Why is the historical commentary on Hamlet so wrong?
Historically, most commentators have been lazy, or have been too self-indulgent in wanting to present their own ideas, and have tried to explain the play based on a few isolated quotes, taken out of context, usually out of order, and garbled together, instead of basing their commentary upon a careful, systematic study of the entire play. In other words, most commentary on Hamlet has been written by people who were largely ignorant of what Shakespeare actually wrote. Also, scholars have tended to read what others have written about the play, rather than studying the play, itself, which has only resulted in the perpetuation of a large number of serious errors.
Why is the historical commentary on Hamlet so wrong?