Fotoreproductie van een ontwerp van Léopold II van België die de eed aflegt tijdens zijn inhuldiging op 17 december 1865 in Brussel

Editor: Here we have a photo reproduction depicting Leopold II of Belgium taking his oath during his inauguration in Brussels, prior to 1866. It's a very formal scene, very detailed, almost like a staged historical painting, and appears to be a photographic print. What draws your eye to this work? Curator: I’m interested in what this image conceals, even more than what it reveals. The reproduction process itself - a photograph of an official design – distances us from the "original event," adding layers of manipulation. Who commissioned it? What were they hoping to achieve with its distribution? Editor: That’s a good point, it makes you wonder about its propaganda potential. So, are you focusing more on the function of this printed reproduction than its aesthetic qualities? Curator: Exactly. I see the photographic print as a *product*. Consider the labor involved in its creation, dissemination, and even its preservation in a museum. Also, thinking about Leopold II's reign, one must confront the brutal exploitation of the Congo Free State, the image-making of which supported it ideologically and economically. How does the print normalize power? What function does the *style* have on audiences? Editor: So, by analyzing the materiality of the photographic print, we uncover a complex relationship between image-making and colonial power? Curator: Precisely. The material realities and the consumption of the work create a narrative more impactful than just its aesthetic representation. The means by which images like this circulated is essential to understand their historical effect. Editor: I never thought about this print being part of such a wider system of production, but your materialist approach makes that undeniable. It gives it new resonance. Curator: I’m glad you see it, now imagine what is excluded to make something like this circulate in good taste, and good order.