Editing Hamlet (section)

===Critical history===
From the early 17th century, the play was famous for its ghost and vivid dramatisation of [[Melancholia|melancholy]] and [[insanity]], leading to a procession of mad courtiers and ladies in [[Jacobean era|Jacobean]] and [[Caroline era|Caroline]] drama.{{sfn|Wofford|1994}}{{sfn|Kirsch|1969}} Though it remained popular with mass audiences, late 17th-century [[English Restoration|Restoration]] critics saw ''Hamlet'' as primitive and disapproved of its lack of [[Classical unities|unity]] and [[decorum]].{{sfn|Vickers|1995a|p=447}}{{sfn|Vickers|1995b|p=92}} This view changed drastically in the 18th century, when critics regarded Hamlet as a hero—a pure, brilliant young man thrust into unfortunate circumstances.{{sfn|Wofford|1994|pp=184–185}}

By the mid-18th century, however, the advent of [[Gothic fiction|Gothic literature]] brought [[Psychology|psychological]] and [[Mysticism|mystical]] readings, returning madness and the ghost to the forefront.{{sfn|Vickers|1995c|p=5}} Not until the late 18th century did critics and performers begin to view Hamlet as confusing and inconsistent. Before then, he was either mad, or not; either a hero, or not; with no in-betweens.{{sfn|Wofford|1994|p=185}} These developments represented a fundamental change in literary criticism, which came to focus more on character and less on plot.{{sfn|Wofford|1994|p=186}}  In the 18th century, one negative French review of Hamlet would be widely discussed for centuries, in particular in publications throughout the 19th and 20th century.<ref>{{Cite news |title=Article clipped from Boston Evening Transcript|url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/boston-evening-transcript/139377896/|access-date=23 January 2024 |website=[[Newspapers]]|date=10 October 1877 |page=6 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title=Article clipped from The Birmingham Post|url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-birmingham-post/139377955/|access-date=23 January 2024 |website=[[Newspapers]]|date=25 April 1898 |page=5 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title=Article clipped from Evening Standard|url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/evening-standard/139377986/|access-date=23 January 2024 |website=[[Newspapers]]|date=25 May 1948 |page=6 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title=Article clipped from Wisconsin State Journal |url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/wisconsin-state-journal/139377784/ |access-date=23 January 2024 |website=[[Newspapers]]|date=29 May 1988 |page=86 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title=Article clipped from Tucson Citizen|url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/tucson-citizen/139377775/ |access-date=23 January 2024 |website=[[Newspapers]]|date=8 October 1988 |page=9 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title=Article clipped from The Kansas City Times|url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-kansas-city-times/139346346/ |access-date=23 January 2024 |website=[[Newspapers]]|date=8 May 1987 |page=25 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title=Article clipped from The Day|url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-day/139377873/ |access-date=16 January 2024 |website=[[Newspapers]]|date=3 December 1986 |page=31 }}</ref> In 1768, [[Voltaire]] wrote a negative review of ''Hamlet'', stating that "it is vulgar and barbarous drama, which would not be tolerated by the vilest populace of France or Italy... one would imagine this piece to be a work of a drunken savage",<ref>{{Cite news |title=Article clipped from The Kansas City Times
|url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-kansas-city-times/139346346/ |access-date=23 January 2024 |website=[[Newspapers]]|date=8 May 1987 |page=25 }}</ref> while acknowledging that it contains "some sublime strokes worthy of the greatest genius".<ref>{{Cite web |others=Translated by D. Nichol Smith |title=Voltaire, Excerpt from the Preface to Sémiramis (1748) |url=https://sites.broadviewpress.com/lessons/DramaAnthology/VoltaireReactionToHamlet/VoltaireReactionToHamlet_print.html |access-date=2025-04-16 |website=Sites.BroadviewPress.com}}</ref>

By the 19th century, [[Romanticism|Romantic]] critics valued ''Hamlet'' for its internal, individual conflict reflecting the strong contemporary emphasis on internal struggles and inner character in general.{{sfn|Rosenberg|1992|p=179}} Then too, critics started to focus on Hamlet's delay as a character trait, rather than a plot device.{{sfn|Wofford|1994|p=186}} This focus on character and internal struggle continued into the 20th century, when criticism branched in several directions, discussed in [[#Context and interpretation|context and interpretation]] below.