Gaiman was never known for his substance. He's a myth-writer who loves to put modern twists on classic fairy tales and ancient mythology. That's what you should be going into his work expecting - a world of imagination and magic where the myths and legends told a couple thousand years ago have an influence on the modern, sanitized, scientific world of today. The imaginative blending of old and new is his mark as a storyteller, as well as his fantastic prose and pacing.But substance? Look elsewhere. He tells what are basically glorified and beautiful bedtime stories. Which is a good thing, but a thing nonetheless.
This applies mostly to his attempt as a novelist?
Because thought his graphic novels on Sandman were full of substance from comic book lore of many eras.
Didn't like his other works as much though like Miracle Man. Same way I can't stand James Robinson who I consider a pretentious (He had Legion of Superheroes member introducing Mon-El to coffee houses in Europe where poets sat, or creating a Yuppie sandwich with kale and stupid cheeses and such), but must admit his Starman was excellent (Even if the snobbery was still there, like Copperhead collecting transistor radios at an antiques dealer before murdering him when the mask slipped)