The meaning of the photographed ob-ject has always been crucial to photog-

raphy. The ambiguous relationship, whichphotography establishes with the reality, isthe key to the understanding of its impact onthe spectator’s consciousness. One necessa-rily starts from the reality, photographingwhat one considers worth photographing - inorder to document, keep it as a memory, ordemonstrate one’s aesthetic view on some-thing. But photography does not merely cre-ate reflections, but also, according to SusanSontag,1 causes a turn by de-Platonizing thereality as such. “The ideal extended arm ofconsciousness” starts from ideological sup-positions about the reason for making photo-graphs and at the same time changes theperception of the reality by making it in-creasingly similar to the photograph. Butperhaps there is a photograph that will defyits task and refrain from showing a certainway of seeing the reality? Some sort ofsenseless photograph with a flaw, which willbreak the vicious circle of interactive exchan-ge and the manipulation of meanings be-tween photography and the outer world? Thephenomenon of the first “click” opens up thefield of autonomy in photography, which, in-stead of referring to the reality or the paint-ing, points exclusively to itself.

I have given the designation of the first“click” to the photograph that is made whena fresh film roll is inserted into a camerawithout an automatic insert option. By shift-ing the transport handle, a 35-milimeter filmroll (of the leica format) is moved to the firstusable shot. With the first release, that is,the first “click”, one makes a casual shot,which is visually completely different thanany of the following 36. It can be made intwo ways: either it is shot at random, just inorder to wind up the film, or it can be takenas if it will succeed. In the first case, thephotographer rejects his authorship by dis-carding the photograph in advance as a fai-lure and by reducing his role to bringing thecamera into a certain position (by insertingthe film and making a shot from a certainposture). In this way, the result is an acci-dental photograph, made without adjustingfocus or exposure. It is mostly blurred, mar-ked by many shades of grey blending intoeach other. Since it lacks all framing andabounds in oblique and fragmented motifs, itrecords the reality independently of actualrelations of space, thus destroying the illu-sion of photographs as excerpts of some ex-ternal space. In this way, for example, it is

ZnaËenje onoga πto je snimljeno od-uvijek je bilo od presudne vaænosti za

fotografiju. U dvojakom odnosu koji fotogra-fija uspostavlja sa zbiljom leæi kljuË za razu-mijevanje njena utjecaja na svijest proma-traËa. Ona nuæno polazi od stvarnosti, foto-grafirajuÊi ono πto se smatra vrijednim foto-grafiranja - kako bi se dokumentiralo, saËu-valo kao uspomena ili kako bi se pokazaloestetsko vienje neËega. No fotografija nestvara samo odraze, nego, rijeËima SusanSontag,1 stvara obrat deplatonizirajuÊi sa-mu stvarnost. “Idealna produæena ruka svi-jesti” polazi od ideoloπkih pretpostavki orazlogu snimanja i pritom mijenja percepci-ju zbilje ËineÊi je sve sliËnijom fotografiji.No postoji li moæda fotografija koja Êe sesuprotstaviti svom zadatku da prikazuje od-reeni naËin vienja realnosti? Neka vrstabesmislene fotografije s pogreπkom koja Êeprekinuti zatvoreni krug interaktivne raz-mjene i manipulacije znaËenjima izmeufotografije i izvanjskog svijeta? Fenomen pr-vog “klika” otvara podruËje autonomije foto-grafije koja, umjesto da se referira na zbiljuili slikarstvo, upuÊuje iskljuËivo na sebesamu.

Prvim “klikom” nazvala sam fotografijukoja nastaje pri umetanju filma u fotoaparatkoji nema automatsko ulaganje filma.RuËicom za transport 35-milimetarski film(leica format) pomiËe se do prve upotreblji-ve snimke. Prvim okidanjem, odnosno pr-vim “klikom”, stvara se neobvezna snimkakoja se vizualno znatno razlikuje od ostalih36 koje slijede. Ona moæe biti snimana nadva naËina: moæe se nasumce “ispucati” tektoliko da se namota film ili moæe biti sni-mana kao da Êe uspjeti. U prvom sluËajufotograf se odriËe autorstva unaprijed odba-cujuÊi fotografiju kao neuspjelu i svodi svo-ju ulogu samo na dovoenje fotoaparata uodreenu situaciju (umeÊe film, okida iz od-reenog poloæaja). SluËajna fotografija takonastaje bez fokusiranja ili odreivanja eks-pozicije. Ona je uglavnom mutna, s mnogonijansi sive koje se meusobno pretapaju.Nikad kadrirana, ukoπenih i fragmentiranihmotiva, ona biljeæi stvarnost neovisno o real-nim prostornim odnosima i time dokida ilu-ziju fotografije kao isjeËka nekog izvanjskogprostora. Tako je, na primjer, na fotografijina kojoj su drugi predmeti sasvim neËitki imutni, istovremeno moguÊe razabrati pred-mete kao πto su rasuti papiri, noga stola,knjiga, pri Ëemu se ti predmeti iz svakodne-vice smjeπtaju u sasvim nov, nepoznati kon-tekst. U procesu nastajanja svake fotografije

80

t lana krπiniÊ-lozica

fotografijeprvog “klika”the photographsmade by the first“click”

t l

1 SUSAN SONTAG, Eseji o fotografiji [Essays on pho-tography], Beograd, 1982., 139-143.

74_ZU_4_9 6/7/05 02:21 Page 80

74_ZU_4_9 6/7/05 02:22 Page 81

possible to discern objects - such as scatte-red papers, a table leg, or a book - in a pho-tograph in which all other objects are com-pletely unreadable and blurred, but thesethings, belonging to everyday life, are set inan entirely new and unknown context. In theprocess of creating each separate photo-graph, a certain role is played by chance,which never permits the photographer to do-minate the object of his activity completely.However, in the case of photograph taken atrandom, by the first “click”, it is the verychance that will become the decisive factorof creation and give perfect freedom to thecamera, which will, for a moment, abandonits role as mere technological aid in extend-ing the consciousness that directs it.

In rare and extreme situations, it some-times occurs that the first “click” is madewhile the camera is being loaded withoutthe lens. Thus, the photograph turns outcompletely abstract - what is recorded areonly vague traces, left behind by light, most-ly in circular shape. Patterns of light whichare made with the lens on can look equallyabstract, for example on the photographwhere nothing can be discerned apart fromvertical passages of transparent, brightshades, overlapping against the grey back-ground. Sometimes even the gradation ofgrey is missing, as we can see on the nextexample, where only bright circles can bedistinguished against the dark background,which links the first “click” to photogramsand various techniques of photography bymeans of light.

The abstraction of accidental photogra-phy is characteristic for the medium as such,

odreenu ulogu ima i sluËaj, koji nikada nedopuπta fotografu da u potpunosti dominiranad objektom snimanja. No kod nasumiËnefotografije prvog “klika”, sam sluËaj postajeodluËujuÊi faktor kreacije i daje potpunu slo-bodu fotoaparatu koji nakratko prestaje bititek tehniËko pomagalo pri produæavanju svi-jesti koja njime upravlja.

U rijetkim i ekstremnim situacijamadogaa se da se prvi “klik” okine kad seaparat puni bez objektiva na kuÊiπtu. Foto-grafija ispada posve apstraktno - zabiljeæenisu samo nejasni tragovi koje je svjetlo,uglavnom u kruænim oblicima, ostavilo zasobom. Svjetlosne πare nastale pri fotografi-ranju s objektivom takoer mogu izgledatikrajnje apstraktno, kao na primjer na foto-grafiji na kojoj se ne moæe razaznati niπtaosim vertikalnih prolaza prozraËnih, svijetlihnijansi koje se preklapaju jedna preko drugena sivoj pozadini. Ponekad niti ne dolazi dogradacije nijansi sive, kao πto moæemo vid-jeti na primjeru u kojem se razabiru jedinosvijetli krugovi na tamnoj pozadini, πto prvi“klik” povezuje s fotogramima i raznim teh-nikama slikanja svjetlom.

No apstrakcija sluËajne fotografije spe-cifiËna je za sam medij fotografije, dok sefotografije snimane s namjerom da buduapstraktne, svjesnim odbacivanjem mimezei razvijanjem vlastite unutraπnje logike iz-gradnje kompozicije, nadovezuju na tradici-ju slikarstva. Kao primjer sluËajne apstrak-cije moæe posluæiti fotografija svjetlosnih li-nija koje se formiraju oko æarulje - one zbogsvoje pravilnosti i kontrasta svijetlog i tam-nog djeluju poput geometrijske strukture.No ipak, sluËajna apstrakcija negira bilo

82

74_ZU_4_9 6/7/05 02:22 Page 82

kakvu smislenost kompozicije tako da, baπkao i prirodne πare na kamenu, ne pripadapodruËju likovnog.

Drugi naËin snimanja prve fotografijene iskljuËuje kreativnu ulogu fotografa kojisnimku tretira kao da Êe uspjeti i svjesnokadrira i namjeπta fotoaparat. No da bi doπ-lo do prvog “klika”, potrebna je pogreπkakoja Êe osujetiti - kako namjeru fotografa,tako i sve moguÊe funkcije same fotografije.Pogreπkom se smatra bilo kakva nepredvi-ena smetnja u procesu Ëitanja fotografije(fragmentirana fotografija, spajanje dvajuokidanja u jednu fotografiju ili njihovo pre-klapanje). Tako se, na primjer, moæe dogo-diti da svjetlost koja dopire do filma prijenamjeπtanja u fotoaparat osvjetljava duljinufilma koja je veÊa od duljine jedne fotografi-je i preklopi se sa svjetloπÊu koja pada krozobjektiv, regulirana otvorom zaslona. Na tajse naËin dobiva dvostruko osvijetljena foto-grafija Ëiji je jedan dio mnogo svjetliji odonog drugog. Na primjer, prvi dio fotografi-je koja prikazuje plesaËe na pozornici tolikoje osvijetljen da ljudski likovi i pozadina dje-luju kao prekriveni prozraËnim svijetlim ve-lom, dok u drugom dijelu fotografije mraË-ne sjene gutaju i tijela plesaËa i pozornicu.Takoer moæe doÊi do varijacija boje ondakad svjetlo pod kosim kutom upadne nafilm prije nego li se umetne u fotoaparat.Kosi upad svjetla ne zadire ravnomjerno usve slojeve boje kojima je premazan film,πto Ëesto dovodi do nekontrolirane pojaveæute i crvene.

©to znaËi ta pojava pogreπaka na foto-grafiji? Fotoaparat u tim sluËajevima pre-staje proizvoditi snimke na predvieni naËin,

while photographs shot with the intention ofbeing abstract build upon the tradition ofpainting by consciously rejecting the mime-sis and developing their own inner logic ofconstruing the composition. As an exampleof accidental abstraction, we can indicatethe photograph showing some lines of lightcircling around a bulb - because of their reg-ularity and the contrast between the lightand dark areas, they appear as geometricalstructures. Nevertheless, accidental abstrac-tion denies any kind of sense in a composi-tion and therefore belongs to the visual artsjust as little as natural patterns in a rock.

The other way of shooting the first pho-tograph does not exclude the creative role ofthe photographer, since he is treating theshot as if it will succeed, framing it con-sciously and adjusting the camera. But if wewant it to be the first “click”, we need a flaw,something that will frustrate the photograph-er’s intention, as well as all possible func-tions of the photograph as such. A flaw isany unforeseen disorder in the process ofreading the photograph (a fragmented pho-tograph, merging two releases into a singleshot, or their overlapping). For example, itmight happen that more film is exposed tolight before it is inserted into the camerathan the length of a single photograph, andthat this light coincides with the light thatcomes through the lens, regulated by theaperture. In this way, what one gets is adouble-exposed photograph, one section ofwhich is much lighter than the other. Forexample, the first part of the photographshowing dancers on the stage is overexposedto such an extent that both the human fig-

83

74_ZU_4_9 6/7/05 02:22 Page 83

ures and the background seem as if coveredby a transparent and bright veil, while on theother side dark shadows are swallowing thedancers’ bodies and the stage alike. Whatmay also happen are variations of colourwhen light falls obliquely on the film beforethe latter is inserted into the camera. Theoblique intrusion of light does not affectequally all layers of colour with which thefilm is covered, which often leads to uncon-trolled outbreaks of yellow and red.

What is the meaning of these flaws inphotographs? In such cases, the camerastops producing shots in the way in which itwas planned; that is, it stops performing thevery functions it was programmed and pro-duced to perform. It is only when a machineceases to be the extension of human activitythat it begins to act as an autonomous being- turning into something else, something thatstands between the author and his work,obstructing the process of creating the pho-tograph. The authority of the Third, whichused to govern the author in the form of aDemiurge or Light, using him as a means ofrealizing its ideas, is transferred, in the caseof the first “click”, from the other world intothe mechanical, earthly world. It often hap-pens that only a portion of the photograph isdeveloped successfully, while another iscompletely white because of overexposure tolight. Instead of a clear rectangular frame,which separates the photograph from therest of the film, which is not considered aphotograph, with precision, there is a jaggedborderline of bright red and orange, whichpushes itself into the frame and divides thefailed portion of the photograph from the

dakle prestaje izvrπavati funkcije koje su muzadane i zbog kojih je proizveden. Tek kadastroj prestane biti produæetkom Ëovjekovadjelovanja, on se poËinje ponaπati kao sa-mostalno biÊe - pretvara se u neπto treÊe,πto stoji izmeu autora i njegova djela ome-tajuÊi proces nastajanja fotografije. Instancaonog treÊeg, koje je nekoÊ u obliku Demiur-ga ili Svjetla upravljalo autorom koristeÊi gakao sredstvo za provoenje ideja, u sluËajuprvog “klika” prebaËena je iz onostranog umehaniËki svijet zemaljskog. Nerijetko se,na primjer, uspjeπno razvije samo jedan diofotografije, dok je drugi sasvim bijel zbogprerane izloæenosti svjetlu. Umjesto jasnogpravokutnog okvira koji toËno odvaja foto-grafiju od ostatka filma koji se ne smatrafotografijom, neravna granica jarkih crveno-naranËastih boja umeÊe se ovdje unutarsamog okvira i odvaja neuspjeli dio fotogra-fije od uspjelog. Ta pojava posebno je nagla-πena na fotografiji na kojoj dijete u kolicimaupire prstom u neπto πto je nama nevidljivozbog neravnog ruba koji prerano otkida prvidio fotografije.

Gdje poËinje fotografija? Moæemo li uËitanje fotografije ukljuËiti i sirovi materijalfilma? Zapis neuspjelog pokuπaja snimanjafotografije unosi element iznevjerenog oËe-kivanja cjeline fotografije. BuduÊi da kon-vencija geometrijskog, unaprijed zadanogokvira, predstavlja vizualni znak dovrπe-nosti fotografije, naruπavanje te konvencijeizaziva napetost izmeu aktualnog prvog“klika” i potencijalne fotografije, one koja bitrebala biti i koja bi se bila uspjela reali-zirati da nije doπlo do pogreπke. Zaustavljenna pola puta izmeu filmske vrpce i fotogra-

84

74_ZU_4_9 6/7/05 02:22 Page 84

fije, prvi “klik” u stvari dokumentira samproces njena nastajanja. PoloviËna snimkanadovezuje se na vjeËni problem non finitai otpora same materije pri pokuπaju realizi-ranja neke od moguÊnosti koje ona sadræi, apraznina prerano osvijetljenog filma nedo-statak vizualne informacije pretvara u infor-maciju o nastajanju fotografije. Dok se “nor-malne” fotografije referiraju u manjoj ili ve-Êoj mjeri na stvarnost, prvi “klik” referira sena ostale fotografije i na predmetnost foto-grafskog medija.

Fotografija prvog “klika” ne prikazujeniπta. Ono πto je zabiljeæeno na filmu egzis-tira iskljuËivo kao znak koji je liπen sadræa-ja u trenutku kada je besmislenim i posvesluËajnim procesom fotografiranja promije-nio medij svog postojanja. BuduÊi da na-sumce okinutim fotografijama ne upravljanikakva svijest, one ne vrπe niti jednu odfunkcija koju inaËe imaju fotografije: one nedokumentiraju niπta, niti imaju ikakvu es-tetsku namjenu. »ak i ako su snimane kaoda Êe uspjeti, izlaze iz podruËja smislenogonda kada pogreπka poniπti znaËenje onogaπto je na njima trebalo biti prikazano. Prvi“klik” proizvodi samog sebe, πto znaËi daprekida komunikacijski kanal izmeu foto-grafa, odnosno svijesti koja u ostalim slu-Ëajevima odaπilje fotografiju i svijesti koja jeprima. On nije poruka i ne prenosi nikakvaznaËenja, ali dopuπta kreativan pristup pro-matraËu koji moæe projicirati nova znaËenjau taj prazan prostor.

Potrebno je da promatraË prestane Ëi-tati vizualne informacije koje se smatrajupogreπkom kao da su uistinu pogreπke,kako bi se promijenile konvencije deπifrira-

successful one. This phenomenon is mostclearly visible on the photograph where achild in a perambulator points its finger tosomething that is invisible to us because ofthe messy edge, which has untimely cut offthe first portion of the photograph.

Where does a photograph begin? Canwe include the raw material of film into ourreading of photography? The evidence of afailed attempt to make a photograph intro-duces an element of frustrated expectationsas to its completeness. Since the conventionof geometry, in terms of frames given in ad-vance, represents a visual sign of complete-ness in a photograph, breaking this conven-tion will cause tension between the actualfirst “click” and the potential photograph,which should have been and could havebeen realized had it not come to disturban-ce. Stopped half-way between the film tapeand the photograph, the first “click” actuallydocuments the very process of its creation.The incomplete shot carries on the eternalproblem of the non finitum and the resistan-ce of the very matter in an attempt to realizesome of the possibilities that it contains,while the emptiness of the film which hasbeen exposed too soon transforms the ab-sence of visual information into the informa-tion about creating the photograph. While“normal” photographs refer to a greater orlesser extent to the reality, the first “click” re-fers to other photographs and to the object-ness of photography as a medium.

The photograph of the first “click”shows nothing. What is recorded on the filmexists exclusively as a sign, which has beendeprived of all meaning in the very moment

85

74_ZU_4_9 6/7/05 02:22 Page 85

in which it changed the medium of its exis-tence through the senseless and completelyaccidental process of photographing. Sincerandomly taken photographs are not direct-ed by any consciousness, they do not per-form any of the functions typical of photog-raphy: they document nothing and serve noaesthetic purpose. Even if taken as if theywill succeed, they become senseless if a flawdeletes the meaning of what they shouldhave represented. The first “click” producesitself, which means that it interrupts thecommunication channel between the pho-tographer, that is, the consciousness thattransmits the photograph in other cases, andthe consciousness that receives it. It is not amessage and carries no meaning, but it per-mits a creative approach to the spectator,who can project new meanings into thatempty space.

It is necessary that the spectator shouldcease reading visual information consideredas failure as if they were failure indeed, andmodify the conventions of decoding the co-des, which will eventually lead to the pro-duction of new interpretations on the level offiction. If we draw an analogy between thephotograph as a second-level reality and thereality as such, then each new insertion offilm will challenge the existence of the firstphotograph (which might, but need notcome out complete or unharmed), as well asthe existence of the represented reality.Thus, the frame which looks as if it werescraping the photograph can be understoodas reference to the ontological frameworkthat threatens to destroy the real world,which is inferior to it. For example, a frag-mented shot, which shows only the otherhalf of a ship, separated from the whitenessof the film through a reddish, jagged edge,becomes a ship which is just about to reachthe end of the world, its steer already swal-lowed by nothingness.

Why do we ignore the existence of thefirst-“click” photography? Why such segrega-tion with respect to the “true” photography?Perhaps the photographers do not considerthe first “click” worth their attention becauseit is a process which is entirely out of theircontrol. They cannot sign that photograph,since it was created during the preparatoryphase of winding up the film, when theywere still not in their role of authors, norhave they established any relationship withtheir camera or their object. Perhaps the aimof such segregation is to suppress the impor-tance of chance, which undermines the do-

nja tih kodova, πto Êe na kraju dovesti doproizvodnje novih interpretacija na razinifikcije. Ako izmeu fotografije kao stvarnos-ti drugog stupnja i same stvarnosti povuËe-mo analogiju, onda se svakim novim ume-tanjem filma u aparat dovodi u pitanje pos-tojanje prve fotografije (koja moæe i ne morabiti cjelovita ili neoπteÊena) isto kao i pos-tojanje reprezentirane stvarnosti. Tako seokvir koji izgleda kao da nagriza fotografijumoæe razumjeti kao referiranje na ontoloπkiokvir koji prijeti uniπtenjem njemu podree-nog zbiljskog svijeta. Na primjer fragmen-tirana snimka koja prikazuje samo drugupolovicu broda, odijeljenog od bjeline filmacrvenkastim neravnim rubom, postaje brodkoji upravo doplovljava do ruba svijeta i Ëijije prednji dio veÊ progutalo niπtavilo.

Zaπto se postojanje fotografije prvog“klika” ignorira? »emu takva segregacija uodnosu na “pravu” fotografiju? Moæda foto-grafi ne smatraju prvi “klik” vrijednim paæn-je zato πto se radi o procesu koji je sasvimizmakao njihovoj kontroli. Oni tu fotografijune mogu potpisati, buduÊi da je nastala upripremnoj fazi namotavanja filma dok onijoπ nisu uπli u svoju ulogu autora, niti su joπuspostavili ikakav odnos s aparatom i ob-jektom snimanja. Moæda takva segregacijapokuπava potisnuti ulogu sluËaja koji pot-kopava dominaciju svijesti fotografirajuÊegsubjekta nad objektom koji fotografira. Prvi“klik” je subverzivan utoliko πto negira pos-tojanje zbilje izvan fotografije baπ zato πto jeta zbilja u stvari konstrukt oka koje proma-tra kroz objektiv. Drugi razlog izopÊenjaprvog “klika” iz svijeta fotografije moæda jetaj πto rezultat takvog okidanja u stvari i nijefotografija u punom smislu te rijeËi. Radi setek o prijelaznoj fazi iz realnosti izvanjskogsvijeta u iluziju, pri Ëemu konvencijefotografije nisu joπ uspostavljene - one setek uspostavljaju. Tako se eksplicitnorazotkriva mehanizam fotografije. Osvjeπ-tavanjem koda kojim se ona sluæi poËinjemoprimjeÊivati istu dvojnost izmeu materijal-nosti filma i iluzije neke izvanjske zbilje kojapostoji i u svim ostalim fotografijama. Do-lazi do obrata - svih ostalih 36 fotografijapoËinjemo promatrati kao neπto Ëega ne bibilo da nije one prve fotografije, neπto πto setemelji na prvom “kliku” i iz njega proizlazi.

No, do Ëega bi dovelo ukidanje segre-gacije prvog “klika”? Kada bi se problemneuspjele prve fotografije osvijestio, sluËaj-nost bi prestala postojati sama za sebe ipostala bi sredstvom manipulacije za ci-ljano dobivanje “nasumiËnih” fotografija s

86

74_ZU_4_9 6/7/05 02:22 Page 86

pogreπkom. Bilo bi nemoguÊe razlikovatipravi od laænog prvog “klika”, onog koji jeuistinu nastao sasvim sluËajno, od onogkoji je falsificiran tako πto je sniman s nam-jerom da izgleda kao da je sluËajan.Izlaganje prvog klika kako bi se predstaviojavnosti ukljuËuje svjestan odabir s nekomnamjerom koja bi od tih fotografija stvorilanovu poetiku. Ako bi bile postavljene naistu razinu vrijednosti s uspjelim fotografija-ma, one bi izgubile svoj znaËaj autonomnepojave koja potkopava sam Ëin nastajanjafotografije. Njihovo postavljanje u prostorugalerije dovodi do toga da se tretiraju kaoda su smislene i estetske upravo zbog svojeoriginalnosti koja onemoguÊuje bilo kakavdokumentarni ili estetski smisao zabi-ljeæenoga. Paradoksalna situacija koja je re-zultat promjene konteksta Ëini da prvi “klik”ukine samog sebe. t

minance of consciousness in the pho-tographing subject over the object which isbeing photographed. The first “click” is sub-versive insofar as it negates the existence ofa reality outside of the photograph preciselybecause that reality is in fact a construct ofthe eye that perceives it through the lens.Another reason for expelling the first “click”from the world of photography might be thatthe result of such clicking is in fact not aphotograph in the strict sense of the term. Itis merely a phase in the transition from thereality of the outer world to an illusion, inwhich the conventions of photography havenot yet been established - they are still in theprocess. In this way, the mechanism of pho-tography is explicitly revealed. By crackingthe code which it uses, we begin to perceivethe same duality between the materialnature of the film and the illusion of someouter reality, which equally exists in all otherphotographs. There we experience a turn -we begin to view all the other 36 pho-tographs as something that would not existwithout that first photograph, somethingthat is based on the first “click” and origi-nates in it.

But what would happen if we abolishedthe segregation of the first “click”? If theproblem of the failed first photograph werefully realized, chance as such would cease toexist, becoming a means of manipulation inorder to obtain “random” photographs with aflaw on purpose. It would become impossi-ble to distinguish the true first “click” from afalse one, the one that was created by mereaccident from the one that was falsified withthe intention of making it look accidental.Presenting the first click to the publicincludes conscious choice with an intentionof taking those photographs and creating anew poetics out of them. If they were placedon the same level of value with the success-ful photographs, they would lose their mean-ing as an autonomous phenomenon whichundermines the very act of creating photo-graphs. Their presentation in the gallery spa-ce leads to treating them as meaningful andaesthetical precisely because their originalitymakes it impossible to perceive any docu-mentary or aesthetical meaning in them. Thesituation of paradox, which results from thechange of context, will bring about the abol-ishment of the first “click” by itself. l

prijevod / translation: Marina Miladinov

87

≥ Ana KrπiniÊ Lozica - studira povijestumjetnosti, komparativnu knjiæevnost i filo-zofiju na Filozofskom fakultetu u Zagrebu.Kao Ëlanica grupe Katapult 6 vodi foto-ga-leriju KIC klub u Zagrebu.

Ana KrπiniÊ Lozica - studies art history,comparative literature, and philosophy atthe Faculty of Philosophy, Zagreb. As amember of the Katapult 6 group, she alsoruns the KIC Klub photo gallery in Zagreb.

74_ZU_4_9 6/7/05 02:22 Page 87