There are various disputes in our society that occur with different controversies when dealing with Violence in Literature. Many people have different opinions in addition to reactions amongst this issue, where it can influence the readers in a negative or positive way. Many opinions like Gerarad Jones, Oscer Wilde, Dan Hopper, in addition to several other people, are for violence in literature and believe violence in literature is superior for adolescents. Nevertheless many other opinions similar to Jacques Ditte, Matt Olsen, and Dr. Virginia Wolf consent among those opinions previously acknowledged. Instead these citizens are against violence in literature, believing in the action of banning all violent books that children are exposed with. .
From reading the opinions of Dan Hopper, Gerarod Jones, Oscer Wilde, and Moore, it is noted that violence in books can have a positive affect on the reader. Gerarod Jones believes that violence in books is good for kids to read. He explains, "Adult/parents are taken this issue way too far and as a result they limit their child too much. Creative Violence helps far more children then they hurt- Jones himself claims his parents did not trust the violent world of the 1960's. "Parents are taken away books from their child due to violence. Violence is just another form of educating and allowing them to think on their own." Jones brings up a great point when he explains that children are better off .
2.
thinking on their own. "Trying to keep certain topics from someone is like showing the rainbow and telling them about all the colors but yellow. Sooner or later people will understand and see the whole picture." Jones states an additional appealing fact when writing that kids who are unexposed to violent books would eventually find violence one way or another. "If you keep books out in the open and teach kids and others about them you will be letting them come up with their own ideas by knowing all aspects of it.