It would be best to compare Series 5 and 6... and Moff's other works - not the whole series.
To a certain extent, I think you make a good point. Moff vs Moff makes some sense. But at the same time, so does good writing vs bad writing, and it makes a lot more sense to use examples that most of the people reading this are likely to be familiar with (eg, "Almost People" against "Fear Her" (though those even have the actual writer, if not show-runner in common) than it would be to bring in, say, Joanna Russ' The Female Man.
And as I type, I realize my reaction to your comment is changing. Let me start again.
Change is not change is not change. Change isn't "all good". Some changes are neutral but others frankly for the better or for the worse.
Doctor Who has been lucky enough that many of its changes of direction have actually been relatively neutral, but some of them have been god-awful. The television moving being a case in point. It's not quite as bad as some people say, but as a 90 minute drama it's pretty mediocre. Paul McGann did quite a lot more with the material than anyone could have asked him to, but that doesn't stop the material from being pretty lousy.
And I fear that that is going to be posterity's take on Moffat's era. Or at least, that it will remain mine. (Others, of course, are free to disagree; there are better and worse arguments in literary debates but no absolute right/wrong answers.)
A *bit* of apples and oranges, yes
It would be best to compare Series 5 and 6... and Moff's other works - not the whole series.
To a certain extent, I think you make a good point. Moff vs Moff makes some sense. But at the same time, so does good writing vs bad writing, and it makes a lot more sense to use examples that most of the people reading this are likely to be familiar with (eg, "Almost People" against "Fear Her" (though those even have the actual writer, if not show-runner in common) than it would be to bring in, say, Joanna Russ' The Female Man.
And as I type, I realize my reaction to your comment is changing. Let me start again.
Change is not change is not change. Change isn't "all good". Some changes are neutral but others frankly for the better or for the worse.
Doctor Who has been lucky enough that many of its changes of direction have actually been relatively neutral, but some of them have been god-awful. The television moving being a case in point. It's not quite as bad as some people say, but as a 90 minute drama it's pretty mediocre. Paul McGann did quite a lot more with the material than anyone could have asked him to, but that doesn't stop the material from being pretty lousy.
And I fear that that is going to be posterity's take on Moffat's era. Or at least, that it will remain mine. (Others, of course, are free to disagree; there are better and worse arguments in literary debates but no absolute right/wrong answers.)