I'm sure he would have loved that comment. I thoroughly recommend this book, a good chunk of which is about how contemporary philosophy and literature influenced Haydn into taking that kind of approach to his audience (quite a small and directly observable entity for him at that time, of course).
Blurb:
Schroeder here sets out to challenge the widely held view of Haydn as an inspired instrumental musician who composed in isolation from 18th-century enlightened thinking. By means of both documentary and musical investigation the author seeks instead to present him as a culturally and politically sensitive representative of the Age of Englightement. Haydn's awareness of contemporary aesthetic opinion and the tenets of the Enlightenment is reflected by the transformations in his own compositional style, and there are fascinating implications here for our understanding of instrumental music from the second half of the eighteenth century. Of fundamental importance in this survey is Haydn's relationship with his audience, which, it is argued, had a significant bearing on the nature of the works. The author suggests that Haydn was well acquainted with the contemporary view that works of literature or music should serve a moral functionand he points to numerous instances in the late symphonies where this end is effectively pursued. For the eighteenth century, however, morality did not imply dullness; indeed, its goals were best served through wit, humour, popular appeal, and beauty, as well as through intellectual challenge.
I agree 100 per cent with Schroeder. I strongly associate Haydn with the Age of Englightement. It seems to me that he embodies the faith in the Reason and the educational purpose of arts in general. Beethoven was already beyond that, following his genious in a 'bourgeois' manner, a self conscious artist that 'wrote for the posterity' as he reproached a musician that didn't understand one of his later works during the rehearsal. (the story could be fake, but it's nevertheless explicative).