The Pharmacist of Auschwitz

The story of the pharmacist is a lesser-known facet of the Holocaust. I'm curious what motivated the author to bring this figure's story to light and how she approached researching such a complex character.

The book humanizes a person involved in unimaginable crimes, which made me question where to draw the line between understanding and moral judgment. Was this discomfort intentional or a side effect of the storytelling?

The detailed descriptions and personal stories made the history feel vivid, but I wonder how much was based on documented evidence versus creative interpretation. Did anyone else feel the line was well-maintained?