he wrote plays--they are plays--to be played---The French considered him so vulgar that they cut the gravedigger scene from Hamlet, in the American west the endings were changed to happy endings--Cordielia recovers and is reunited with Lear-----the interpretation changes with each generation---but what is truely transendental about his work can only be appreciated in acting or watching his work acted out. I do suspect its is better for the actor than the passive watcher. My opinion only of course but it does come from personal experience.
Those examples just show you how destructive the theater can be to his writings. I don't think an actor's interpretation has any inherent superiority over the reader's, and is often much worse. I know from my own experience that a lot of actors don't even understand Elizabethan texts.