William Shakespeare is arguably the most famous writer in the history of the English language, and as such all of his plays have been subject to critical scrutiny over the past four centuries. Some of his plays, such as The Two Gentlemen of Verona or Two Noble Kinsmen, have been met with a particularly harsh reception from scholars and theatergoers alike, even during the time of their original performance. Other plays like Hamlet will always be touted as Shakespeare's best work. Love's Labour's Lost, however, presents an interesting divide among critics: while some include it among Shakespeare's worst plays, others celebrate it as evidence that Shakespeare was a superior playwright from the very beginning of his career.
Part of the reason for this mixed reception is timing. Love's Labour's Lost was one of Shakespeare's earliest plays, and plays written at the beginning of a playwright's career tend to be less complex and polished than later performances. Many agree that Love's Labour's Lost showcases an "early" Shakespearean plot, conflict, and cast of characters, but that it is not itself a mature production. That said, fans of the play argue that its complex dialogue and reliance on witty wordplay showcase Shakespeare at his best, emphasizing how the play takes very seriously the exploration of the power of language and communication.
Another reason for this divide is historical context. The play was originally performed for Queen Elizabeth's court, and as such its audience would have been familiar with the political setting in Europe that the play depicts. As time went on and this historical understanding left public consciousness, the play appeared to be less relevant and make less sense to audiences. Thus, it is often considered quite an esoteric play, made less accessible by the fact that it was written for only a small group of courtiers and not meant to be performed on a large stage for a common audience.
