I personally am not a fan of writing that claims to have no message. I think it's either ignorant of the fact that every decision you make about what is in or not in a work is innately political, or a cowardly way of avoiding responsibility for the content of your work. I'm fine with people having different opinions on that and enjoying what they enjoy, but that's honestly how I feel about it.
I remember when I was doing my Games Design MA, I was in lectures with all the other Design MA students, even though Games Design as a discipline has very little in common with things like Pottery or Fashion, but there we were. One day, our guest lecturer was a sculptor. She made these big statement pieces of conceptual art, for example when commissioned to make a sculpture to go near a place that sells sausages, she made this big ugly, garishly coloured fibreglass statue of a pig skewered on a fork (she got paid tens of thousands of pounds for this), because she "thought people don't really think about where their food comes from. They forget that a sausage was once living animal". Okay, I thought, I think it's a shallow statement for a piece of work designed to go in a farming area where everyone is very aware of this, but okay, go off...
But then she said, "I don't make statements with my art, I only make observations. I'm just an observer of people."
Now that.... I took umbrage with and straight up asked her at the questions part at the end of the lecture, "you say that you're just an observer, but don't you think making a piece of art about something is a statement?" She couldn't give an answer. She just brushed it off with an "Oh that's an interesting point hmm..." Wow, it sure is nice to make huge sums of money making art and when people praise you to own it, but if somebody criticises it to be able to easily disown it as having no meaning, huh? It's the artistic equivalent of saying something edgy and problematic with absolute sincerity and if people react badly saying it was "just a joke".
I don't believe it is possible to make a piece of art that doesn't say something about what you or your culture values or believes should be valued or should be seen as relateable or laughed at. By saying you're not making a statement, you are implicitly making the statement that you endorse the status quo, whether of the real world or of existing tropes of fantasy and sci-fi and do not want to face your own biases and assumptions.
I will acknowledge that yes, a lot of the work of teenagers will inevitably have very flat morals and messages that may feel embarrassing to read, which is due to a lack of experience and deeper knowledge of the world due to still learning about it. So often teenagers writing stories with morals do make things with statements like "Bullies are bad and deserve violent revenge" or "This character who is totally not based me at all, they just happen to share all my opinions and interests, is treated with undue cruelty by the world", or "hurting animals is always bad and so we should just release all captive animals immediately without considering any ramifications." ....so yeah, in work by many (NOT ALL! One of my fave books, Frankenstein, was written by a teen and it is astonishingly deep and clever!) teenagers, just a snapshot of a person or place can come across as far more sophisticated writing or art, because it just requires describing, and if the snapshot shows poverty or despair, framing that in a work alone to bring attention to real human suffering can be an easier way to make a deep statement than trying to awkwardly describe a lesson or solution with limited knowledge of the problem. You see, as soon as you make art about a thing, the fact that you chose to make the art about that thing IS a statement about the value and meaning of the thing.