At first glance at István Orosz’s 2001 etching, entitled Columns III, our initial emotional response might be to think that we are witness to some sort of new-Renaissance revival: relics evoking the beauty and greatness of Antiquity, and majestic remains of ancient edifices that once stood, now in ruins, appear again in these pictures. And then making a more thorough survey of the pillar-column ensemble enclosed by a complicated architrave with ornamental Corinthian capitals, ascending in tiers, precisely demarcated (and thus contrary to its ruinous nature), in a wild, overgrown milieu, we stumble upon visual phenomena that are strange and difficult to decipher or interpret, as we scan the accentuated, dictated vertical axis of the artwork. Commencing our gaze from below, we are compelled to recognise that the two pillars standing on a quadratic pedestal and commencing rectangularly, are transformed imperceptibly into columns while ascending – and certainly playing an important role in this is the fluting of the pillars-columns into nothingness, and the capricious emergence of azure bands stretching between them – and in the course of this evolution, the two pillars will become three columns in a mysterious way, while the forms projecting frontally from the plane of the base into the upper realms, are transformed into a heavy and painfully unfinished architectronic conclusion, also taking possession of the space in its depth. (To monitor, starting from above, we are compelled to experience inversely the exact same phenomenon raised to appearances – but use of the concept “appearance” here is suggested to be contingent and qualified.) Attempting to dispel our doubts and to clear questions that have arisen, we can formulate our suspicion that the visual illusionisms generated by the transitions, and sparklings are blurred, re-coloured, kept in incertitude, and things are dispersed into presentiments.Things that are naturally not of architectonic character, but raised to metaphoric heights and of a mental nature. In the central space of spirit-mirror-image, refined confusion is rekindled (the essence of art is error and misunderstanding), which then imperceptibly takes the upper hand over the entire portrayal, extending doubt and shutting out formulas and unambiguity. Paradoxes and contradictions, however, create a kind of balance, and we do not find logical responses to this harmonious junction, to this harmony that can be synthesised in playfulness: according to our conventions of so-called reality, it cannot be equivalent to appearance, even if appearance is equivalent to non-reality. But if we get beyond the laying out of this seemingly important conclusion, then we finally are confronted with the essential problem: what can we do with so-called reality, which is not only a semblance, but really apparently that?