In Everything is illuminated by Jonathan Safran Foer the theme of enlightenment is explored by the triple meaning of the word itself. Foer shows how illumination can mean clarifying or explaining, producing real light, or beautifying something. These multiple meanings of enlightenment, paired with the book's triple narrative, help convey that knowledge relating to the past is often sought, even if answers are rarely found. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original EssayThe first meaning of enlightenment that Foer plays with is to clarify. This broad term turns into a narrower path when Foer asks one of the main characters, Jonathan, to return to a small town called Trachimbrod to find himself through his past lineage. His travel guide, Alex, finds this confusing and sees no point in trying to look to a horrific past for answers. Jonathan explains to Alex why he wants to return: "I want to see Trachimbrod... See what it's like, how my grandfather grew up, where I would be now if it hadn't been for the war." (59) Jonathan tries to escape from his real life and place himself in a fairytale land that he will never know anything about. Jonathan tries to understand the mysteries of his past by searching for a city that no longer exists called Trachimbrod. By meeting the last woman who lived in Trachimbrod, Jonathan thinks he will finally have clarity on his past. Jonathan shows his interest in the woman when he says, “Ask her to tell us everything. I want to know how he met my grandfather, and why he decided to save him, and... if they were in love." (148) To find out facts about his grandfather he has to ask more questions about the woman than about his grandfather. Jonathan hangs on every word because , according to his knowledge, she is the reason he is alive today. But when Jonathan is finally told the story of his grandfather and Trachimbrod, he states, "I don't want to hear anymore" (184-186) Foer shows that when he is given the enlightened truth about his past Jonathan prefers to hide from it rather than face it. The use of enlightenment to clarify the past is refuted by the inability to accept the truth. Foer's second meaning is to produce real light incorporates this concept when he uses the image of a "sexual light" saying: "from space, astronauts can see a person making love as a tiny speck of light... the glow arises from the sum of thousands of loves" (95) Foer places this light on the day of Trachim, the day in which "everything is tied with string" in memory of the past, of which no one knows all the details. Having this light tied to a day created to commemorate the uncertain past actually ends up uniting people, sexually, and producing light. This light of love is repeated again when Foer writes: "[Brod's] belly lit up like a firefly's bulb, brighter than a hundred thousand virgins making love for the first time." (98) Here Foer weighs all the past love light against Brod's only love light. In this way he suggests that the present is more important and urgent than the past. By speaking of Brod as a firefly, Foer leaves room for many different symbols. Butterflies often imitate each other to attract mates, just as Foer made present generations imitate past generations and each produce a light with its own mate. Fireflies also communicate with each other through light, just as people making love communicate with their light. This light is shown in space when the astronaut looks at Trachimbrod, sees the light and says: "There is definitely something out there." (99) Once again “what” thereis exactly out there is unclear, and he will never find it. Also, seeing anything in space from Earth will take time, so whatever was illuminated to the astronaut is actually happening in the past. Finally, Foer uses lighting as a means of beautification. Alex plays with exaggerating his backstory, which causes a discrepancy in the past. Trying to justify why he does this, Alex says: “I produce untruths for little Igor. I want him to feel like he has a cool brother, and a brother whose life he would one day want to embody. (144) Foer, once again, makes the future more important than the past by allowing it to be altered in the hope of a better life. Just like Jonathan, this change of the past, even if to make it better, will break the knowledge on which little Igor will base his life. This also insinuates that Igor, similar to Jonathan, will choose to base his future on lies rather than the truth shown by the past. During the novel, Jonathan is writing a fictional book and Alex responds with letters to Jonathan criticizing his writing. Once again, Foer shows Alex's desire for embellishment when he asks Jonathan, “If I could make a proposal, please let Brod be happy… You would have to edit your story a lot… but it could be wonderful in this way?" (143) Foer wonders whether truth or deception is better to demonstrate the past. Even though Jonathan's book is fictional, Alex still insists that changes be made to the book to make the characters seem happy. Foer shows that any work needed to change the past would pay off through the beautiful "image" of the past it would create. Alex is also writing his own book, the story of how he, Jonathan and his grandfather were searching for Trachimbrod. Alex sends all of these writings to Jonathan for feedback in the same way that Jonathan sends his writings to Alex. After learning that Jonathan had ignored a fabrication in the story, Alex writes, "I'm glad you were in good spirits about the part I made up about ordering you to drink coffee until I could see my face in the cup, and how you said it." it was an earthenware cup." (142) Here Foer improves Alex's writing with a comedic touch, while still trying to demonstrate that Alex is a more competent writer than Jonathan. Changing the past to appear harsher proves foolish to Alex, as it is stated that "it was a clay cup" – without giving Alex the proper answer he was looking for. Here Foer shows that even altering the past does not give adequate answers to the questions posed. Foer shows that while most things can “be illuminated,” the answers are not guaranteed. Enlightenment made to clarify may not prove anything. This is illustrated when the men find “Agostino” and ask her to take them to see Trachimbrod, and she says, “There's nothing. I already told you. Nothing." (154) After the men have found the closest thing to an answer they have, there is still no proof of it; they leave without ever fully understanding what Trachimbrod was. This is still seen in the "light of 'love' when the astronaut says, 'There is definitely something out there.' (99) As stated above, the 'what' is never explained or understood; 'enlightenment through embellishment might not be a great idea when Alex asks: We are very nomadic with the truth, yes... Do you think this is acceptable when we write about things that happened? and your grandfather in this way, and why do you order me not to be sincere? If your answer is yes… why don't we make the story more premium than life (180)The question finally asked is whether.