Produkcija | Production:
DB INDOŠ Kuća ekstremnog muzičkog kazališta | House of Extreme Music Theatre - Perforacije Festival - Teatar &TD


FANTOM PLANINŠAK / THE PHANTOM PLANINŠAK
DB Indoš & Tanja Vrvilo

Izvođači-šahtofonisti | Performers-Schachtophonists:
Vilim Matula, Tanja Vrvilo, Damir Bartol Indoš
Glazba | Music: Ivan Bilosnić - Bic - guitar, Nino Prišuta - bas,
Ratko Danilović - Racak- udaraljke

Film: Gaetano Liberti, Luciano Pérez Savoy, Michael Szekelyhidi
Svjetlo | Light: Damir Kruhak
Majstor | Master: Ivica Bačun
Pomoćnik majstora | Master's assistent: Milan Ivanac
Dizajn | Design: Niko Mihaljević

 

U sklopu dokumentarističke trilogije Svaka revolucija je bacanje kocke, u razdoblju od 2010. do 2014. izvodili smo tri povezane predstave Cefas, Američki atentator i Tosca 914, dekonstruirajući povijesne fragmete o trojici atentatora u Hrvatskoj u vrijeme Austro-Ugarske u razdoblju 1912.-1914. Naše predstave su proizašle iz posljednjeg rukopisa povjesničara Josipa Horvata o pobuni omladine uoči Prvog svjetskog rata, izvornog naslova Četvorica atentatora. Slučaj četvrtog atentatora ispao je iz našeg trijaloškog sistema po svojem metapolitičkom korijenu, napinjajući se u rasponu između psihičke uzročnosti i logičke normalnosti, između minimuma nužnosti i maksimuma zahtjeva, Planinšak je učinio svoju aktivističku želju fantomskom, približivši se nestvarnom postajanju.

Slučaj Planinšak je sablasnog karaktera, pitanje je da li je to uopće bio pokušaj atentata ili se radilo o samoubojstvu atentatom i slobodnim padom koje se dogodilo na noćnoj plinskoj svjetiljci preko puta Banskih dvora na Markovom trgu 1912. godine, početkom studenoga. Situacija koju je proizveo Planinšak popevši se na plinsku svjetiljku, pucajući na prozorsku siluetu i pucajući u sebe, preduhitrila je funkcionare disciplinarnog društva u izvršavanju njihove dužnosti procesuiranja čina političkog atentata, stvar je iz društvenog stanja transformirana u čisto postbiološko stanje, atentator trenutno postaje Matoševim umrlikom. Fantomska priča radi s intenzitetima prethodnih triju činjeničnih priča, pamćenjem pojedinaca i grupa koji su ostvarili mogućnost da politiziraju svoj čin, njihova iznenadna ubrzavanja u metalogici slobodne volje dolaze u najveću blizinu Planinšakove iznenadne sporosti.

As part of the documentarist trilogy entitled Every Revolution is a Throw of Dice we performed three interconnecting works from 2010 to 2014 - Cepheus, An American Assassin and Tosca 914- deconstructing historical fragments about three assassins in Austro-Hungarian Croatia from 1912-1914. The works are inspired by the last manuscript on the rebellious youth on the eve of WWI by historian Josip Horvat, with the working title The Four Assassins. The case of the fourth assassin fell out from our trialogic system for its meta-political roots, straining in the range between psychological causality and logics of normality, between minimum necessity and maximum requirements. Planinšak made his activist desire phantomic, moving toward becoming-phantom.

The case of Planinšak is of a ghostly character. The question is whether it was an assassination attempt at all or a suicide by assassination and free fall that took place at the night on the gaslight column across the Ban’s Court building at St. Mark’s Square in early November 1912. The situation produced by Planinšak climbing on the gaslight column, shooting at the silhouette in the window and himself, forestalled the functionaries of the disciplinary society in the execution of their duties of prosecution of the acts of the political assassination. The matter is transformed from a social condition into a purely post-biological condition, the assassin instantly becomes Matos’ deadman. The phantom fable works with the intensities of the previous three factual fables, memories of individuals and groups who have achieved the ability to politicise their acts, their sudden accelerations come in the greatest proximity of Planinšak’s sudden slowness in the metalogics of free will.

 Izvori | Sources: Josip Horvat Pobuna omladine | The Youth Rebellion 1911 -1914 (1967 | Gordogan 2006), Albert Bazala O slobodi volje | On the Freedom of the Will (1910), Ivana Rossi Osnovne misli filozofije Henri Bergsona | The Basic Thoughts of the Philosophy of Henri Bergson (1916), Elly Ebenspanger Problem slobodne volje | The Problem of Free Will (1939), Gaston Bachelard Plamen voštanice | La flamme d’une chandelle (1961), Narodne novine (Zagreb, 1912), Gajo Petrović Logika (1963), Eyal Weizman Najmanje od svih mogućih zala | The Least of All Possible Evils - Humanitarian Violence from Arendt to Gaza (2011), Gang of Four, Lene Lovich

Premijera | Premiere: Zagreb, Teatar &TD, 25. & 26. 06. 2015.

Hvala | Thank you: Teatar &TD, film.factory, Branko Matan, Ljiljana Filipović, Vjeran Zuppa, Ivan Marušić Klif, Hrvoje Nikšić

Projekt su podržali | Project is supported by: Ministarstvo kulture RH | The Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Croatia, Ured za obrazovanje, kulturu i sport Grada Zagreba | City Office for Culture, Education and Sports – City of Zagreb, Zaklada Kultura nova

 

FANTOM PLANINŠAK
DB Indoš & Tanja Vrvilo
 

I. PANDEKTA

Pretpostavimo da smo se nakon mjesec dana ljetovanja vratili kući, u stan koji je za to vrijeme bio prazan i zaključan, a čije ključeve nema nitko osim nas. Otključavamo vrata, ulazimo, prolazimo kroz sve sobe i otvaramo prozore da se provjetri. Sve je poznato, prirodno, sve je onako kako smo ostavili i kako smo očekivali naći. Ali gle - nema pepeljare na radnom stolu! Odjednom se zbunjujemo. Posumnjamo u vlastite oči, protrljamo ih i pogledamo ponovo; pepeljare nema! Posumnjamo u svoje pamćenje; možda smo pepeljaru slučajno stavili na neki drugi stol ili na ormar? Izvršimo brz pregled čitavog stana; pepeljare nema! A kako bi i bila negdje drugdje. To je pepeljara od crvenog muranskog stakla koja uvijek stoji na radnom stolu i nigdje drugdje. Osim toga točno se sjećamo da smo je neposredno prije putovanja oprali, obrisali i stavili na njeno mjesto. Suočeni smo dakle s problemom (zagonetkom); kako i kamo je nestala pepeljara iz zaključanog stana, u kom se inače, bar pri letimičnom pregledu, ne primjećuje nikakva druga promjena? Ovo pitanje nas zbunjuje, kopka, uznemiruje, podstiče na razmišljanje. Osjećamo da moramo naći rješenje. Ali kako da ga pronađemo? Prirodno se nameće hipoteza (pretpostavka); za vrijeme dok smo bili na moru netko je bio u stanu i nekamo odnio pepeljaru. To je, čini se, jedino moguće objašnjenje (ukoliko ne vjerujemo u čuda i u duhove), ali ako je i točno, ono još ne rješava, nego samo povećava zagonetku. Pepeljara nije vrijednost zbog koje se provaljuje u tuđi stan! Razmislimo još malo pa kažemo sami sebi; pepeljaru mora da je odnio netko tko je u stan provalio zbog nečeg vrednijeg. Svidjela mu se pepeljara pa je usput uzeo i nju. Ili ju je možda nehotice razbio, pa je ostatke pokupio smatrajući da će vlasnik prije primijetiti razbijene komade pepeljare nego njen nestanak. Našu dosta neodređenu pretpostavku preliminarnu (prethodnu hipotezu) hipotezu tako smo zamijenili drugom, mnogo određenijom. Ali kako možemo utvrditi da li je ona točna? Da bismo utvrdili da je hipoteza istinita moramo je verificirati (provjeriti). Ali kako da je provjeravamo? Iz naše hipoteze slijede neke konsekvencije (logičke posljedice). Ako je hipoteza istinita, mora da je iz stana pored pepeljare na stolu nestalo i nešto mnogo vrednije. Ako hoćemo da provjerimo našu hipotezu, treba, dakle, da pažljivo pretražimo stan i utvrdimo nije li iz njega nestalo i nešto što vrijedi mnogo više. Otvaramo najprije stol u kojem držimo novac: 44 000 koje smo ostavili stoje nedirnute. Otvaramo ormar s odijelima: kaputi i odijela su na mjestu. Na svom mjestu je i pisaća mašina, radio, televizor, tranzistor. Najzad se dosjetimo: Najvrednija je u stanu zbirka maraka. Samo jedna serija vrijedi pola milijuna. Otvaramo još jednom srednju ladicu stola i nalazimo album s markama. I on je tu, ali nekoliko najvrednijih serija je nestalo. Naša je hipoteza provjerena, našli smo rješenje zagonetke: Pepeljaru je uzeo čovjek koji je odnio marke. Međutim, ovo rješenje problema otvara jedan novi, teži i važniji: Tko je odnio marke i gdje su te marke sada? Ako je za našu zbirku maraka znao samo jedan čovjek, naš najbolji prijatelj, za kojeg znamo da je pošten, ali sklon neslanim šalama, pretpostavit ćemo da je on odnio marke s namjerom da nas prestraši. Otići ćemo k njemu i reći ćemo mu da sve znamo. Kad on prsne u smijeh, hipoteza će biti provjerena i mi ćemo zatražiti da marke vrati. Čitava priča tako će završiti hepiendom. Ako je, naprotiv, široko poznato da imamo veliku zbirku maraka, ako to znaju ne samo mnogi naši prijatelji i znalci, nego i prijatelji i znalci naših prijatelja i znalaca, novi problem će biti mnogo zamršeniji. U takvom slučaju telefonirati ćemo policiji i zamoliti je da preuzme dalje istraživanje. (Gajo Petrović)

II. OBAVEZNO PRAVO

Ja se kolebam između dva akta, te prelazim od pomišljanja jednoga k pomišljanju drugoga. To znači da prolazim nekim redom stanja i da se ona mogu razdijeliti na dvije grupe, pa se naginjem sad jednoj X sad drugoj Y: X i Y su simboli, koji pretstavljaju razne tendencije moga djelovanja u raznim momentima trajanja ili još je bolje reći da nisu zapravo niti simboli realnih tendencija jer se ja ne može cijepati. Ovakovo obilježavanje uzimamo samo zato jer je govoru zgodno. Realnost naprotiv poznaje samo jedno cjelovito ja, koje se razvija, dok se slobodno djelo ne odluči od njega kao zrio plod. Međutim, ovo shvaćanje slobodnoga čina ne zadovoljava obično mišljenje, koje se voli kretati u sasvim odijeljenim difernenciranim pojmovima. Ono si predstavlja neko ja, koje je prošavši neki put M O došlo u tačku O gdje mu se pokazuju dva jednako moguća puta. Namjesto aktivnoga kontinuiranoga živoga ja, u kojemu smo samo apstrakcijom razlikovali dvije direkcije, supstituiraju se dva realna smjera, koja čekaju našu odluku. Živi će aktivititet uistinu poći ili putem X ili Y, t.j. izvest će jednu od tendencija, koje smo apstrakcijom prepoznali. Tome će tako biti zato što se smjer kojemu je taj aktivitet pošao pripravljao za cijeloga puta M O, a ne zato što se volja O tobože indiferentna t.j. jednako sposobna, da pođe obim putevima odlučila za jedan od njih. Ukratko i zastupnici i protivnici slobode slažu se u tome da shvaćaju slobodno djelo kao neko mehaničko osciliranje između dvije tačke X i Y. Ako se odlučimo za X kažu prvi, dakle ste birali, kolebali, bilo je dakle i Y moguće.
Drugi odgovaraju: izabrali ste X, imali ste i razlog za to, a držite li da je Y bilo jednako moguće, zaboravljate na taj razlog. Oba ova riješenja osnivaju se na istom pogrješnom slijedu misli. Ona naime promatraju djelo, kad je već gotovo, prenose ga u prostornu sliku i drže, da ta slika potpuno adekvatno prikazuje nastanak djelovanja. No dok determinizam računa sa svime što znade o tom djelu i konstatira da je put M O X bio doista izveden, to indeterminizam ignorira jedan od data s kojima je konstruirao sliku djelovanja, pa kad je već neko djelo izvedeno vraća se na tačku O i stavlja tamo ja da oscilira između X i Y. (Ivana Rossi)

U ovoj radnji bavit ćemo se specijalno etičkim problemom slobode volje, te ćemo ga odrediti kao problem nauke o vrednotama. Ali pokazat ćemo i psihologijsko značenje problema. Što se tiče pojma volje i pojma slobode ne određujemo volju supstancijalno nego aktualistički; volja nije supstancijalno biće, već se radi o htijenju, o voljnim aktima. Slobodu određujemo negativno kao neprisutnost prisile i pozitivno kao aktivnost u smjeru vrednota. Na vrelu zazbiljnosti sloboda je neposredni nalaz, etičko vrednovanje posvjedočuje nam slobodu htijenja, a znanstveni prikaz, koji prikazuje determiniranost naših voljnih akata, ne može da pokoleba naše vjerovanje u slobodu; jer znanost ima kao predmet logizirano htijenje, htijenje koje je pretvorila u mehnički preparat, ali pravi doživljaj htijenja izmiče znanstvenom prikazu; slobodu možemo doživjeti i vrednovati, ali je ne možemo spoznati. Zbog toga ondje gdje ima života, ima i slobode. Međutim, logičkom shemom ne može se sloboda shvatiti, ona ostaje misterij. (Elly Ebenspanger)

 

III. STATISTIKA AUSTRO-UGARSKE MONARHIJE

Br. 1
Indeks mu je nosio broj 198 a bio je redovni slušač oslobođen od cijele naukovine na drugoj godini bio je upisan kao izvanredni slušač Možda je tada usporedo radio kao dnevničar u Statističkom uredu Prve je godine slušao Institucije Hrvatsko-ugarsko pravo Povijest srednjeg vijeka polazio je Romanističke vježbe a slušao je i tečaj Alberta Bazala - O slobodi volje Druge je godine slušao Obavezno pravo Pandekta O posjedu Nasljedno pravo Pravo katoličke crkve Sociologiju te Statistiku Austro-Ugarske Monarhije

Br. 2  
te Statistiku Austro-Ugarske Monarhije Sociologiju Pravo katoličke crkve Nasljedno pravo O posjedu Pandekta Obavezno pravo Druge je godine slušao O slobodi volje a slušao je i tečaj Alberta Bazala polazio je Romanističke vježbe Povijest srednjeg vijeka Hrvatsko-ugarsko pravo Prve je godine slušao Institucije kao dnevničar u Statističkom uredu Možda je tada usporedo radio kao izvanredni slušač na drugoj godini bio je upisan oslobođen od cijele naukovine a bio je redovni slušač Indeks mu je nosio broj 198

Br. 3     
Prve je godine slušao Institucije Hrvatsko-ugarsko pravo Povijest srednjeg vijeka polazio je Romanističke vježbe a slušao je i tečaj Alberta Bazala O slobodi volje Druge je godine slušao Obavezno pravo Pandekta O posjedu Nasljedno pravo Pravo katoličke crkve Sociologiju te Statistiku Austro-Ugarske Monarhije  Indeks mu je nosio broj 198 a bio je redovni slušač oslobođen od cijele naukovine na drugoj godini bio je upisan kao izvanredni slušač Možda je tada usporedo radio kao dnevničar u Statističkom uredu

 

IV. HRVATSKO-UGARSKO PRAVO

Šest pljezaja dolje x10 Mali pljezaj za njega
Šest pljezaja dolje x20 Dva pljezaja gore
Šest pljezaja dolje x35 Mali pljezaj za njega
fotografija s vlastoručnim potpisom
snimljena u vrijeme nekako pred smrt
prikazuje mladog čovjeka duguljaste glave
plavokosog smirenog inteligentnog pogleda
s brčićima koji su već pošiknuli
On je odjeven kao student prava
On je odjeven kao student prava
dobro skrojeno prutasto odijelo
kaput s dva reda puceta
Potpis na fotografiji je sitan
rukopis čitak prilično pravilan
rukopis čovjeka meke-ćudi
brižljivog u svakidašnjem životu
On je odjeven kao student prava
On je odjeven kao student prava
on ima tvrdu ogrlicu
konfekcioniranu razmjerno svijetlu
dessiniranu svilenu kravatu
rukopis čovjeka meke-ćudi
metodičnog pedantnog u radu
bez ambicija povučenog u sebe
metodičnog pedantnog u radu
bez ambicija povučenog u sebe
metodičnog pedantnog u radu
povučenog u sebe
bez ambicija povučenog u sebe
bez ambicija povučenog u sebe
bez ambicija povučenog u sebe
bez ambicija povučenog u sebe
Šest pljezaja dolje  x24  Dva pljezaja gore x3
Šest pljezaja dolje x86   Mali pljezaj za njega
metodičnog pedantnog u radu
Dva pljezaja gore
metodičnog pedantnog u radu
Dva pljezaja gore
metodičnog pedantnog u radu
Dva pljezaja gore
metodičnog pedantnog u radu
Dva pljezaja gore
metodičnog pedantnog u radu
Dva pljezaja gore
metodičnog pedantnog u radu

V. SOCIOLOGIJA

U srijedu 30. listopada zakazano je u zagrebačkom kazalištu jedino gostovanje francuske glumice Henriette Roggers s družinom u igrokazu Henryja Bernsteina Le voleur, tada senzacionalnom pomodnom komadu. Kazalište je 30. listopada 1912. bilo slabo posjećeno. Predstavu francuske družine, koja je počela u pola osam, posjetio je i ban-komesar Slavko Cuvaj. Ne dočekavši svršetka predstave, Cuvaj je oko devet sati napustio kazaliste. Autom se vratio u banske dvore. Predzimska je noć bila škura i neugodna. Grad tih i pust. Sutradan se ujutro šaptom pronio glas da se te noći pred banskom palačom na Markovu trgu nešto dogodilo. Neki su tvrdili da je počinjen atentat na bana-komesara. I da je zaglavio neki mladić. Konkretno nije nitko znao ništa. Otkako se počelo šaputati, najradoznaliji su i najsmioniji, kao slučajno, odlazili na Markov trg. Kao uvijek, i danju i noću, pred kapijom je automatski koračao vojnik-stražnik, trgom je kao uvijek šetkao i postajkivao dežurni redarstvenik. Neki su prolaznici ustvrdili da se u zidu ispod prozora u prvom katu primjećuje neka oderotina. Nitko nije znao je li raspuklina postojala i prije. Govorilo se da je tu zacijelo udarilo tane. U četvrtak oko podneva nagađanja su se konkretizirala. Tvrdilo se da je počinjen atentat, koji nije uspio. Atentator da je neki student, koji da je nakon neuspjeha počnio samoubojstvo. Nitko nije znao ime studenta. Zagrebačke su novine o svemu šutjele. Tek se u petak i subotu doznalo što o događaju na Markovu trgu javljaju novine izvan dosega zagrebačke cenzure.

Br. 1
Splitska Sloboda, kojoj je redaktor bio Oskar Tartaglia, javila je u petak 1. studenoga da je đak Planinščak 30. listopada u devet sati uvečer, kad se ban-komesar autom vraćao kući, ispalio na Markovu trgu četiri revolverska hica prema vozilu, a peti u sebe. Policija da, navodno, slučaj zabašuruje, pa je zbog toga obustavila i potragu za sukrivcima.

Br. 2
Riječki novi list u broju od 31. listopada donio je ovaj izvještaj: Večeras u 8 sati pucao je pravnik Planinščak na jedan prozor banske palače na Markovu trgu. Na prozoru je opazio silhouettu jedne osobe, te je misleći da je Cuvaj, ispalio tri hica iz browninga, koji navodno nisu pogodili nikoga. Na to je atentator ispalio sebi u sljepoočnicu četvrti hitac i srušio se obliven krvlju. Atentator je izdahnuo pred vratima bolnice, kamo su ga prenijeli. Zove se Planinščak, bio je pravnik star 24 godine, i namješten u Statističkom uredu. Policija se razbježala po gradu i uhapsila više osoba. U narednom je broju javljeno: Zagrebačka je policija upela sve sile, da ovaj cijeli slučaj prikaze kao jednostavno samoubojstvo. U tom smislu priopćen je slučaj i bečkim i peštanskim agencijama. Zagrebačke novine dobile su nalog, da ne smiju ništa pisati o atentatu; oblasti ga žele sakriti, zabašuriti.  Markov trg je zaposjednut brojnom policijom, a banska je palača u tami. Policija se nalazi u velikoj potrazi za toboznjim sukrivcima atentatora. U Zagrebu je glas o atentatu praizveo veliku senzaciju i svugdje vlada razumljiva uzbuđenost. Na prozoru banske palače, na prvom katu, izbušen je komad zida, kamo je tane udarilo. Sva nastojanja policije da zabašuri atentat neće uspjeti.

Br. 3
Treću verziju o slučaju Planinščak, koja se tada još najviše prepričavala,
pribilježio je kasnije atentator Stjepan Dojčić: Planinščak se popeo na jednu
svjetiljku naveče oko 9 sati 30. X. 1912, te je tako htio ubiti Cuvaja,
koji se nalazio na prozoru, ali je bio zle sreće, te ga nije pogodio, već su njega na mjestu ubili.

Br. 4
Konačno je u subotu 2. studenog u Narodnim novinama objavljeno priopćenje kojim je demantirano da je đak Stjepan Planinšak - prvi puta je tu korektno navedeno njegovo ime i prezime - pokušao atentat na bana-komesara, te ustvrđeno da se radilo o ‘dobro smišljenom’ samoubojstvu. Planinšak da je ispalio u zrak tri pokusna hica da okuša oružje. Da se ustanovi istina i da se svedu na zaista postojeće činjenice nekoje podpuno izmišljene glasine, koje su nastale povodom dne 31. listopada t.g. u 1/2 8 sati na večer izvedenog samoubojstva pravnika S. Planinšaka na Markovom trgu, te koje su sasvim neosnovane i samovoljno dovedene u svezu sa tobožnjim atentatom na kr. povjerenika, saobćuje se na temelju redarstvenih izvida sliedeće: Službeno jest ustanovljeno, da je pravnik drugog tečaja S. Planinšak toga dana u 1/2 8 sati na večer kod pljušteće kiše došao iz svog, u blizini ležećeg stana, Duga ulica br. 30, na sredinu Markovog trga - nu na onu stranu, koja bliže leži novoj vladinoj zgradi; nego banskoj palači - i da je tamo brzo i to uzastopce opalio tri pokusna hitca iz samokresa u zrak, a zatim se sa četvrtim hitcem smrtonosno ranio. Dok je Planinšak pucao, doletio je k njemu postajni stražar, nu samoubojica bio se je već, težko ranjen zadnjim hitcem, srušio se na zemlju. Odmah prizvano družtvo za spasavanje prevezlo je težko ranjenoga u bolnicu milosrdne braće, gdje je isti doskora podlegao težkoj ozliedi, a da se nije povratio k sviesti. Iz redarstvenih izvidjajnih spisa, naročito iz preslušnih zapisnika njegovih prijatelja, koji spisi stoje svakom na uvid, proizlazi da je samoubojica već odavna bio obračunao sa svojim životom. Već nakon položenog izpita zrelosti nakanio je Planinšak skončati svoj život, pa je tada, a i kasnije često puta rekao, da ne ima uobće svrhe živjeti. Isto tako je ustanovljeno, da je Planinšak već dugo vremena bio zavadjen sa svojom obitelji i da je naročito zadnjeg mjeseca dozriela u njemu nakana da se skonča, jer unatoč tomu, što je po iskazivanju njegovih prijatelja bio dobro pripravljen, nije pristupio drugom državnom izpitu, a isto tako je napustio svoje namještenje kao dnevničar zemaljskog statističkog ureda, a da se nije ogledao za kojom inom zaslužbom. Prema tomu  se ne radi o ničem drugom, nego o dobro promišljenom samoubojstvu, pa su sve druge glasine, naročito pako o navodnom atentatu na kraljevskog povjerenika, tim više izmišljene i neosnovane, jer je banska palača u to doba u cieloj svojoj fronti napram Markovom trgu bila podpuno u tami, a kraljevski povjerenik nalazio se je tog časa u odajama banske palače, koja leže baš na suprotnoj strani Markovoga trga, to jest u Kapucinskoj ulici. Osim toga  ustanovljeno je točnim redarstvenim izvidjajima, da se na cieloj fronti banske palače ne nalaze nikakovi tragovi ispaljenih hitaca.

 

VI. NASLJEDNO PRAVO

Planinšakovi su imali kuću u Dugoj ulici, danas Radićevoj 58, a poslije u Maksimirskoj cesti 68. Ti se obiteljski podaci ne slažu s ličnim podacima koje je Stjepan Planinšak naveo kad se 2. svibnja 1911. upisao na pravo na Zagrebačkom
sveučilištu. Prema podacima sveučilišnih matrikula, rođen je 25. listopada 1889. u Zagrebu. Očevo ime nije navedeno, možda je tada već bio mrtav, a kao mati je navedena Anastazija Planinšak, sitničarka, sa stanom Hrastik br. 1 (Hrastik je bio periferija Laščine, blizu Maksimirske ceste.). U sveučilišnim je matrikulama navedeno je da mu je skrbnik Julije Herzog, trgovac.
Jednako su zbrkani i podaci o dogadaju u noći 30. 1istopada 1912. na Markovu trgu. Uglavnom su sve to nagađanja, naklapanja posve nerealna, fantastična. Verzija da je Planinšak pucao na komesarov automobil posve je nevjerojatna. Na ulaznoj je kapiji banskih dvora bio vojnik-stražnik, na trgu su bila, barem za povratak bana-komesara, postavljena barem dva redarstvenika. Da se u noćno doba na trgu pojavio neki neznanac, svi bi ga oni držali na oku, a zacijelo i intervenirali da se približio ulaznoj kapiji. Posve je pak nevjerojatna verzija da se Planinšak popeo na svjetiljku do visine prvoga kata. Kandelabar je bio metalan, gladak, na nj bi se mogao uspeti sarno profesionalni pelivan. Takvu ekshibiciju nebi pasivno promatrali ni vojnik-stražnik ni redarstvenici. Jedino je činjenica da su prasnuli hici, da je jedan mladić smrtno ranjen i da je pred banskim dvorima prolivena krv. Što se uistinu dogodilo te mračne, zamagljene listopadske noći ostat će zagonetka. Zagonetka te večeri na Markovu trgu ostat ce neriješena. Premalo ima uporišta za bilo kakvo kombiniranje. Službeni dokumenti slučaju ne postoje. Možda je Planinšak počeo demonstrativno pucati u općenito povišenoj psihičkoj atmosferi tadanje omladine u euforiji zbog pobjede balkanskih saveznika. IIi je počinio samoubojstvo zbog neke intimne krize? Tada još nisu bila rijetkost samoubojstva zbog nesretne ljubavi. IIi je policija jednostavno umlatila neznanca kad se nije odazvao pozivu da stane? Zagonetka ostaje. Planinšak je nakon smrti ostao samo nejasna sjena.

 

VII. INSTITUCIJE

Halo bok moje ime je Danny | časnik sam IDEEFA | Za sat vremena vašu ćemo kuću dignuti u zrak | ova lažna raketa je kucanje na krov vaše kuće | palindromski x3
Planinšakovi su imali    U                   Dugoj ulici kuću
danas kuća u Radićevoj  A                  poslije kuću
u Maksimirskoj cesti    KAD              se je Planinšak 
upisao na pravo sa stanom U              kući Hrastik
u kući Hrastik
Drška | Baza | Okidač
Dodatne tipke |Autofire prekidač
Gas | Kapica | Usisni pikovi
U si  sni   pi  ko   v i
Halo bok moje ime je Danny | časnik sam IDEEFA | ova lažna raketa je kucanje na krov vaše kuće | x3
Hrastik je bio periferija Lašćine   A     blizu Maksimirske
Planinšakovi su imali        U                Dugoj ulici kuću
danas kuća u Radićevoj    U                 centru Zagreba
u centru Zagreba
Drška | Baza | Okidač
Dodatne tipke | Autofire prekidač
Gas | Kapica | Usisni pikovi
U  si sni  pi  ko  v i
Halo bok moje ime je Danny | časnik sam IDEEFA | Halo bok halo / x3
Hrastik je bio   NA                              periferiji Lašćine
blizu Maksimirske ceste A                  poslije kuću
u Dugoj ulici danas kuća U                 Radićevoj  ulici
u Radićevoj ulici
Drška | Baza | Okidač
Dodatne tipke | Autofire prekidač|
Gas | Kapica | Usisni pikovi
U  si sni pi  ko  vi
Halo bok moje ime je Danny | časnik sam IDEEFA | za sat vremena vašu ćemo kuću dignuti u zrak | ova lažna raketa je kucanje na krov vaše kuće | x3

 

VIII. ROMANISTIČKE VJEŽBE

Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji
U kla-sičnom Ri-mu fo-renzika iz la-tinskog fo-rensis ko-rijen te rije-či  10
o-dnosi se na fo-rum je bi-la dio re-torike koja se da-kako  11
tiče go-vora no fo-renzika nije u-kjučivala samo lju-dski go-vor nego i  11
onaj pred-meta u fo-renzičkoj re-torici pre-dmeti se mogu  8
obra-titi fo-rumu govor u ime ne-živih pred-meta  7
rimski ora-tori na-zivali su proso-popoeija   5
ra-spravljajući o  davanju glasa stva-rima kojima pri-roda nije dala   9
glas Kvin-tilijan piše o moći proso-popoeije da pri-vuče bogove s neba o-živi 12
mrtve  te-da-de svoj glas  gra-dovima  6
i ne-žive pre-dmete ob-daruje gla-som proso-popoeije  5
A h ! O h! A h! O h!         4x2

IX. POVIJEST SREDNJEG VIJEKA

Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijjajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji
Tijekom srednjovjekovlja zbiljska praksa forenzike održala se 
na životu uz pomoć ljudi poznatih kao ‘đavolji odvjetnici’
pravnih stručnjaka koje je imenovala crkva kako bi 
iznosili dokaze protiv kanonizacije kandidata tražeći pogreške ili 
pri-jevaru u ob-jašnjenju po-nuđenom  4
kao dokaz za ču-da  4
A h! O h! A h! O h!     A h! O h! A h! O h!      
Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji
za ko-je se tvrdi da ih je i-zveo kan-didat svjedoci  10
su često iz-vje-šta-vali o iz-van-rednim do-ga-đaj-ima za ko-je  8
su zbi-ljski vje-ro-vali da su ih do-živ-je-li ta ču-da  9
shva-ćali su kao bo-žan-ske inter-vencije u ze-maljsku sfe-ru kao dje-la ko-ja  11
na-dilaze po -re -dak bož -anski stvo -rene pri -rode ta ču-da bi -la su u-glavnom izlje-čenja  11
A h! O h! A h! O h!   A h! O h! A h! O h!      
Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji
ponekad vizije rijetko kada levitacije proces njihova procjenjivanja uključivao je
pregled živih tijela i tijela mrtvaca
po-ne-kad kap-lji-ca kr-vi  ča-va -la   4
i dru -gih sto-larskih po-je-di-no-sti ako se ne-što mo-glo  8
ob-ja-sniti pri-ro-dno to on-da ni-su bi-la ču-da fo-renzi-čka zna-nost se 10 
ta-ko razvila kao oblik po-bijanja 5
praksa mu-čenja i do-kazivanja  5
A h! O h! A h! O h!    A h! O h! A h! O h!      
Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji

 

X. PRAVO KATOLIČKE CRKVE

Planinšak je bio pokopan 2. studenog u 10 sati prije podne. Čini se da s kolegama nije mnogo drugovao. Od kolega, jos unazad nekoliko godina živih, nijedan ga nije zapamtio, čak ni po imenu. Planinšakov grob i danas postoji na ‘starom groblju’, unesen u registar. Grob izdržava brat mu umirovljeni pristav Mirko Planinšak sa stanom u Petrovoj 21.

 

XI. O POSJEDU

U tom se zidu, u kojem je bio probijen neki uski prozor, već one večeri mojega dolaska, najednom zapalila svjetiljka. To mi je smetalo. Čekao sam na cesti. Nadao sam se da će oni navući kapke na prozore. Ali ih nitko nije navukao. Svjetiljka je gorjela i onda, kada sam odlučio da se vratim. Otada, svake sam večeri gledao kako se pali, već za prvih sumračja. Ponekad sam veoma kasno u noć izlazio na put. Želio sam vidjeti da li još uvijek gori. Bila je tamo. Gasili su je tek u praskozorje.
Za sanjača svjetiljke postoje dvije vrste tuđih svjetiljki. Nečija je svjetiljka ujutro, nečija uvečer; svjetiljka onoga koji Prvi ustaje i onoga koji Zadnji liježe. Pred svjetiljkom koja se ne gasi cijele noći. Kakva je stvarno to svjetiljka i tko je kraj te neobične svjetiljke?
Biće što dolazi na pustu visoravan da potraži samoću, uznemireno je svjetiljkom koja gori na pet stotina metara od njegova obitavališta. Tako se javlja rivalitet samoća. Jedna je suvišna. Ta udaljena svjetiljka zacijelo nije suzbijena na samu sebe. Ona čeka. Ta svjetiljka koja neprestano bdije, u stvari nadzire. Jer tako nadzire, ona je pakosna. Jer daleka svjetiljka nadzire visoravan, sanjač će, uznemiren takvim nadzorom, nadzirati onog koji ga nadzire. Sanjač svjetiljke skriva tada svoju, da bi uhodio tuđu svjetiljku.
(Gaston Bachelard, Henri Bosco)

XII. O SLOBODI VOLJE

1. Sloboda predavanja i 2. Sloboda slušača.
Sloboda predavanja i sloboda slušača - čine zajednicu u kojoj učitelj govori o mnogim pitanjima, a da rješenje ne bude obavezno, kao jedino shvaćanje. Otvorenost razmišljanja bio je uspješan put učenja filozofije. Tu je izraženo uvjerenje da onaj koji druge poučava filozofiju vodi slušaoce po kriteriju sinteze filozofskog shvaćanja. Svakog svog slušača Bazala prihvaća u duhovnom odnosu da bude nosilac filozofske ideje. Svaki je slobodno biće, dakle dominus (gospodin) što znači da nije servus (rob). Po slobodi određeno je pravo ali i dužnost prema mišljenju.

Filozofija je metalogičke naravi, njeno porijeklo nije benigno taumazijsko, nego životno agonalno. Ona je u svom iskonu čin rođen iz udesa u koje zapada pojedinac i zajednica zapleteni u čvorove životnih sila različitih po vrsti ali homogenih po svom porivnom, voljnom, meta-logičkom korijenu. Filozofija je pokušaj razmrsivanja tih životnosilnosnih čvorova, njezina meta-logičnost dobiva etičku funkciju, postaje osnovom teorijskoga dobra, budući da počiva na volji koja je svjesna dužnosti.

 

PHANTOM PLANINŠAK
DB Indoš & Tanja Vrvilo

 

I. PANDECTS

Suppose that we returned home after a month of holidays to an apartment that was empty and locked during that time and no one had the keys but us. We unlock the door, enter, pass through all the rooms and open the windows to ventilate the rooms. Everything is known, natural, everything is as we left it and as we expected to find it. But look - no ashtray on the desk! Suddenly we’re confused. We suspect in our eyes, rub them and look again - no ashtray! We suspect our memory; maybe we accidentally put the ashtray on another table or cabinet? We perform a quick search of the whole apartment - no ashtray! How could it be somewhere else? It’s an ashtray made of red Murano glass which always stands on the desktop and nowhere else. Furthermore we remember exactly how we washed, wiped and put it into place just before our travels. We are faced therefore with a mystery. How and where did the ashtray disappear out of the locked apartment, and not leave traces obvious traces or changes, at least at the first glance? This question confuses us, nags, disturbs, inspires us to think. We feel that we have to find a solution. But how should we find it? Naturally a hypothesis arises; while we were at the sea someone was in the apartment and took the ashtray somewhere. It seems like the only possible explanation, if we do not believe in miracles and ghosts. If it’s true, it doesn’t solve anything, but only increases the mystery. The ashtray is not the value for the breaking into someone else’s apartment! Let’s think a little bit and say to ourselves that the ashtray must have been taken by someone who broke into the apartment for something more valuable. They liked the ashtray and took it as well. Or they may have unintentionally broke it, picking up the remains considering that the owner will firstly notice broken pieces of the ashtray then it’s disappearance. From our rather vague assumption of the preliminary hypothesis we decided to switch to another, more specific one. But how can we determine whether it is correct? To determine if the hypothesis is true we have to verify it. But how to check it? From our hypotheses follows some logical consequences. If the hypothesis is true, it must be true that something much more valuable than the ashtray disappeared from the apartment. If we want to check our hypothesis, we should, therefore, carefully search the apartment and determine whether something that is worth much more is missing. Firstly we open the desk in which we keep the money: 44 000 that were left are standing intact. We open the closet with clothes: our coats and suits are in place. The typewriter, radio, television, transistor are all in their places. Finally, we remember: The most valuable item in the apartment is a collection of stamps. Only one series is worth one million. We open the middle desk drawer once more and find our stamp album. It is there, but a few of the most valuable series are missing. Our hypothesis was tested, we found the riddle: An ashtray took the man who took the stamps. However, this solution to the problem opens up a new, more difficult and more important one: Who took the stamps and where are the stamps now? If only one person knew of our stamp collection, our best friend whom we know is honest but prone to practical jokes, we will assume that he took the stamps with the intent to scare us. We’ll go to him and tell him that we know everything. When he bursts into laughter, the hypothesis will be proved and we will ask him to return the stamps. The whole story will have a happy ending. If, on the contrary, it is widely known that we have a large collection of stamps not only by many of our friends and experts, but also by friends and acquaintances of their friends and acquaintances, the new problem will be much more complicated. In such a case we will call the police and ask them to take further investigation. (Gajo Petrović)

 

II. LAW OF OBLIGATIONS

I hesitate between two acts, and I move from considering one to considering the other. This means that I’m passing in some order their conditions and that they can be divided into two groups, so I incline to one X and one Y: X and Y are symbols that represent the various tendencies of my actions in different moments of duration; or it’s even better to say that they are not even symbols of the real tendencies because I can not splinter. This sort of marking we take simply, because it is convenient to speech. The reality on the contrary knows only one complete I, which develops, until a free act is decided by one as a ripe fruit. However, this notion of a free act does not satisfy the usual thinking that likes to move in completely separate, differentiated concepts. It presents itself a certain I, that passing some path from M to O came to point O where two equally possible paths were shown. Instead of an active continuous living I, in which we only by abstraction distinguish two directions, two real ways are substituted, awaiting our decision. The living activity will truly go through either path X or Y, i.e. it will perform one of the tendencies that we recognised by abstraction. It will be so because the course that activity went was prepared through the path M to O, and not because the will of O is seemingly indifferent i.e. equally capable to take the both paths decided for one of them. In short, both representatives and opponents of freedom agree that understanding a free act is a mechanical oscillation between two points - X and Y. Say we choose X first, at the same time, Y was therefore a possible choice too. The other answer: you have chosen X, and you had a reason for that. If you hold that the Y was equally possible, you’re forgetting that reason. Both of these solutions are based on the same false sequence of thoughts. They in fact observing the act when it’s already over, and transfer it into a spatial image and consider that this image shows fully adequately the emergence of an action. But while determinism counts with everything that it knows about this work, and concludes that the way M to O to X was indeed performed, indeterminism ignores one of the data with which it constructed an action-image, but when the act has already been done it returns to the point O where it places I to oscillate between X and Y. (Ivana Rossi)

In this paper we will deal specifically with ethical problems of free will, and we will define it as a problem of the science of values. We will show the psychological meaning of problems as well. As for the idea and the concept of freedom, we will not determine the will substantially but its actual state; will is not a substantial being, it is about volition and voluntary acts. We determine freedom negatively as the absence of force and positively as activity towards values. At the source of real freedom is the immediate finding that ethical evaluation certifies to us freedom of the will, and a scientific view shows that the determination of our volitional acts can not shake our belief in freedom; science has as an objective logical will, it turned into a mechanical product, but the real experience of desire evades scientific views. We can experience and evaluate freedom, but we can not comprehend it. Therefore, where there is life, there is freedom. However, freedom can not be understood through a logical schema, it remains a mystery. (Elly Ebenspanger)

 

III. STATISTICS OF THE AUSTRO-HUNGARIAN EMPIRE

No. 1
His Index was number 198 and he was a regular listener, freed from all the courses of the second year. He was enrolled as a part-time listener, and may have simultaneously worked as day labourer at the Statistical Office. In his first year he listened to Institutions of the Croatian-Hungarian Law and History of the Middle Ages, taking Romanist Exercises and to a course by Albert Bazala - On Freedom of the Will. The second year he listened to Law of Obligations, Pandects On Property Inheritance Law, Law of the Catholic Church, Sociology and Statistics of the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

No. 2
Statistics of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Sociology, Law of the Catholic Church, Inheritance Law On Property Pandects, Law of Obligations. In the second year he listened to On Freedom of the Will, a course by Albert Bazala, History of the Middle Ages, the Croatian-Hungarian Law and taking Romanist Exercises. He may have then simultaneously worked as a part-time listener in his second year, freed from all the courses. His Index was number 198.

No. 3
The first year he listened to Institutions of Croatian-Hungarian Law, History of the Middle Ages, taking Romanist Exercises and listened to a course by Albert Bazala - On Freedom of the Will. The second year he listened to Law of Obligations, Pandects On Property Inheritance Law, Law of the Catholic Church, Sociology and Statistics of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. His Index was number 198 and he was a regular listener freed from all the courses of the second year. He was enrolled as a part-time listener and may have simultaneously worked as day labourer at the Statistical Office.

 

IV. CROATIAN-HUNGARIAN LAW 

Six climbs down x10 A small climb for him
Six climbs down x20 Two climbs up
Six climbs down x35 A small climb for him
a photograph with his personal signature
shot at the time somewhat shortly before death
shows a young man with an oblong head
blond, calm, an intelligent gaze
with a moustache already curved
He is dressed as a law student
He is dressed as a law student
well-tailored jute suit 
a coat with two rows of buttons
The signature on the photo is small
with legible handwriting, quite regular
handwriting of a soft-tempered man
caring in everyday life
He is dressed as a law student
He is dressed as a law student
He has a hard necklace
Prefabricated, relatively light
a designer silk tie
handwriting of a soft-tempered man
methodical and meticulous in work
without ambition, withdrawn into himself
methodical and meticulous in work
without ambition, withdrawn into himself
methodical and meticulous in work
withdrawn into himself
without ambition, withdrawn into himself
without ambition, withdrawn into himself
without ambition, withdrawn into himself
without ambition, withdrawn into himself
Six climbs down x24 Two climbs up x3
Six climbs down x86 A small climb for him
methodical and meticulous in work
Two climbs up
methodical and meticulous in work
Two climbs up
methodical and meticulous in work
Two climbs up
methodical and meticulous in work
Two climbs up
methodical and meticulous in work
Two climbs up
methodical and meticulous in work

V. SOCIOLOGY

On Wednesday October 30, 1912, the only hosting of French actress Henriette Roggers and her group was scheduled at Zagreb theatre in a play by Henry Bernstein Le voleur, a popular piece of the time. The theatre was poorly attended on October 30, 1912. The French play, which began at half past seven was visited by the Ban-Commissioner, Slavko Cuvaj. Before the end of the play, around nine in the evening, he left the theatre. He returned by car to the Ban’s Palace. The early winter night was dark and unpleasant, the city was quiet and deserted. The next morning whispers spread the word that something happened during the night in front of the Ban’s Court at St. Mark’s Square. Some have argued that the assassination on the Ban-Commissioner was committed, and that some young man was struck. No one knew anything concretely. Ever since the whispering began, the most curious and daring went to St. Mark’s Square. As always, by day and night, in front of the gate a guard walked back and forth, and as always a duty policeman walked slowly across the square. Some bystanders claimed that they noticed abrasions on the wall under the window of the first floor. Nobody knew whether these cracks existed beforehand. They said that a bullet must have hit the wall. On Thursday around noon speculations became more concrete. It was claimed that an unsuccessful assassination was committed and that the assassin is a student, who after their failure committed the suicide. Nobody knew the name of the student. Zagreb newspapers were all silent. It was only on Friday and Saturday that the event at St. Mark’s Square became known outside the scope of the Zagreb newspapers’ censorship.

No. 1
Oskar Tartaglia, editor of the newspaper Split Freedom, reported on Friday November 1, that around nine in the evening of October 30 a student named Planinščak fired four gun shots at the Ban-Commissioner’s car as he was returning home to St. Mark’s Square. The fifth shot in himself. Police allegedly obscured the case, and therefore suspended the search for accomplices.

No. 2
Rijeka’s New Paper on October 31 issued a statement, “Tonight at 8pm a lawyer named Planinščak shot at a window of the Ban’s Palace at St. Mark’s Square. He saw a silhouette behind the window, and thinking that it was Cuvaj, fired three shots from a Browning, which apparently did not hit anyone. Then the assassin fired the fourth shot in his temple and collapsed covered in blood. The assassin died at the entrance of the hospital. His name is Planinščak, he was lawyer, 24 years old, employed at the Statistical Office. The police scattered around the city and arrested several people”. The next day’s paper said, “Zagreb police took all their force to present this whole case as a simple suicide.” The case is reported to Viennese and Budapest agencies in this way. Zagreb newspaper received an order not to write anything about the assassination; they wanted to hide and obscure it. St. Mark’s Square is occupied by numerous policemen and the Ban’s Palace is in darkness. The police is on the great quest for the assumed assassin’s accomplices. In Zagreb, the rumours of the assassination made a great sensation; understandably, excitement was evident everywhere. Below the window of the Ban’s Palace on the first floor, a piece of wall is cracked where a bullet struck. All the efforts of the police to cover up the assassination will not succeed.

No. 3
The third and most convincing version of Planinščak’s case, which came much later, was annotated by the to-be assassin Stjepan Dojčić. Planinščak climbed up to a gaslight around 9 at night of October 30, 1912, and wanted to kill Cuvaj who was at the window. He had bad luck, and did not hit him, instead he was shot on the spot.

No. 4
Finally on Saturday November 2, the Official Gazette published a statement denying student Stjepan Planinšak’s - the first time his name was reported correctly -  assassination attempt of the Ban-Commissioner, and proclaimed that it was a ‘well thought out’ suicide. They said that Planinšak fired three shots into the air to test his gun before killing himself.  In order to establish the truth of the events and demystify the completely fabricated rumours, it is recognised that what occurred on the occasion of October 31 this year at 30 minutes to 8 in the evening was a suicide by lawyer S. Planinšak at St. Mark’s Square. The rumours brought into connection with the alleged assassination of the Royal’s Commissioner are unfounded and arbitrary, as seen in the following police report. “It is officially determined that S. Planinšak, a lawyer studying in his second year, on that day around 30 minutes to 8 in the evening at pouring rain came from his near by flat, on Long Street no. 30, to the middle of St. Mark’s Square - but to the other side, which lies closer to the new government building, rather than Ban’s Palace - and there quickly and repeatedly fired three shots from his pistol into the air as a test, then fired a fourth shot into his head, killing himself. The stationed guard flew to Planinšak after his shots but the suicide attempt had left him severely wounded and was immobile on the ground. The guard immediately called police to rescue him, and was transported to the hospital of the merciful brothers, where he succumbed to the severe injury”. From the police report, especially from the recording and writings of his friends, all of which are available to review, it appears that the suicide had long been calculated in his life. Even after passing the exam of maturity it is noted that Planinšak often said that there is no purpose to continue living. It is also established that Planinšak had long been quarrelling with his family and that especially in the last month of his life his intentions had reached its final point. Despite the fact that by his friends’ statements he was well prepared, he did not attend the second state exam, had left his work as a day labourer at the National statistical office, and did not seek a new job. Therefore it was not about anything but the well-thought-out suicide. All the other rumours, particularly on the alleged assassination of the royal commissioner, are all the more contrived and unfounded because at that time Ban’s palace facade opposing St. Mark’s Square was in complete darkness, and the royal commissioner at that time worked in the chambers of Ban’s Palace, which lies just across St. Mark’s Square, i.e. at the Kapucinska Street. In addition, it was found that the police inquests were correct in saying there were no traces of fired shots at the front of the Ban’s Palace.

VI. INHERITANCE LAW 

The Planinšaks’ had a house on Duga ulica (Long Street), today Radićeva Street 58, and later moved to Maksimirska Street 68. This family data do not correspond to the personal data that Stjepan Planinšak gave when he enrolled in law studies at the Zagreb University, on May 2, 1911. According to the university papers, he was born on October 25, 1889 in Zagreb. His father’s name is not mentioned, perhaps he was already dead, and his mother was listed Anastazija Planinšak, a small trader, residing in Hrastik 1 (Hrastik was Lašćina’s periphery, close to the Maksimirska Street.). The university papers stated that his tutor was Julije Herzog, a trader. Equally confusing is the data concerning the incidents of the night of October 30, 1912 at St. Mark’s Square. Almost all of these are speculations and gossip, completely unreal and fantastic. The version that Planinšak fired shots at the Commissioner’s car is quite unbelievable. At the entrance gate of the Ban’s house was a guard, at the square there were at least two police officers awaiting the return of the Ban-Commissioner. If at a late hour some stranger appeared at the square, all of them would have keep an eye on him, and would have certainly intervened had he approached the entrance gate. However, the most improbable version is that Planinšak climbed the lamp post to the height of the first floor. The candelabrum was metallic and sleek, only a professional wrestler could succeed to climb it. Such an exhibition would not be watched passively, neither by the guard nor the police officers. The only fact is that the shots were fired in the air, that a young man was mortally wounded and that blood was shed in the front of the Ban’s Court. What really happened that dark, foggy October night will remain a mystery. The puzzle of that evening at St. Mark’s Square will remain unresolved. There are too little strongholds for any combination of events. Official documents on the case do not exist. Perhaps Planinšak began demonstratively firing shots in a generally elevated psychological atmosphere of euphoric youth because of the Balkan allies’ victory. Or perhaps he committed suicide due some intimate crisis? At the time it was not uncommon for suicides related to unrequited love. Or the police simply killed the stranger when he didn’t answer their requests to stop. The mystery continues to this day. After his death, Planinšak remains only as a vague shadow.

VII. INSTITUTIONS

Hi, my name is Danny | I’m an officer in IDF | In one hour we will blow up your house | this warning rocket is roof-knocking on your house x3
Planinšaks had                         ON                           Long Street a house 
today a house at Radićeva      AND                         later a house 
on Maksimirska Street           WHEN                      Planinšak has
enrolled in law studies residing IN                          Hrastik house
in a house at Hrastik 
Stick | Base | Trigger
Extra buttons | Auto-fire switch
Throttle | Hat switch | Suction cups
Suc - tion cu - ps  
Hi, my name is Danny | I’m an officer in IDF | this warning rocket is roof-knocking on your house x3
Hrastik was Lašćina’s periphery   AND                   close to Maksimirska Street
Planinšaks had                               ON                     Long Street a house 
today a house at Radićeva             IN                       the centre of Zagreb
in the centre of Zagreb
Stick | Base | Trigger
Extra buttons | Auto-fire switch
Throttle | Hat switch | Suction cups
Suc - tion cu - ps  
Hi, my name is Danny | I’m an officer in IDF | Hello Hi Hello x3
Hrastik was                                               ON         Lašćina’s periphery       
close to Maksimirska Street                     AND       later a house
on Long Street today a house                   ON         Radićeva Street
on Radićeva Street
Stick | Base | Trigger
Extra buttons | Auto-fire switch
Throttle | Hat switch | Suction cups
Suc - tion cu - ps  
Hi, my name is Danny | I’m an officer in IDF | In one hour we will blow up your house | this warning rocket is roof-knocking on your house x3

 

VIII. ROMANIST EXERCISES 

Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji
In cla-ssical Ro-me fo-rensics from the La-tin fo-rensis the word’s ro-ot  10
re-fers to the fo-rum which was pa-rt of rhe-torics which of co-urse  11
concerns spe-ech however fo-rensis in-cluded not only hu-man spe-ech but also  11
that of ob-jects in fo-rensics rhe-toric ob-jects could  8
add-ress the fo-rum on behalf of in-animate ob-jects  7
the Roman ora-tors were re-ferred as proso-popoeia   5
they dis-cussed giving a voice to thin-gs to which na-ture has not given   9
a voice Quin-tilian writes of the power of proso-popoeia to bri-ng down the gods from heaven e-voking 12
the dead and  gi-ving vo-ices to ci-ties  6
and in-animate ob-jects en-dowing them with a vo-ice of proso-popoeia  5
A h ! O h! A h! O h!         4x2

IX. HISTORY OF THE MIDDLE AGES 

Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijjajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji
During medieval times the actual practice of forensics was 
kept alive by people known as ‘devil’s advocates’
legal experts appointed by the Church to argue against
a candidate for canonization by searching for faults or
fra-ud in the acc-ounts presented 4
as evidence for mi-racles  4
A h! O h! A h! O h!     A h! O h! A h! O h!       
Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji
the can-didate was claimed to have per-formed witnesses  10
often re-port-ed ex-tra-ordinary ev-ents that they  8 
act-ually be-lie-ved they had ex-pe-ri-enced these mi-racles  9
under-stood as di-vi-ne inter-ventions in the ear-thly realm act-ions that 11
went be-yond  the-or-der of divi-nely created nature these miracles were mainly healings 11
A h! O h! A h! O h!   A h! O h! A h! O h!       
Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji
sometimes visions seldom levitations their process of ascertainment
involvement the examination of living bodies and those of the dead
so-me-times dr-ops of blo-od na-ils  4
and o-ther car-pen-try de-tails if thin-gs had 8
a na-tur-al ex-plan-ations they we-re not mi-ra-cles fo-rensic scien-ce 10
thus de-vel-oped as a mode of re-fu-tation  5
practices of tor-ture and con-fession 5
A h! O h! A h! O h!    A h! O h! A h! O h!       
Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji   Ajijajiajijaji

X. LAW OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH 

Planinšak was buried on November 2, 1912 at 10 am. It seems that he didn’t have friends among his colleagues. None of them even remembered his name. Planinšak’s grave still exists in ‘the old cemetery’, entered in the register. The grave is maintained by his brother Mirko Planinšak, a retired clerk residing at Petrova 21.

XI. ON PROPERTY 

On this wall, pierced by a narrow window, the lamp was suddenly lit for the first time since the evening of my arrival. I was vexed by it. I waited on the road. I was hoping that someone would pull the window shades, but no one did. The lamp was still shining when I decided to go back home. Since then, I have seen it lit every evening since the first shadows of nightfall. Sometimes, very late at night, I went out onto the road. I wanted to see if it was still burning. It was there. It was not extinguished until early morning. For a dreamer of the lamp, there are two kinds of lamps belonging to the other person. There is the morning lamp and the evening lamp; the lamp of the first to rise and the lamp of the last to bed. They confront the lamp that shines all night. What is this lamp that belongs to the other person; who is this other person by this lamp? The being that came to the empty plateau to seek solitude is troubled by a lamp which burns five hundred meters from their dwelling. Thus arises the rivalry of the solitudes. One is redundant. This distant lamp certainly was not turned on by itself. It is a lamp that waits. It watches and hence it is malevolent. For when the distant lamp controls the plateau, a dreamer will, disturbed with such surveillance, control the one who controls him. The dreamer of the lamp hides his own lamp to spy upon the lamp of the other.  (Gaston Bachelard, Henri Bosco)

 

XII. ON FREEDOM OF THE WILL

1. Freedom of lectures; 2. Freedom of the listeners.
The freedom of teaching and freedom of the listener form a community in which the teacher talks about range of matters, but this decision is not mandatory as the only conception. Openness of thinking was a successful way of learning philosophy. This expressed the conviction that the one who teaches others philosophy leads listeners on the criteria of synthesis of philosophical understanding. For Bazala, each of his listeners accepts in a spiritual relationship to be the bearer of a philosophical idea. Everyone is a free being, therefore a dominus (gentleman) which means that it is not a servus (slave). After this, freedom is determined as a right and also a duty towards thinking.

Philosophy is of metalogical nature. Its origins are not benign thaumaturgic but agonal in the throes of life’s struggle. Philosophy was born out of the fateful predicament in which individuals and communities find themselves entangled in the action of life forces different in kind but homogeneous in terms of their stimulative, volitional, metalogical roots. Philosophy is an attempt to disentangle these entanglements of life forces. The metalogical acquires an ethical function, becoming the basis of theoretical good, because it reposes on the will that is aware of the duties.

The phantom PLANINŠAK / FANTOM PLANINŠAK (vimeo) - video

THE PHANTOM PLANINŠAK / FANTOM PLANINŠAK - poster

FANTOM PLANINŠAK / THE PHANTOM PLANINŠAK - booklet

FANTOM PLANINŠAK / THE PHANTOM PLANINŠAK - gallery