In the context of current debates regarding the restitution of looted objects/artefacts/artworks to former European colonies arises the question around the restitution of images, especially portraits:
Who holds the rights to images taken illegally or illegitimately, under coercion or threat of violence?
While the image itself can obviously not practically be returned, the rules by which we define and re-create that image can be shifted and multiplied.
It is within the fissures, the missing and the opaque that the possibility for a new and more possible meeting manifests itself.