Shakespeare’s Complete Works Ranked From Masterpiece to Mediocrity

To mark Shakespeare’s birthday, the Guardian’s ex theatre critic has completed the monumental task of ranking all 37 of the playwright’s works, from acknowledged classic to peculiar outlier. The detailed appraisal spans the complete spectrum of his output—tragedies, comedies, histories and romances—each judged on its theatrical merit, narrative framework and enduring cultural significance. Whilst some plays, such as Hamlet, are considered to have “limitless” appeal, others prove more troublesome. Antony and Cleopatra is dismissed as “exhausting,” whilst King Lear, though “magnificent,” is acknowledged as fundamentally “flawed.” This ranking provides both devoted theatre audiences and Shakespeare newcomers a challenging roadmap to which plays genuinely deserve their place in the canon, and which are perhaps better left gathering dust on the shelf.

The Iconic Classics That Shape Theatre

At the pinnacle of Shakespeare’s accomplishments sit the plays that have fundamentally shaped Western drama. Hamlet stands as perhaps the supreme example, a work of such psychological depth and philosophical complexity that it seems to produce new readings with each generation of actors and audiences. The Danish prince’s existential struggle and his affected insanity and authentic suffering have made him theatre’s most captivating character. Similarly, King Lear demands admiration as a monumental work of familial betrayal and human suffering, though even this great work bears the marks of its age in certain structural choices. These plays go beyond their time period, speaking to essential issues of mortality, ambition, love and the essence of human existence itself.

What distinguishes these canonical works is their inexhaustible theatrical potential. No two productions of Hamlet or Macbeth seem the same; the plays appear to support infinite reinterpretation whilst preserving their essential power. The language itself—rich in metaphor, psychological insight and poetic brilliance—repays careful examination yet remains accessible to modern audiences. These great works have earned their pre-eminent position not solely through critical agreement, but through countless successful theatrical productions over time, each one demonstrating afresh that Shakespeare’s finest plays possess a rare quality: the power to affect audiences deeply, regardless of era or cultural background.

• Hamlet: boundless emotional complexity and existential questioning
• Macbeth: downfall of unchecked desire and ethical decay
• Othello: devastating exploration of envy and racism
• A Midsummer Night’s Dream: perfect comedic balance and enchantment

Problematic Pieces That Push Against Present-Day Attitudes

Some Shakespeare plays have fared less gracefully than others, presenting contemporary theatre practitioners and audiences with authentic ethical questions. Works such as Antony and Cleopatra, despite featuring stunning verse, can feel exhausting in their surfeit of feeling and expansive narrative structure. More troublingly, many plays contain elements that sit uncomfortably with contemporary values: endemic misogyny, racial stereotyping, and portrayals of sexual assault that previous audiences accepted without question. Yet rejecting these plays outright would be to disregard Shakespeare’s unquestionable talent and the possibility of recontextualising them for contemporary theatre. The difficulty involves acknowledging their flaws whilst appreciating their dramatic force and the perspectives they give into period perspectives.

Theatre practitioners frequently wrestle with how to stage these problematic works ethically. Some stagings have successfully reframed contentious aspects through creative direction, casting choices, and script modification. Others have chosen to emphasise the plays’ progressive aspects or to use their challenging elements as a springboard for productive conversation about power dynamics and representation. Rather than relegating these works to oblivion, modern theatrical practice often finds ways to interrogate their problematic aspects whilst safeguarding their theatrical significance. This strategy allows audiences to think carefully with Shakespeare’s influence, understanding both his genius and his shortcomings as a writer shaped by his period.

The Merchant of Venice and Modern Setting

The Merchant of Venice presents arguably the most significant difficulty for modern productions. The play’s central character, Shylock, has been understood in different ways as a villain or a victim, yet his depiction of a Jewish moneylender relies upon deeply offensive stereotypes. The play’s resolution, which requires Shylock’s conversion to Christianity, appears to contemporary audiences as profoundly troubling. However, the work includes some of Shakespeare’s finest writing, such as the speech on the quality of mercy and Portia’s brilliant legal manoeuvring. Theatrical productions must navigate these tensions with sensitivity, often emphasising the play’s anti-Semitic context whilst trying to reclaim Shylock’s dignity and humanity.

Successful contemporary stagings have reshaped the narrative to emphasise Shylock’s mistreatment rather than his villainy. Some directors have cast the character with authentic compassion, making his forced conversion a tragic instead of comic conclusion. Others have employed diverse casting to challenge the play’s racial assumptions. These directorial decisions don’t erase the play’s problematic elements, but they provide viewers with a more nuanced understanding of both Shakespeare’s text and the prejudices it reflects. The play endures because, despite its flaws, it contains undeniable theatrical brilliance and instances of deep human understanding.

The Taming of the Shrew’s Dramatic Contradiction

The Taming of the Shrew poses a different yet equally vexing problem. The play’s core argument—that a woman’s spirit must be subdued to render her a appropriate partner—troubles contemporary audiences profoundly. Katherine’s final speech, in which she advocates for wifely obedience and submission, has provoked significant discussion about Shakespeare’s purposes. Was he endorsing traditional gender hierarchies or mocking them? The very uncertainty becomes part of the play’s dramatic complexity. Yet the work remains enduringly popular, mainly since Katherina is such a lively, sharp-witted figure that many stagings have effectively reimagined her change as a genuine meeting of equals rather than domination.

Creative directors have identified ingenious ways to reframe the play’s apparent message. Some productions present Katherine’s final speech as ironic, suggesting she’s playing Petruchio rather than genuinely submitting. Others highlight the genuine affection and mutual respect between the couple, reframing the “taming” as a stripping away of protective walls rather than a loss of agency. These interpretative choices demonstrate that Shakespeare’s plays, even the most problematic ones, retain considerable nuance to accommodate modern values. The theatrical paradox of The Taming of the Shrew lies precisely in this conflict between what it seems to say and how it can be reimagined.

Lesser-known Treasures Often Bypassed by Viewers

Amongst Shakespeare’s thirty-seven plays lie several underrated works that rarely receive the prominence afforded to Hamlet, Macbeth, or A Midsummer Night’s Dream. The Two Gentlemen of Verona, ranked near the bottom of many critical assessments, nonetheless contains memorable lines and displays genuine theatrical potential when staged with imagination. Likewise, Cymbeline, notwithstanding Dr Johnson’s rejection of its “unresisting imbecility” and Shaw’s condemnation as “stagey trash,” houses one of Shakespeare’s finest female characters in Imogen, a character of deep integrity and devotion that has engaged spectators across multiple generations of distinguished performers such as Peggy Ashcroft, Vanessa Redgrave, and Judi Dench.

These underappreciated plays exhibit qualities that transcend their problematic narratives and structural inconsistencies. Henry VIII, co-written with John Fletcher, provides powerful closing monologues and performs remarkably well on stage, whilst The Two Noble Kinsmen, Shakespeare’s final collaborative work, features authentically Shakespearean moments despite Fletcher’s contributions dominating certain scenes. Even the least celebrated plays demonstrate Shakespeare’s enduring theatrical craftsmanship and emotional depth. Contemporary stagings have demonstrated that inventive production design and careful artistic guidance can reveal the real value found in these sidelined plays, proving that scholarly assessments tell only part of the story about Shakespeare’s multifaceted and intricate legacy.

• The Two Gentlemen of Verona showcases improbable plotting but includes glimpses of greater plays to come.
• Cymbeline offers a disjointed narrative yet contains one of Shakespeare’s most acclaimed women characters.
• The Two Noble Kinsmen, adapted from Chaucer, showcases genuine Shakespeare’s language alongside Fletcher’s additions.
• Henry VIII led to the first Globe playhouse to burn in 1613 because of a cannon blast on stage.
• These plays perform remarkably effectively on stage when directed with imagination and creative interpretation.

The Joint Projects and Later Career Experiments

Shakespeare’s closing years saw a notable transformation in his artistic method, marked by increasingly experimental creative partnerships with co-writer John Fletcher. These late works embody a divergence from the traditional approaches of his prior output, combining varied dramatic forms and story materials into ambitious theatrical ventures. Henry VIII and The Two Noble Kinsmen demonstrate this spirit of partnership, each displaying the clear marks of both writers whilst wrestling with issues of honour, virtue, and death. The dynamic between Shakespeare’s verse and Fletcher’s contributions generates a intriguing literary terrain, demonstrating how even seasoned writers went on to progress and adjust their technique in reaction to evolving stage requirements and viewer preferences.

These joint experiments, though occasionally dismissed by critics as unbalanced or lacking structural coherence, showcase Shakespeare’s readiness for fresh theatrical opportunities late in his career. Rather than representing decline, these works exhibit his flexibility and openness to partnership, notably in addressing historical material and complex emotional terrain. Henry VIII‘s memorable farewell speeches and The Two Noble Kinsmen‘s genuine Shakespeare passages establish that collaboration does not have to diminish creative quality. Contemporary stagings have increasingly recognised the significance of these works from his final years, revealing how considered directorial choices can illuminate the unique input of both playwrights and celebrate the intricate layering that results from their collaborative effort.

Why Scores Are Important for Theatre Appreciation

Ranking Shakespeare’s plays is not merely an scholarly undertaking—it serves a practical purpose for theatre-goers and practitioners alike. By distinguishing between masterpieces and lesser-known works, critics help audiences navigate the extensive body of work and understand which plays demand to be experienced on stage. Theatre companies need to make challenging decisions about which productions to mount, and critical rankings inform these decisions. A play ranked lower remains far from being unwatchable; rather, it signals that it may require outstanding directorial skill or specific casting choices to truly resonate. Understanding a play’s position within the canon allows both audiences and artists to engage with appropriate expectations and creative ambition.

Moreover, rankings demonstrate the development of Shakespeare’s craft throughout his career, from youthful experimentation to refined mastery. Early comedies like The Two Gentlemen of Verona showcase promise and striking moments, yet fall short of the emotional complexity of his most accomplished works. These comparative analyses reveal how Shakespeare evolved as a playwright, refining his command of character, plot complexity, and emotional impact. Rather than discounting lower-ranked plays outright, thoughtful ranking encourages audiences to appreciate the path of creative genius—recognizing that even Shakespeare’s formative work contains glimpses of genius worth uncovering and celebrating in theatrical performance.