In a common (and Scholarly) reading of the work, Michelangelo’s Moses is interpreted as showing the prophet responding to the disturbing scene in anger, vengefully in readiness to smash the stone tablets.

Freud took this narrative as a point of departure for his own interpretation, and with his power of observation and analysis, contended that while rising and letting the tablets slip, Michelangelo’s Moses gained control of his rage; thus, the right hand retracted in the beard, pulling it along in the wake of his gesture, and clamping down on the slipping tablets along with the tension of his inner right arm. Freud believed that Michelangelo’s Moses was and always will be a figure in the act of restraining himself from rising to the anger of his own passion.

By observing in detail, we can create narratives that open new avenues of interpretation. In Architecture, this would translate as concentrating on what a building means, rather than how it looks. This is particularly relevant to ‘propaganda’ architecture, where iconic masterpieces sometimes masquerade ideological manipulation.