions and/or hallucinations or if some of the figures were meant to be angels. *shrugs* I just could not get into this book, which is crazy, as books on this topic usually crush me and haunt me for days.

Although I didn't like Twilight, I admit it had its interesting moments, for sure. I found the setting of a psychiatric hospital in the Carpathian mountains that specializes in patients with religious delusions (one thought he was Abraham, one Cain, one God, etc.) to be fascinating. Some of the conversations with the psych patients were actually pretty wise and enlightening. Really, those conversations were the "silver lining" of the story.

I think this book could have been quite good if it didn't flip topics and settings without any sort of clarity and if it were written in a way that made me care. But it wasn't and Lord help me, I didn't. And I feel bad about that, actually.

☆☆

I truly relished this novel. The narrative style shifts from one person to another and from one time period to another. At first, it might seem perplexing, but if you persevere, you'll find that all the pieces the author reveals come together to form a deeply thought-provoking and touching conclusion.

There were several dialogues that I wished were concise enough to add to my 'quotes' page on Goodreads. I really wanted to write them all down. Perhaps I just need to purchase a copy of this novel and mark them. The one that touched me the most was near the end of the novel, when Raphael encounters "God" and has a highly meaningful conversation with him. Here is a part of it:

"He does not introduce himself. He does not have to. Now that he has spoken, I know who he is. In his presence, I feel alone. Yet this solitude is not a burden. I am alone as he is alone. I am alone because he is alone."

I feel like speaking to him. I, who have been so intent on listening, now feel the need to reach into myself and beyond. I must speak to him of the dead who no longer speak, of the ghosts that haunt my sleep, of the memories that plague me. I must tell him what I have never told a soul.

But the man speaks first: 'This is not how I had imagined my creation. All these creatures that breathe because of me, what do they want? That I keep quiet, that I keep out of their lives. But when I remain silent, they reproach me. When I speak, they call me arbitrary. Those poor earthworms envy me. But why? Because I am invincible? So what? Do they think I like taking the blame for everything?'

'...If only they'd leave me alone. There would be help for the sick, a mother for every orphan, a home for every beggar. There would be peace everywhere, in heaven and on earth. No more bloody wars! No more massacres committed in my name! I repudiate them all.'

His words are spoken with such conviction that I allow myself to be carried by their cadence, their logic. Like Moses before me, I absorb his voice and it is that voice that speaks through mine. 'You say that you pity man. But tell me, where is your pity? How does it manifest itself? And why must it be so sparing? Since you are Almighty, why don't you replace man's baseness with goodness? And his cruel instincts with generosity?'

A cool breeze rustles the leaves. Raphael's neighbor turns up his collar.

'Who are you?' he asks impatiently. 'Who are you, mortal, to question the order of my creation? How dare you ask such momentous questions?'

I would prefer to say nothing, Pedro, and yet I hear myself speak:

'I have seen men suffer, I have seen children die. It is in their name that I speak to you. How can you justify their suffering?'

'I don't have to. Some men kill people and people say it is my fault. Other men permit the killers to kill. Are you saying that too is my fault?'

'You could have prevented it all from happening.'

'Yes, I could have. Not only the massacres, but all that preceded them. I could have prevented the killer from being born, his accomplice from growing up, mankind from going astray... Can you tell me at what precise moment I should have intervened to keep the children from being thrown into the flames? At the very last moment? Why not before? But when is 'before'? When the idea is conceived? When the order is transmitted? When the hunter sights his prey? Go on, answer! You are putting me on trial. Fine. But a trial involves facts and arguments, not clichés. Since you are so clever, can you tell me what I should have done, and when?'