The Graven Word
Sigmund Freud wrote about Michelangelo's Moses in a study unpublished by him, probably because it neglects the artist, dwelling, instead, on the subject of his work of art: Moses. From what we know of Michelangelo any insight into how his personality affected his production as an artist would have been welcome. We must be happy with what we have. Freud begins with this disclaimer:
"I'll start by saying that I'm not an art connoisseur, but a layman. I have often noticed that the content of a work of art attracts me more than its formal and technical qualities, which are what the artist attaches most importance to. I really don't have the right understanding for many of the means and effects of art. I must say this to ensure a lenient judgment of my attempt."
Freud makes it clear he's looking for meaning in art, not aesthetic pleasure, which he assumes is the artist's motive. Had he lived to see the total elimination of subject from art, as with Abstract Expressionism, his hypothesis would have been confirmed. That he looks for meaning in art does make him a connoisseur. He at least knows the difference between fine art and decorative art.
What we all find incomprehensible is a beautiful work of art that means nothing. The work itself must have this analyze-ability (ermöglichen) if it is an expression of intentions affecting us -and the impulses of the artist. The expression of emotion in art was a leading concern in Renaissance Italian art since Giotto. A psychiatrist must have an interest in the human emotions. It is a natural convergence of interests.
It might be relevant to point out that the behavioral definition of autistic spectrum disorder is a disability to read facial expressions in others. It must be said on behalf of everyone concerned that an emotional reaction to the Golden Calf incident must not be assumed. An generic example of a reflexive emotional reaction is the plight of the cuckold. The figure depicting Moses looks like he was told a moment ago of the faithlessness of his beloved. A fair comparison, then, might be the emotional reflex conditioned upon the sin of idolatry to the guilt conditioned upon Original Sin.
The representations of people in the art of ancient Greece and Rome exhibit a uniformly bland facial expression. It was their intention to eliminate incidental passion. Passion was thought to be madness. The epitome of art was the idealization of the human being sanitized of passion. An exception was made for facial grimaces representative of pain, not itself an emotion, more in the nature of a physical reflex. Not so for the artists of the Italian Renaissance, known for being passionate, by nature.
Freud, lurking in the shadows of the cathedral crypt arouses his imagination. It is an adventure. His attention is drawn first to the look in Moses' eye, in which he perceives, or projects, upon the face of Moses a look of disdain, of condescension towards the golden calf-worshiping rabble -which doesn't believe, and has an unseemly zest for the worship of idols.
Freud is reminded of a contemporary critic's comparison of the masterpiece to a faun (panköpfigen). How else depict in marble the shine emanating from Moses' face as he returned with the Commandments? At that point in the story Moses was no mere mortal. He has by then become a mythological being. It is the stuff of pagan mythology. The thought makes Freud uncomfortable.
All such inferences are ever latent in the work of art, "manifest content," subject to analytical "elaboration." Upon persistent iconographic analysis, Moses' expression can read as his reaction to the orgiastic celebration of the Golden Calf -itself symbolic of the carnival of life. It is axiomatic that the repression of the instincts is the cause of emotional suffering. In an instant, that can change into an insight into the true human condition. Although Freudian, it's only my interpretation, if not necessarily Freud's.
Freud writes that the art scholarship of Giovanni Morelli had come to his attention even before his interest in psychiatry. Morelli was notorious for challenging the attribution to famous artists of copies, even forgeries. His blunt tactics caused a stir in the field of art history which still resonates. Freud adapted Morelli's approach of paying special attention to minor details as clues.
If there is anything enigmatic about the statue of Moses, it is its blatant disregard for God's commandment, "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image." Challenging the statue's fidelity to its subject (the real Moses) in minute particulars conveniently dodges the question of faith in God's Commandments. The statue is not the real Moses.
One-of-a-kind works of art can be viewed at: https://www.saatchiart.com/account/artworks/1840403