I have always thought that the more you are exposed to something the less of a shock value it will have on you and it wouldn’t be such a big deal when discussed publicly so in terms of openness to topics I agree with Warren Ellis in his article “Blood in your eye: Why we need Violent Stories.”
Ellis argues that “We learn about things by looking at them and then talking about them, together.” This is true, we are exposed to war on the news all the time as well as death and violence, As he says “And yet it’s fine for our television news providers … to hammer us with this crap and then insist that it must be witnessed .” So why is it that because it is in a book, comic, or video game make any difference? the answer is because we have become accustomed to seeing or discussing these type of things in the real life. This means that it can be done for fictional violence as well. the more we are exposed to fictional violence the less of a reaction it . The more we speak openly about violence the less taboo the topic would be. I feel that people with a bigger social stand point should take a bigger stand in this which is also why I agree with Ellis when he say “That, right there, is the problem, as I see it.” about Jim Carrey refusing to promote his film Kick-Ass 2, due to violence. If Carrey were to speak on the topic of violence and how fictional violence could help improve or reaction to violence in general and in turn less the amount to violence in society we would be bettering ourselves as people but instead we stand at a stand still where people refuse to speak on fictional violence.
Ellis Warren “Blood in your eye: Why we need violent stories” vulture New York Media, 14 August 2013. Web 5 October 2013