I remember picking up my copy of Alasdair MacIntyre's After Virtue once, thinking I should really read it some time, and then finding that I obviously had read it already, since it was full of my marginalia. So I can't be sure whether I really just read Allan Janik and Stephen Toulmin's Wittgenstein's Vienna properly for the first time (rather than just reading in it, which I'm pretty sure I have done), but I think that's what happened. I should have read it years ago, decades ago.
It's not exactly easy going. The book deals with science, music, history, politics, philosophy, architecture, journalism, art, and more, requiring a fair amount of knowledge and sophistication in the reader. I went into it hoping that I might be able to assign it to undergraduates and quickly realized there was no way that would ever work. Which was disappointing. As was the authors' tendency to use phrases from Wittgenstein in describing the views of others, which seemed to me at first to be an attempt to make various figures appear more proto-Wittgensteinian than they really were. And their reading of Wittgenstein is a little more mystical, perhaps a lot more, than mine.
But what a good book! Or what an impressive confirmation of much that I already thought about Wittgenstein, his interests, and the connections between them. (Hmm. That sounds arrogant. I mean a) that the book is impressive, and b) that one thing I like about it is that it confirms things I already believe (as well as doing much more besides this). People who taught me have been influenced by it, I suspect.) It even suggests a connection between Wittgenstein's remarks on private language and ethics (see p. 235), which I had thought was a new idea. It would be good reading for anyone who intends to read James Klagge's Wittgenstein in Exile or Clive James's Cultural Amnesia. Klagge discusses the fact that Wittgenstein's belonging (as he felt) to another time and/or place should be expected to make his work difficult for us to understand, and gives some examples, but he says little about this other time/place and its concerns. Janik and Toulmin do that in spades. James emphasizes Vienna but, from the little I have read so far, he is a little superficial. Certainly his essay on Wittgenstein is not satisfying. On the other hand, Coetzee has called it, "'Aphoristic and acutely provocative: a crash course in civilization," which sounds like praise.