I agree completely about judging music on it's own merit. Not to measure Bach in units of Beethoven, or dislike Haydn for not being Chopin. Best to listen with the intent of discovering what's good, especially if it's generally liked (mind you, there's also the hype-factor/marketing/false demand).
When I was first getting into classical, it was all about the Beethoven. I thought Haydn and Mozart was 'fairy-music'. Compared to my favorite, they truely do seem light. Looking back, I just didn't have much understanding of the classical aesthetic - I didn't know to wait for the action and intensity to rise, how to enjoy the more subtle expressions and appreciate the architecture... and still so much to learn. I think that's an advantage of Beethoven to the laylistener, his music can hook you from the get-go.
With this in mind, I now try to give some understanding of the aesthetic to the listener beforehand. Help them to enjoy the unfamiliar, to see the beauty. Public speaking would be a good skill for a performer. Especially museum curators such as ourselves, the music is part history lesson

Something else about Haydn here: that he stayed in Vienna as he struggled to become a composer. That's important. Reminds me of a bit of wisdom from Conan OBrian in an interview "go to where they're making the things you like". Not the most poetic, but it was a central point he came up with in response to his success. I doubt Haydn would have met Popra or Prince Esterhazy if he'd been in Rohrau.
I haven't heard the Creation yet, will have to check it out. My current favorite is Symphony 61. What an energetic first movement, and the buildup for the explosive development, phew! Listening to it while riding my bike, I feel like I'm flying. The andante as well, in particular there's this descent to some spooky winds, makes me want to howl at the moon.