HAMLET as "best consensus"

lawrence olivier's hamlet, 1949 (one of the best hamlets in film)

i propose how to evaluate best consensus of a thing (whether literature, music, art, drama, food).

let's take Hamlet (only because it's so obvious)

1- presentations of the piece between 18th-20th century (and how it contributed to the art of drama).
2- Hamlet in the history of movies (how the play has contributed to the history of film).
3- Hamlet's influence in english literature (400 years)
4. hamlet is discussed in detail by Freud, Jung, Lacan, the existentialists, feminists, post-structuralists, etc.
5- Hamlet in asia, africa, in arab countries.

1-5 is only a sketchy approximation of what builds consensus and best consensus.

"Hamlet" as consensus, is a process that happens in time. consensus is NEVER static. it's a dynamic process where each Hamlet read, discussed and presented is different than the previous one. numerically speaking there is only one Hamlet, qualitatively there are many. this is how the work becomes canonical (or part of the canon of a civilization).

remember that BC is not what makes Hamlet good. Hamlet is good because of "facts" in Hamlet. what consensus and BC do is flesh out these "facts."