This was a painful read for me. I don't think that this primarily because of the author; it is that much of what Heidegger is saying or might be saying or people claim he is saying is... bunk..? That might be too strong. From my one reading note, my reactions to concepts/ideas/definitions in this book more or less fall into one of:

(1) What? No. That's idiotic.
(2) Ok, ok, ok, sure. So what?
(3) The fuck? The-actual-but-not-literal-contoring-the-fuck-ness?

That might be my one complaint. Inwood uses Heidegger's obtuse language even after describing or clarifying it. I'd have preferred a slightly more verbose expansion that got rid of much of the neologisms. ( )

While Heidegger is a notoriously difficult read, Michael Inwood has written a lucid and eminently readable introduction. This is masterfully done and perfectly fitted to the VSI format - one of the best I have come across in this series. ( )

It's not quite as 'transparent' as the quote on the back would have it but it is accessible as far as Heidegger goes.It starts off fine but as the concepts mount up and intertwine it gets pretty abstruse. There's a wide ground covered with sections on 'authenticity' and the role of art being of most interest to me. If you can get your head around the concepts there's a lot to build on. Inwood provides some concrete examples too so it's not entirely theoretical but the concepts are tricky and elusive at times. ( )

I thought I was keeping my head above water for the first 100 pages or so (out of 134), though whether I could explain it all to somebody else is another matter. Then I just got overwhelmed trying to keep all the technical vocabulary straight, especially as it most involved weird meanings of everyday words. It did not help that the glossary was based on the German terms while the text used English. ( )

Being unfamiliar with Heidegger's writing, which I'm given to understand is technical and obscure, I'm not able to offer comment regarding Inwood's explication of his thought. That said, I found Inwood's text occasionally illuminating but often unhelpful. Whether or not the lack of clarity is the result of Inwood's language, though, or the difficulty inherent in simplifying Heidegger's thought, is unclear. A moderately useful introduction that probably requires supplementation with related texts. ( )