When an intellectual work (philosophy book, literary book, painting etc) is studied there are (at least) two principal questions to be addressed:
- What is this work about?
- Why is this work important?
These questions are very intimately interrelated.
For example, if you know more precisely what is this work about then you can answer more convincingly why this may be important.
Also, if you know why this work is important then this may shed light on some cardinal aspects of the work and it may make you understand it better.
But these two questions are (probably) not identical because to start with the latter question needs significantly more the historical context of the intellectual work to be addressed and also perhaps some comparative analysis in general so that the question is more precisely answered.
In a quite interesting way, although many people can answer the former question about an intellectual work they usually are not so confident or convincing when answering the latter question. (See also here when I asked the same question about the Tractatus Logico Philosophicus - nobody really gave an inclusive answer)
In any case, I want to ask the latter question about 'Hamlet': Why is 'Hamlet' considered one of the very best plays ever?
It may be that the existential monologue of Hamlet is a quite strong advocate of why this play should be considered so important as it addresses the topic about what is the meaning of life and when life loses to such extent its meaning that death is almost mandatory.
But still, in my opinion, this is only a part of the play and it is not exactly its overarching theme and in this regard the play should not be evaluated only on this.
Another factor which may make the play (considered as) great is the unique alternation of extreme emotions and behaviors which certainly makes the play rich as a kaleidoscope of human psychology.
Just to make clear that I am not saying that Hamlet is not or should not be considered as a great theatrical play but I just want to see some compelling arguments/evidence from people who has seriously read it.
I would strongly prefer a comprehensive answer and not a too brief one.
