So we speak of good and evil. Or rather, we talk pretty good and the bad. We all agree that good is good and evil is evil and that we should desire the good and reject evil. And we should be good and not evil, and that we should cultivate our good side and do our part to dry cattiva.Ma not so simple.

In a recent film by Lars von Trier's " The Boss ", a manager at a computer company invents a fictional character to which are attributed to the decisions of the company uncomfortable. Mergers, layoffs, organizational changes, new rules and prohibitions are made to fall on the shoulders of this fictitious figure. In this way the true architect of the decisions may store, in the eyes of others, its image of good-natured

The theme is not new in Lars von Trier: if we think about, even Dogville was built around this mechanism. A girl wants to escape his fate (and his father) and suffer the worst oppression but to maintain its good image. Until that is, after knowing the wickedness of others, is forced to call in rescue his father (or the bad part) to do justice.

Lars von Trier is obviously not the only one to have addressed the issue of good and evil, fighting to oust his ambivalence unacceptable parts of themselves and project them onto someone else. In literature before the closest I know is certainly " The Good Person of Szechwan "by Bertolt Brecht. Even then a good girl must find the figure of a poor brother to be able to pay creditors and no end in misery.

Brecht's message was political, in the goodness of pure capitalism can not exist: we have to bribe to survive and "beautiful souls" are bound to succumb. But I am not interested in this aspect, since the psychological fact linked to "good" images itself.

Basically all Wherein examples tell us that goodness "pure" is ultimately a position perverse, sick, not respectful of reality. And also tell us that true goodness, as the location is necessarily intended to compromise. Does anyone remember " The dirty hands "of Sartre?

We can not please everyone, we should not appeal to everyone: if we want this necessarily intended all'astrattezza, solitude and schizophrenia (and, ultimately, contempt for others).

Goodness is a position that takes upon itself dialectically large doses of cruelty and even evokes Proust, at some point of his work (which? Vattelapesca), a person, a housekeeper think, whose goodness was reported by his own rough and do perfunctory.

I think we all take a step forward, as people, if we can see ourselves and our reality as a big game that mixes good things in bad things and vice versa.

And only become great if we can accept upon ourselves the evil that others necessarily will give us.