The title of my review comes from the structure of the book itself, in which Heidegger himself says that in philosophy one circles around a question in order to explore it in depth, not go at it head on for a superficial answer.
The book begins with Heidegger doing his standard pulling-apart of the question itself - such as exploring the word "metaphysics" in its original, then subsequent meaning.
For the first half of the book, Heidegger explores the attunement to profound boredom ona personal level (It is boring for one) he characterizes as the state of modern mankind (following Kierkegaard), which as a fundamental attunement nonetheless serves to reveal Being. The move from various forms of boredom, such as that of waiting at a train station having misread the schedule or attending a party that didn't at first seem boring, to that of profound boredom is actually very interesting.
We then move to the thesis that Man is world-forming, while the animal is poor in world. The animal being does not experience beings as beings, or being qua being, but as reactions to the world.
From there Heidegger moves on to examine the propositional statement, the logos apophantikos, in considerable detail, mainly with reference to Aristotle and Kant. The inner structure of the logos as revealing and concealing truth and falsity (aletheia and pseudos) by a pointing out (apophantikos) that is either pointing to (kataphasis) or pointing away (apophasis), from within the inner structure of synthesis and diairesis, is the real meat of the work, and wonderful even when I disagree with it or need to explore further. And it is a bit alien and tricky when one is not immersed in this stuff.
And once this has been accomplished, the reintroduction of world-formation and profound boredom reappear to complete the circle around the question.
Finitude and solitude barely rate an explicit mention - but if one is paying attention they are always there implicitly, particularly in the sections on the logos apophantikos as something that is arrived at in agreement, not in isolation ala Protagoras, in a relation. Being is relational in its inmost essence as Being.
Heidegger also points out his limited concept of logos in Being and Time, where only one aspect was considered.
I found this lecture series much more engaging and readable than Being and Time - and much more accurate and profound to my way of thinking. It has certainly inspired me to read more Heidegger - and Aristotle. Attributing Relativism to Heidegger may be more problematic than I had been led to believe. I would recommend reading Heidegger without the Parisian School in mind.