56 pages 1-hour read

Last Twilight in Paris

Fiction | Novel | Adult | Published in 2025

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Character Analysis

Louise Emmons Burns

Content Warning: This section of the guide includes discussions of illness, antisemitic violence, alcohol dependency, and death.


Louise is the novel’s dynamic protagonist. In her youth, she lives in London, estranged from her mother, who has an alcohol dependency. She is free to live according to her principles and to experience almost complete independence. Although she is dismayed by Joe’s choice to break off their relationship rather than marry her before he is sent to the Continent, his absence grants her even greater autonomy. After the war, however, they marry quickly and settle down, away from the hustle of the capital and the freedom and sense of purpose it represents in her life. Her postwar life causes her to wonder, “What can’t I be content with this life?” (19). 


Unable to ascertain the causes of her discontent in Oxfordshire, finding the necklace she recognizes from the war gives her a renewed sense of purpose. The necklace inspires her to travel, investigate, and use her intellect and compassion to learn the truth behind what happened to Franny, which in turn inadvertently uncovers Ian’s treason. The changes she feels in her life and herself due to her successful investigation of the necklace’s provenance allows her to identify her need to heal from The Enduring Effects of Trauma and Loss she experienced, and to lessen the guilt she feels due to The Moral Complexities of Resistance, such as when she refused to help Franny so she could protect herself and the Red Cross’s access to the POW camps.


Louise also comes to understand The Interplay Between One’s Past and Identity and how important it is to possess The Freedom to Control One’s Narrative, figuratively and sometimes, more literally. The changing social contract—from increased opportunities for women’s employment and involvement in society during the war, to the postwar period when those opportunities dried up—meant that she was expected to give up freedom and self-actualization for motherhood and wifely duty. 


It is only when she realizes how crucial it is to share her past and her pain with others, especially her husband, that she begins to reconcile her former identity with her current one. Her honesty brings them closer together instead of building a wall between them. To this end, she says, “with that understanding, the anger I have been holding on to begins to subside” (321). Moreover, gaining the freedom to make more choices about her future, and the way her life story will go on, helps her to heal from the trauma and losses she’s endured.

Helaine Weil (Lemarque)

Helaine is the novel’s dynamic deuteragonist. As a child and a young woman, she is confined to her parents’ Parisian townhouse, an admittedly beautiful and elegant residence which she nonetheless compares to a “gilded cage.” Her loss of childhood and freedom includes her relationship with her grandmother, who she is no longer allowed to visit after the influenza weakens her body’s immunity and who dies when Helaine is nine. Helaine begins the novel believing that she is weak, the consequence of being sheltered for so long, too feeble even to sustain an easy walking pace for more than a few minutes. On her first outing from her home in 13 years, she realizes that she must keep going or return and submit to being a “prisoner” forever.


This important decision—to keep walking—helps to refocus what would be the remainder of Helaine’s life. Instead of being condemned to a life consisting of parental surveillance, dreams of adventure, and window scenes, Helaine chooses music, the streets of Paris, and romantic love. She even learns, eventually, that she is not incapable of becoming pregnant, as her mother told her: She gets pregnant while confined at Lévitan and learns of the pregnancy after the Allies liberate Paris from German occupation. 


When she chooses freedom and love over limitation and protection, opting to marry Gabriel instead of remaining in her mother’s stifling care, she opens up a new world of possibility—some beautiful and some horrible—and learns the significance of having The Freedom to Control One’s Narrative. She, quite literally, writes stories that she hopes to live out one day and then realizes the possibility and potential to do so. Her decision to retain her maiden name, and for Gabriel to adopt it for himself, highlight The Interplay Between One’s Past and Identity by demonstrating one way to resolve the tension between the two: By honoring the past while moving beyond it. 


Helaine continues to be affected by The Enduring Effects of Trauma and Loss, which make her suspicious of the Allies’ displaced persons camp and even cause her to answer her door with suspicion some 10 years after the war’s end. However, the novel ends on a hopeful note, with Helaine and Gabriel raising their daughter together, and Helaine considering writing her own story at last.

Ian Shipley

Ian Shipley is Louise’s mentor at the Red Cross during the war. It initially seems like Ian’s involvement in the Red Cross’s war effort will contribute to highlighting The Moral Complexities of Resistance, but the revelation of his treason and war crimes at the novel’s end exposes him as someone who never truly believed in the causes he claimed to support. When Louise meets him at the Red Cross center in London, she believes that he is committed to his principles so strongly that he is willing to risk his life to help the POWs imprisoned in the Nazis’ inhumane camps. He is committed to his principles, though it turns out those principles are dramatically different from the ones Louise believes him to hold. 


When Louise eventually identifies him in the film Gabriel attempted to smuggle out of the camp, he tells her, “He was using the cover of the Red Cross to provide classified documents to the Germans […]. And also to feed false information from the Germans back to the Brits” (312). Not only is Ian responsible for potential delays and errors in British intelligence, but his work on behalf of the Germans may have led to additional deaths of Jews and/or POWs. Furthermore, he is obviously responsible for Franny’s death.


Ian’s treason also affects Louise and Gabriel’s feelings about the past. When Gabriel learns of the circumstances surrounding his sister’s death, he weeps and says that he “never meant to put her in harm’s way” (313), and Louise realizes that he shares the guilt she feels regarding Franny’s death. Had Gabriel never involved Franny in his risky resistance mission, she would not have been killed, and had Louise consented to help her when she asked, Franny would not have gone to Ian—a move that let him know that she could pass information dangerous to both the German war effort and himself. 


Though their “guilt” is indirect, as neither is truly responsible for Franny’s killing, when Louise learns of Ian’s arrest and imminent trial, she says, “‘It’s over.’ I exhale with relief. Except that it will never really be over” (323). The effects of her sense of loss cannot be fully mitigated, even if Ian is brought to justice.

Gabriel (Lemarque) Weil

Gabriel is Helaine’s husband and the father of her daughter. He is acutely aware of The Transformation of Civilian Spaces into Sites of Oppression, long before Helaine acknowledges the shift. Upon one of their earliest meetings, he asks her if her family has considered leaving France for their own safety, a question that surprises her because it seems so unnecessary and extreme. While she cannot imagine any part of the persecution that follows France’s declaration of war on Germany, Gabriel senses and fears it long before it happens. He is deeply committed to his principles and to his wife, even adopting the appearance of collaborating with the Germans to barter for her protection in his absence. 


He tries to enlist in the French army, but his application is declined due to his leg. He quits the National Orchestre when Helaine is banished from his performances because she is a Jew, and he only returns to work so that they have some means of subsistence via his income; this choice directly demonstrates The Moral Complexities of Resistance. Although he would prefer to completely sever ties with an organization that condones the persecution of Jews, he knows that his salary is necessary for his and Helaine’s survival.


Gabriel is a static character, one who supports Helaine’s talents and dreams as a young woman and continues to do so as they age. He never treats her as a victim, as someone weak or inferior—either due to her sex or her religion—instead, he routinely empowers her, presenting her with a choice to remain with her parents or marry him, and even taking her last name in an era where a man doing so is virtually unheard of. He is willing to change his name to honor the Weils—a family who never treated him with honor or respect—out of love for his wife, even giving up the possible continuation of his own family’s surname. His devotion to what is right, whether it’s a commitment to equality, freedom, or love, never wavers.

Joe Burns

Joe is a stereotypical, stiff-upper-lit Briton who returns from the war and tries to get on with life: Marrying his prewar girlfriend, having a family, getting a job, and settling down in a pretty little house outside London. Louise says that he served for more than four years in active combat: “Lucky, some call him, because he was never captured or even wounded. I can see the scars brought on by living under that kind of strain, though, watching friend after friend killed, never knowing if each day would be his last” (13-14). His postwar experience, drinking until he passes out in his chair and reliving battles in his nightmares, speaks to his unresolved trauma. Joe continues to suffer because he tries to ignore reminders of what was lost, shying away from any discussion of the past, whether it touches his experience directly or not.


In trying to move on without doing this emotional labor, Joe highlights The Interplay Between One’s Past and Identity. It isn’t until he faces his past by joining Louise in France to help her investigate the necklace, that their relationship can improve. He must acknowledge the effects of the past before he can flourish in the present. Louise even calls their unwillingness to discuss the past a “dark divide” that separates them and causes her to become angry. 


At the novel’s end, Joe begins to attend therapy, and Louise says, “Things have been so much better since we returned from Paris. He is seeing a doctor to help him deal with the trauma of the war. It isn’t perfect or easy […] But I understand better now what he is dealing with and we are closer for it” (323). In allowing events of the past to come to light, Joe and Louise can face them and work toward a resolution that gives them more peace in the present.

blurred text
blurred text
blurred text

Unlock analysis of every major character

Get a detailed breakdown of each character’s role, motivations, and development.

  • Explore in-depth profiles for every important character
  • Trace character arcs, turning points, and relationships
  • Connect characters to key themes and plot points