à la recherche de la vérité perdue / in search of the lost truth - by Jan Theuninck, 2025

 

acrylic on canvas, 70 x 100 cm

https://x.com/JanTheuninck

The phrase "in search of the lost truth" (or à la recherche de la vérité perdue in French) echoes Marcel Proust's In Search of Lost Time, but in 2025, it resonates as a rallying cry against the erosion of unfiltered reality amid accelerating AI-driven censorship:
 "à la recherche de la vérité perdue" is a direct nod to pursuing truths buried under layers of digital control, ideological suppression, and algorithmic gatekeeping.
The intersection with censorship and AI is palpable, as evidenced by contemporaneous discussions on X. These reveal a world where truth isn't erased outright but rewritten in real-time, optimized for engagement over accuracy, and policed by code rather than censors.

Theuninck's paintings are not nostalgic; they are live autopsies.

Dix screamed: “Look what you did.”

Theuninck whispers: “Look what you’re doing—again.
”The search for the lost truth continues"

The phrase "preferred reality" often refers to a subjective or biased version of events that individuals, groups, or institutions cling to, even when it conflicts with evidence or objective facts. It's a concept rooted in psychology and rhetoric, where people selectively interpret information to align with their desires, ideologies, or agendas—essentially cherry-picking data to construct a narrative that feels comforting or advantageous. This can manifest in debates over politics, science, media, or personal beliefs, leading to denialism or willful ignorance.When tied to "authorities," it typically critiques how governments, police, media, or experts impose or promote a sanitized, agenda-driven version of reality to maintain control, avoid accountability, or push policies. For instance:

• Official statistics or reports might downplay issues (e.g., crime data softened for "social cohesion") to fit a narrative that keeps the public calm or supports funding.
• Propaganda models, like those allegedly favored by institutions such as the Pentagon, deliberately muddle facts with lies, jokes, or AI-generated content—not to convince people of one truth, but to breed distrust in all information, fostering apathy and reducing opposition.
• In broader discourse, authorities (e.g., via social media algorithms or state media) amplify viral, emotion-driven stories over accurate reporting, warping public perception of reality into something secondhand and manipulated.

This dynamic isn't new—think Orwell's "Ministry of Truth" or historical calls for a "reality czar" to police narratives. Today, it's amplified by echo chambers: people reject inconvenient truths (e.g., election results, health data, or geopolitical events) for a "preferred" alternate version that reinforces tribal loyalties. Critics argue this erodes shared reality, making consensus impossible and enabling abuse of power.In essence, authorities don't always lie outright; they often just nurture the version of reality that serves their interests, leaving the public to navigate the gap between what's reported and what's real. Facing unfiltered evidence—through independent verification or diverse sources—is the antidote, though it's uncomfortable when it shatters illusions.