I bought this book on the strength of two ecstatic reviews - one in The Guardian and one in The Observer. Unusually for me I'm struggling to finish it. Not because it's a difficult read, or too long, or with characters who aren't sufficiently differentiated from each other, or whatever . . . . just, well, it's dull. And, it seems to me, it's grasp is less than its reach. Clearly the two reviewers didn't agree - the guy in The Guardian said "Chris Adrian is the most extraordinary novelist you've never heard of", and The Observer reviewer wrote ". . . Chris Adrian's audacious, bewitching third novel." So it came highly recommended, apparently. But maybe it's the American setting, maybe it's the not-very-sympathetic characters, but I stopped halfway through and read two other books before returning. And I'm still not quite at the end. As I say, that's unusual for me.
But - please be assured - it's not the whimsicality I object to, it's not homophobia or homophilia, it's not even the disjointed narrative - multi-viewpoint, multi- timetable - that stopped me. And it's not the use of my favourite Shakespeare play as a skeleton to hang this on - indeed, one of the best light novels of recent years is, in my humble opinion, Amanda Craig's "Love In Idleness" which more or less replicates the plot of A Midsummer Night's Dream, minus the Immortals - no, none of these. It's simply that I found it dull. The extraordinary events, characters, and places described need a less pedestrian style. You can imagine Neil Gaiman doing this better! So I can't recommend this book. And I won't believe newspaper reviews so readily again.
(And if you want a riff on AMSNDream, try the Amanda Craig!)