The first part of the study appeared in issue no. 2008/1 of Acta Historiae Artium. The second part is concerned with the press coverage of the society's second and most momentous exhibition in 1909, taking into account all supportive, appreciative reviews as well as the disapproving, unsympathetic ones by conservative critics. The exhibition multiplied the attacks against the group; a spectacular campaign was organized to celebrate the art of Gyula Benczúr, and at the general assembly of the National Salon members of MIÉNK were ousted from the board and Lajos Ernst was removed from the leadership. To offset the attacks, György Bölöni organized a series of exhibitions, showing works of Rippl-Rónai and younger MIÉNK members in Kolozsvár, Nagyvárad and Arad. Parallel with that, the organization called Artists' House led by Miklós Rózsa was emerging and in December 1909 an exhibition entitled New Pictures was staged of works by artists later to be rallied in the group The Eight. All this fermented the slow disintegration of MIÉNK, which held its last exhibition in 1910 and then dissolved.
During their tragically short artistic careers Sándor Galimberti (1883–1915) and his wife Valéria Dénes (1877–1915) roused the interest of the critics three times. After a stay in Paris for several years, they staged their first exhibition of their collected works in Budapest in January 1914, which elicited vivid, mostly appreciative reviews. The critics claimed they were representing the most up-to-date Paris trends in Hungary. Hardly a year later, several obituaries made their careers and artistic works known after their tragic death. In 1918 the group of activists organized by Lajos Kassák presented the work of the couple acknowledged as their forerunners in the exhibiting room of MA, which also drew wide and positive press coverage.
Károly Kernstok showed nearly one hundred works in the Ernst Museum. Critics agreed in declaring that a radical change was palpable in his oeuvre, with a clear turn towards nature, a return to his earliest naturalist style. The majority of critics hailed this as a positive turn, some even interpreting this relapse as a sign of the failure of the earlier innovative attempts. Some reviewers, however, condemned it as opportunism, betrayal, or the missing of the great chance of a breakthrough.