Hatab's work is more than an interpretative study, inspired by Neitzsche and Heidegger of the historical relationship between myth and philosophy in ancient Greece. Its conclusions go beyond the historical case study, and amount to a defence of the intelligibility of myth against an exclusively rational or objective view of the world.
Hatab's Heideggerian insights into the natural conflict between mythology and philosophy as two different ways of approaching the truth are valuable, but he wastes his time by summarizing all of Greek thought in order to make his argument, which he does not need to do at all. This book could've easily been 200 pages shorter. There is no need for him to go on a summary form Hesiod to Euripides and from Heraclitus to Aristotle in order to make his point. If I ever read a book that tires to summarize Greek thought to me ever again, I am just going to put it down. I can't stand these summaries for the life of me.
If you ever find this book just read the first and the last chapter, you can skip everything else in between.