Saw Dear Evan Hansen last week, because I realized it was a musical that sounded like a YA novel and because I realized that if I am willing to go see theater in London by myself, why shouldn't I also be willing to do it in NYC? It was a good decision - the first half in particular gave me the same sort of feeling as the third quarter of The Wings of the Dove, when Merton Densher slowly realizes exactly what Kate Croy is expecting of him.
(On a total sidenote, the last book for my college alumni reading group this year was The Hate U Give - very exciting that I was actually able to read a YA book for my college alumni reading group - and, towards the end, there's a paragraph which consists of just: "Things will never be the way they used to be," and I actually cracked up, because all I could think of was, "We shall never be again as we were," and I don't know if it was a deliberate reference or not - it certainly could be, but it doesn't have to be - but it definitely highly amused me.)
That said, during "Requiem," I started imagining the alternative version in which Connor had actually attacked or even attempted to kill Zoe, and she had killed him in self-defense. I guess ideally in a sort of premeditated way, maybe having been violently attacked by him and then having to figure out a way to kill him but frame it as a suicide because otherwise she might not survive the next attack? So not only would Evan still have the ethical difficulty of the letter and his lies to deal with, but Zoe would have the dilemmas of the fact that she had killed (hopefully rather justifiably, but still) her own brother, and the fact that she actually knew it wasn't a suicide but her cover-up was really aided by the letter?
It's just - why is one ethical dilemma enough? The more the merrier! I mean, the opposite, I guess.
