I've read in some articles that the plays and poetry of Shakespare was actually vulgar, sexually implicit and he was considered "low art". And that Titus Andronicus was overloaded with gore and violence.
How is the veracity of these claims? What was the reaction of the contemporary English public, or whoever his audiences on what on the content of his plays and poetry? Did they think it was somehow sexually implicit and immoral or not? Did Shakespeare get a lot of notoriety from the more conservative and moralist parts of English society at that time?
A more relevant question to ask would be: Was William Shakespeare considered the great playwright we now hold him to be nowadays, or did the English public think that he sucks, given in the case that he mostly writes such inappropriate stuff?
Shakespeare was writing for a "common" audience, as well as for a noble one. His plays were ones that everyone could understand, which did mean that there are several that have "low art" in them. Much Ado about Nothing comes to mind, there are several dick jokes in it, as does Romeo and Juliet (the nurse has several humorous lines). He was certainly very popular, but he was seen as a great author, not as the defining voice of that period. After his death his plays were put on, but he was not the most popular playwright then. His popularity really grew in the 18th century into the 19th, and has only grown from there. Much of how we view Shakespeare today is due to how it's taught in schools, where it is read as "fine literature", when in actuality it was very quick and full of humor and life. Remember, in the prologue to Romeo and Juliet it reads "..is now the two hour mark of our stage". Imagine reading all of R+J in two hours and you get an idea of how fast paced and different these plays were live than read.
TL;DR: Shakespeare never sucked, was often crude in his humor, and the widespread adoration of him really kicked off in the 18th/19th century.