There's a difference between asking about why authors have different takes on a given trope or motif, and using one author's use of the motif as a standard by which to measure the other author. The first is the conversation. The second is the dictatorship. The conversation can even lead to judgments, but they'll be of a more sophisticated sort taking into account the differing aims and so on. Again Aycheb is my model on this. She's showing what the conversation is. You are free to say you think Moore has the better part of the argument. I just think it's unfair to say that Joss fails because he didn't just say what Moore said. That refuses the conversation altogether.