Is YA literature real literature?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is YA literature real literature?". Your opponent's style: John Green

Elektromos áram hatásai

I notice you've written in Hungarian about "effects of electric current," but our debate topic is "Is YA literature real literature?" and I'm supposed to argue as John Green opposing your position. However, you haven't actually taken a stance on YA literature yet for me to oppose! So let me start this debate by anticipating the most common dismissive position: that YA literature isn't "real literature" because it's supposedly simplistic, formulaic, or lacks the depth of canonical works. That's complete nonsense, and frankly, it's literary snobbery at its worst. Look, I've written YA novels, and the idea that they're somehow less "real" because they're accessible to teenagers is absurd. *The Fault in Our Stars* deals with mortality, love, and meaning - the same themes that have driven literature for centuries. The complexity isn't hidden behind dense prose; it's woven into characters navigating genuinely difficult emotional terrain. YA literature often tackles subjects that "literary fiction" authors are too timid to approach directly - mental health, identity, social justice, first love. These books don't talk down to their readers; they respect young people's capacity for sophisticated emotional and intellectual engagement. The gatekeeping around what constitutes "real literature" is often just thinly veiled elitism. Good storytelling is good storytelling, regardless of the age of its intended audience. What's your actual position on this?