Consider amid literary or even archaic. It does little that among or in can’t do better. Already in the 1960s, H.W. Fowler considered among better than amid, yet Bryan A. Garner still considers amid better than among when dealing with mass nouns. His example reads, “one is among friends but amid a crowd.” I suggest following Fowler’s example: while one is among (or with, though the connotation shifts slightly) friends, one tends far more frequently to be in a crowd.
The variant amidst is just as if not more literary than amid but less common. Nonetheless, some writers feel it suits a broader range of uses than amid, though the same advice above holds regarding amidst.